
| Forest codes of practice. Contributing to environmentally sound forest operations. (FAO Forestry Paper - 133) (1996) |
| (introduction...) |
| Foreword |
| The FAO programme on environmentally sound forest harvesting operations |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Introduction |
![]() | Harvesting and sustainable development |
![]() | The new dimension of harvesting |
![]() | Programmes and projects of the forest harvesting, trade and marketing branch |
![]() | Literature cited |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| A brief overview of the proposed FAO model code of forest harvesting practice |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Introduction |
![]() | Historical perspective |
![]() | Conceptual framework |
![]() | Concluding remarks |
![]() | Reference |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| ISO standards on machinery for forestry |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| CATIEs contribution to sustainable forest management in the humid tropical forests of Central America |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | Introduction |
![]() | Basic elements of sustainable forest management |
![]() | Conclusion |
![]() | Literature cited |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| The IUFRO position on sustainable management of tropical forests |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | Introduction |
![]() | IUFRO policy and research issues |
![]() | Sustainable forest management and global initiatives: IUFROs role |
![]() | Rational management of tropical forests |
![]() | IUFRO initiatives and scientific contributions |
![]() | Conclusions |
![]() | Literature cited |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| The Oregon forest practice act: 1972 to 1994 |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | History and origins |
![]() | Concepts of feasibility for the forest practices act |
![]() | Rule-making processes and players |
![]() | Enforcement processes and players |
![]() | What is needed to make a forest practices act work? |
![]() | Summary |
![]() | References |
![]() | Authors contact information |
![]() | Appendix 1. Evolution of Oregons forest practice rules, 1972-1993. |
| Fiji national code of logging practice |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | Introduction |
![]() | Preparatory work for the compilation of the code |
![]() | Scope, content and structure of code |
![]() | Logging planning |
![]() | Operational requirements |
![]() | Environmental requirements |
![]() | Equipment and safety |
![]() | Training and supervision |
![]() | Introduction of logging code |
![]() | Conclusions |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| New Zealand forestry and the forest code of practice |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | New Zealand forestry |
![]() | NZs environmental legislation |
![]() | NZ forest code of practice |
![]() | Conclusions |
![]() | Reference |
![]() | Authors contact information |
![]() | Annex. Reproduction of a page on Roading from the operational database. |
| British Columbia forest practices code |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Introduction |
![]() | Guiding principles for code development |
![]() | Forest practices code framework |
![]() | Forest practices board |
![]() | Forest appeals commission |
![]() | Forest planning framework |
![]() | Strategic planning |
![]() | Operational planning |
![]() | Forest development plans |
![]() | Silviculture prescriptions |
![]() | Forest practices code requirements |
![]() | Summary |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| Forest harvesting and environment in Austria |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | 1. Some facts about Austria |
![]() | 2. Forest roads and alpine land management |
![]() | 3. Planning parameters of forest roads |
![]() | 4. Experiences in forest road construction |
![]() | 5. Harvesting |
![]() | Literature cited |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| The South African harvesting code of practice |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Introduction |
![]() | What is the harvesting code of practice? |
![]() | Why a harvesting code for South Africa? |
![]() | Recent international actions |
![]() | The South African harvesting code of practice |
![]() | Conclusions |
![]() | References |
![]() | Acknowledgements |
![]() | Authors contact information |
![]() | Appendix. List of forest practice guidelines and best management practices. |
| Guidelines on logging practices for the hill forest of peninsular Malaysia |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | 1.0 Introduction |
![]() | 2.0 Overview of forestry in peninsular Malaysia |
![]() | 3.0 Overview of environmental management in peninsular Malaysia |
![]() | 4.0 Forest harvesting and management in peninsular Malaysia |
![]() | 5.0 Logging guidelines and practices |
![]() | 6.0 Conclusion |
![]() | 7.0 Recommendations |
![]() | Literature cited |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| The development of a code of practice for forest roading |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | Forest road design |
![]() | Conclusion |
![]() | Literature cited |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| A review of forest practice codes in Australia |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | 1.0 Introduction |
![]() | 2.0 Current state of codes |
![]() | 4.0 New initiatives |
![]() | 5.0 Conclusion |
![]() | Literature cited |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| Lessons from Californias forest practice act |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | Introduction |
![]() | Historic development |
![]() | Poll of resource managers |
![]() | Positive aspects |
![]() | Negative aspects |
![]() | Emerging issues |
![]() | Summary |
![]() | Literature cited |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| Integrating research, policy, and practice for forest resource protection |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Abstract |
![]() | Text |
![]() | Literature cited |
![]() | Authors contact information |
| Programme of work; FAO/IUFRO meeting of experts on forest practices |
![]() | (introduction...) |
![]() | Detailed schedule |
![]() | List of participants |
![]() | Discussion groups |
| FAO technical papers |
The aim of the LIRO NZ Forest Code of Practice (FCoP) is to plan, manage and carry out forestry operations in a sustainable manner, and this is closely aligned with the purpose of the RMA. The FCoP was first published in 1990, after three years of consultative work. It was revised and updated in 1993, primarily because of the introduction of the RMA. The FCoP is intended to be a very practical document for both the environmental planning of forestry operations, and an information base on the forestry operations themselves.
The FCoP commences with a page on the beneficial aspects of the relationship between forestry, the environment and the community. The objectives of the FCoP relate to the protection or maintenance of the following ten common production forestry values: soil and water, scenery, cultural, recreation, science and ecology, forest health, site productivity, off-site impacts, safety, and commercial viability. This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but should provide a useful starting point for addressing specific issues.
Environmental Planning Process
Thorough environmental planning is considered to be the key to achieving the best possible environmental outcome. Figure 2 shows the Environmental Planning procedure as outlined in the FCoP (use of the Code section), in addition to indicating where the other sections of the code are to be used.
Minimising adverse effects of operations starts in the planning phase through clear and systematic identification of values. The Objectives section of the FCoP lists ten common values related to production forestry. These common values are not always present, but by consultation with a wide range of local interest groups, the important site-specific values can be recognised.
Impact of Operations
Considering how operations might impact on the identified values can be achieved through a systematic matrix checklist such as the one provided in the FCoP (Figures 3 and 4). The checklist is designed for easy use in the field, which can highlight operations with potentially high impacts at an early stage. It is not intended to substitute for a comprehensive environmental plan for the whole forest, but to provide site specific information. Figure 3 shows how operations are rated using the FCoP checklist. The + and - indicate an expected positive or negative effect respectively.

Fig 3. The FCoP Checklist Rating System
|
Length of time affected |
Degree of risk/potential effect |
Potential impact |
Checklist symbol |
|
Short term |
Minor |
Minimal |
· |
|
Long term |
Minor |
Low |
+ or - |
|
Short term |
Major |
Intermediate |
++ or -- |
|
Long term |
Major |
High |
+++ or --- |
Example
Figure 4 is an example checklist from a Wairarapa woodlot. By consulting the landowner, Department of Conservation, Fish and Game Council and the Regional Council, the values of water quality, wetland areas, slope stability, erosion and domestic water supply were established for the site. The checklist is then systematically filled out to highlight areas of concern relative to the identified values for this woodlot.
From the checklist, for example, we see that felling of the woodlot will potentially be very beneficial in the short term for slope stability. This is because many of the larger trees are starting to fall or slide on the slopes creating erosion scars. Similarly, roading and tracking could potentially give significant long term adverse impacts on water quality, highlighting the need for careful road and track location. Road maintenance and oversowing are highlighted as measures which could mitigate impacts on water quality.
Selecting Cost-Effective Low-Impact Techniques
Mitigation methods or techniques must be implemented by forest managers and supervisors and carried out by individual operators. The FCoP Operations Database contains detailed information that helps identify risks associated with certain operations. It lists key consideration factors for the stages of forest development: access, land preparation, establishment, tending, protection, and harvesting. For each stage the range of methods available to undertake the operation, the potential adverse impacts, and methods for reducing those adverse impacts are listed. Annexed to this paper is a copy of one page on Roading from the Operation Database. In addition to the Sidecasting & Cut and Fill technique, Endhaul is also discussed in the Roading section.
Figure 4. Example checklist for a Wairarapa woodlot.
|
|
Identified Environmental Values | |||||
|
Operation |
Water Quality |
Wetland Areas |
Slope Stability |
Erosion |
Water Supply | |
|
Access |
| | |
| | |
|
Roading, tracking |
- |
· |
--- |
-- |
-- | |
|
Land preparation | | | | | | |
|
Herbicide appl. |
-- |
· |
· |
· |
-- | |
|
Over sowing |
++ |
· |
+ |
+ |
· | |
|
Tracking |
-- |
· |
--- |
--- |
-- | |
|
Grazing |
-- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
-- | |
|
Establishment | | | | | | |
|
Planting |
+ |
· |
+++ |
+++ |
++ | |
|
Releasing |
· |
· |
· |
· |
-- | |
|
Grazing |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
-- | |
|
Fertilising |
-- |
· |
+ |
+ |
--- | |
|
Tending | | | | | | |
|
Pruning |
+ |
· |
· |
++ |
· | |
|
Waste thinning |
++ |
+ |
+++ |
+++ |
· | |
|
Protection | | | | | | |
|
Animal control |
· |
· |
· |
· |
-- | |
|
Road maintenance |
-- |
· |
-- |
-- |
- | |
| |
- long term |
++ |
· |
+++ |
+++ |
++ |
|
Weed control |
-- |
-- |
· |
· |
· | |
|
Harvesting | | | | | | |
|
Roading, tracking |
--- |
· |
--- |
--- |
--- | |
|
Landings |
--- |
· |
--- |
--- |
· | |
|
Felling |
· |
++ |
++ |
· |
· | |
|
Processing |
++ |
· |
· |
· |
· | |
|
Extraction |
--- |
-- |
-- |
--- |
-- | |
|
Stream crossings |
--- |
- |
- |
--- |
· | |
|
Transportation |
· |
· |
- |
- |
· | |
Obtaining Approvals and Monitoring Performance
Operations that potentially have a significant impact on the environment, such as earthworks or vegetation removal, can require a resource consent from the district or regional council. It is important to ensure the correct approvals have been obtained prior to commencing operations.
Performance monitoring is expected to be the last step essential for achieving the best possible outcome. Post-operational monitoring will help ensure that adverse effects on the identified values have been minimised. Implemented alongside a regular maintenance program, monitoring can continue to protect the site values, and prevent possible problems. A common example of inadequate post-harvest management is poor road, track and landing maintenance. Failure to check-up on a regular basis is often the reason for continued erosion and water quality problems.