Managing forests for wood yield and carbon storage: a theoretical study.

Which forest management regimes best achieve the dual objectives of high sustained timber yield and high carbon storage, including the carbon stored in soil and wood products? A mechanistic forest ecosystem simulator, which couples carbon, nitrogen and water (Edinburgh Forest Model), was calibrated to mimic the growth of a pine plantation in a Scottish climate. The model was then run to equilibrium (1) as an undisturbed forest, (2) removing 2.5, 10, 20 or 40% of the woody biomass each year (3) removing 50% of the woody biomass every 20 years, and (4) clear-felling and replanting every 60 years as in conventional plantations in this climate. More carbon was stored in the undisturbed forest (35.2 kg C m(-2)) than in any regime in which wood was harvested. Plantation management gave moderate carbon storage (14.3 kg C m(-2)) and timber yield (15.6 m(3) ha(-1) year(-1)). Notably, annual removal of 10 or 20% of woody biomass per year gave both a high timber yield (25 m(3) ha(-1) year(-1)) and high carbon storage (20 to 24 kg C m(-2)). The efficiency of the latter regimes could be attributed (in the model) to high light interception and net primary productivity, but less evapotranspiration and summer water stress than in the undisturbed forest, high litter input to the soil giving high soil carbon and N(2) fixation, low maintenance respiration and low N leaching owing to soil mineral pool depletion. We conclude that there is no simple inverse relationship between the amount of timber harvested from a forest and the amount of carbon stored. Management regimes that maintain a continuous canopy cover and mimic, to some extent, regular natural forest disturbance are likely to achieve the best combination of high wood yield and carbon storage.