Ab Kvalilimbe Oy
HELSINKI
belongs to the Midboreal forest vegetation zone. It is characterized by long winters and relatively short growing seasons (Source: Finnish Forest Research Institute, Metsien kunto ja monimuotoisuus, p.84).
The climate close to the sea is, however, characterized as mari-time. Temperatures remain tively low in the spring and rela-tively high in the autumn. Spring and summer are dry in relation to the generally moist climate. The growing season, in which the daily mean temperatures are above 5 degrees Celsius, lasts approxi-mately 160 days.
All of the above-mentioned factors show us that Ostrobothnia is a problematic region. Ostrobothnia suffers from its remoteness as well as from a climate that cannot be considered optimal.
Lappfors 8nickeri
' •• ""',m~, \
u"'--7,673.8 km2 of which
approxi-mately 5,717 km2or 74.5% is for-estry land (Source: Finnish Forest Research Institute, 1997). As in most of northern Europe, the ma-jority of forests in Finland are pri-vately owned. The tradition of en-trepreneurship is stronger in Ostrobothnia than in other regions of Finland. Of all the employed in Ostrobothnia, 1.5% are working in mechanical wood-processing busi-nesses while 1% of the region's entrepreneurs are also active in this industry (Source: Statistics Fin-land, 1999).
In terms of natural history, Ostrobothnia is a narrow coastal plain of clay. Along the Gulf of Bothnia, the plains slope southwest from the upland areas. The land in this area is mostly used for agri-culture, dairy farming, and forestry.
The land in Ostrobothnia
is still emerging from the Map1:The region of Ostrobothnia.
last ice age. The weight of the continental glaciers de-pressed the land over which it moved, and even now, 100 centuries after its recession, the land is still rising through the process of isostatic rebound. In Ostrobothnia, uplift is more rapid than in other parts of Finland, amount-ing to 80 or 90 centimeters
a century. The process VAASA (WOODPOINT)•.... -. ""''-.
means that the land area of } Nyqv~IElemenlhllSbe the region is growing
slightly every year (Source: Karlsson, 1997).
The southern part of Ostrobothnia is considered
Southboreal while the rest Source: Eurostat GISCO
The Region of Ostrobothnia Situated on the western coast of Finland along the Gulf ofBothnia in the Baltic Sea, Ostrobothnia is a region with large expanses of plains, lakes, and forests. Pictur-esque wooden houses, mostly painted in that darker shade of rich red so common in north European countries, are a distinctive feature of the area. Vaasa, with a popula-tion of 57,014 (Statistics Finland, 31112/2001), is the only large city in the region.
With 173,533 inhabitants (Source:
Statistics Finland, 2001) Ostrobothnia is in the province of western Finland, called "Lansi Suomi" in Finnish, and is divided into 18 municipalities. Compared to the European Union average of 115 inhabitants per km2, Ostrobothnia is sparsely populated, with on average just 22.7 persons per km2 (Source: Eurostat Regio, 1999). The region is, however, not among the most thinly populated regions in Finland, a country with a total population of a mere 5 171 302 (Source: Statistics Fin-, , land, 1999).
Known as "Pohjanmaa" in Finn-ish and "Osterbotten" in SwedFinn-ish, some 53% of the region's popula-tion has its roots in Sweden (Source: Statistics Finland, 1999).
While most of Ostrobothnia's Finnish-speaking population lives in urban areas, such as the city of Vaasa, the Swedes prefer the rural countryside. Surprisingly, these Swedes often don't speak or under-stand Finnish.
Ostrobothnia has a land area of
24
A Network of Mechanical Wood Processors WOODPOINT
Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001. Forest resources, p.4S, Table 1.5. Finnish Forest Research Institute.
Source Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001. Forest resources, p.SO, Table 1.10. Finnish Forest Research Institute.
Table 11: Ownership of forestry land in Ostrobothnia (1997), Southern Finland (1996-2000), and Finland (1992-2000).
Table 12: Distribution of forestry land into mineral-soil sites and mires in Ostrobothnia(1997),Southern Finland(1996-2000)and Finland(1992-2000) (1,000ha),
Ostrobothnia's forestry lands are privately owned, marking one of the highest percentages of private forestry lands in the whole of Fin-land. Some 61% of forestry lands Forestry's Center's definition of
Ostrobothnia that are covered by forests amount to 5,270 km2, of which 4,710 km2are forestland.
Surprisingly, 85.1% of
Ostrobothnia Southern Finland Finland
Land class I Area % I Area % Area %
Mineral-soil sites 367 70.0 8,731 73.1 17,168 65.8
Spruce Mires 63 12.0 1,199 10.0 2,298 8.8
Pine Mires 79 15.1 1,807 15.1 4,930 18.9
Treeless Mires 15 2.9 214 1.8 1,714 6.6
Mires total 157 30.0 3,220 26.9 8,942 34.2
Mires drained 116 73.9 2,504 77.8 4,812 II 53.8
Total Forestry land 524 100.0 11,951 100.0 26,110 100.0
Definition of Forestry Land
Forestry land consists of the following sub-<:Iasses: 1) Forest land: the mean annual increment of the stand is 1m3 per hectare at minimum 2) Scrub land: usually characterized by very rocky or paludified soil, Wlere the mean annual increment of the stand is less than 1m3 per hectare,
but more than 0.1m3 per hectare 3) Waste land: naturally treeless and the mean annual increment of the stand is less than 1m3 per hectare
Definition of Mires classes used
1) Spruce mire: a general name for a group of mire types scattered with more or less stagnated spruce trees 2) Pine mire: a general name for a group of mire types scattered with
more or less stagnated pine trees 3) Treeless mires: a general name for a group of mire types too watery for the formation of forest vegetation.
Ostrobothnia Southern Finland Finland
Forest omership % % %
Private 85.1 73.4 53.7
Companies 1 11.9 7.8
State 2 8.3 33.4
Others 11.9 6.3 5.1
Total 100 100 100
Forest Resources
Most of Ostrobothnia's forest sources are managed by the re-gional Coastal Forestry Center (Rannikon Metsakeskus). The area covered by this Center differs from the area within the political bound-aries of Ostrobothnia in that it ex-cludes the municipalities of Vahakyro, Isokyro, and Laihia, and instead includes the municipality of Kokkola-which is in the neigh-boring region of North Ostrobothnia, called "Pohjois-Pohjanmaa" in Finnish (Source:
Finnish Forest Research Institute).
This unusual land division oc-curred because the Coastal For-estry Center wanted to manage municipalities with a Swedish ma-jority. For statistical purposes, the Coastal Forestry Center calls this new land area "Ostrobothnia," al-though it differs from the political land area of Ostrobothnia. For the purpose of this particular section of the report, IIASA's ERD team has chosen to use the Coastal Forestry's Center's definition of Ostrobothnia.
For the subsequent statistics, it is important to understand the fol-lowing terminology used by the Finnish Forest Research Institute:
the difference between "forest-land" and "forestry "forest-land" is that the latter includes less productive lands such as scrubland, wasteland, roads, and depots. In other words, forestland is more productive than forestry land. The mean annual in-crement of the stand on forestland is 1 m3per hectare at minimum.
According to the country's latest national forest inventory (VMI 9, 1997), land areas in the Coastal
25
WOODPOINT A Network of Mechanical Wood Processors
Table 13: Share of growing stock volumes by tree species on forestry land in Ostrobothnia (1997), Southern Finland (1996-2000), and Finland (1992-2000) (mill. m3).
Ostrobothnia Southern Finland Finland
Tree species mill. m3 % mill. m3 % mUI. m3 %
Pine 18.2 36 558.3 41.4 939.7 46.9
Spruce 21.3 42.2 558 39.6 687.5 34.3
Birch 9 17.8 206.5 14.7 304.9 15.2
Other broadleaves 2 3.9 60 4.3 70.6 3.5
Total gro....ng
50.4 100 1408.2 1'00 2002.6 100
stock I
Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001. Forest resources, p.61, Table 1.21. Finnish Forest Research Institute.
Table 14: Distribution of forest land according to tree-species dominance in Ostrobothnia (1997), Southern Finland (1996-2000), and Finland (1992-2000).
Ostrobothnia Southern Finland Finland
Tree species % % %
Pine 57.1 56.6 64.7
Spruce 29.5 30.8 24
Other coniferous - 0.1 0.1
Silver birch 1.8 4.4 2.5
Downy birch 8.5 5.4 6.5
Aspen 0.7 0.5 0.3
Alder 0.8 0.6 0.4
Other broadleaves 0.1 0.1 0
Treeless 1.4 1.5 1.4
Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001 Forest resources, p. 52, Table 1.12. Finnish Forest Research Institute.
Table 15: Drain in Ostrobothnia, 1995-1999 (m3/year).
m3/year %
Annual increment of the gro....ng
2,080,000 100.0
stock
Maximum sustainable drain 1,802,000 86.6
Naturally dead trees+nature
278,000 13.4
conservation+other land use
Source: Pohjanmaan Puualan Kehitysstrategia 2000-2006. p.3. WOODPOINT 2000.
throughout Finland are privately owned (Table 11).
Soil Class Distribution on Forestry Land
For the following statistics, the Finnish Forest Research Institute has split the country into two halves: Northern Finland and Southern Finland. Ostrobothnia is one of 12 regions in Southern Fin-land. According to the Institute, the forestry land in Ostrobothnia is roughly divided into mineral soil sites and mires. In Finland, forestry land can be classified as mire if it has a peat-layer or if peat-forming plants cover more than 75% of the area.
While most of the forestry land in Ostrobothnia is located on mineral soil (3,670 km2), approximately 1,570 km2or 30% are considered mires. This distribution is below the overall Finnish average of 34.2% but above the 26.9% aver-age in the southern half of Finland (Table 12).
After World War II, forest drain-age became a common practice with forestry in Finland to increase the area of productive forestly land.
This led to a draining of approxi-mately three-quarters or 73.9% of the peat lands in Ostrobothnia. This proportion is similar to that in Southern Finland (77.8%) but con-siderably higher than that in the whole of Finland (53.8%) (Table 12).
Volumes and Use of Timber Resources
In 1997, the total growing stock volume on forestry land was 50.4 mill.m3(Table 13), less than 2.5%
of Finland's total volume. Spruce
A Network of Mechanical Wood Processors WOODPOINT
Table 16: Drain in Ostrobothnia, 1995-1999 (m3/year).
Typeofactivity m31year %
Total roundmod rerrovals 1,280,600 88.7
Was!emod left on logging sites 163,400 11.3
Realizeddrain(bylogging) 1,444,000 100.0
Source: Pohjanmaan Puualan Kehltysstrategla 200-2006, p3. WOODPOINT 2000.
Table 17: Planned roundwood removals in 2001·2005 in the area of the Coastal Forestry Center in Ostrobothnia.
Ostrobothnia
"Roundv.ood removals Planned roundv.ood 1995-1999" removals
I Timber assortment m3/year % m3/year %
Commercial roundv.ood removals 1,223,600 95.5 1,510,000 95.9
Pine logs 172,600 13.5 240,000 15.2
Spruce logs 278,400 21.7 330,000 21.0
Hardoood logs 9,200 0.7 10,000 0.6
Pine Pulpoood 315,600 24.6 430,000 27.3
Spruce Pulpoood 242,000 18.9 270,000 17.1
Hardoood Pulpoood 205,800 16.1 230,000 14.6
Fuelv.ood and other domestic use 57,000 4.5 65,000 4.1
Total roundv.ood removals 1,280,600 100.0 1,575,000 100.0 Source: Pohjanmaan Puualan Kehitysstrategia 2000-2006, p.3. WOOD POINT 2000.
Table 18: Mean growing stock volumes and annual increments in
Ostrobothnia (1997), Southern Finland (1996-2000), and Finland (1992-2000).
Ostrobothnia Southern Finland Finland
Mean volume, m3/ha 106 125.1 97
Mean increment,m3/ha 4.4 5.4 3.9
Annual increment percentage 4.2 4.3 4
Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001. Forest resources, p 68, Table 1.28. Finnish Forest Research Institute.
is the most common tree in the growing stock (Table 13). Pine, however, has the largest share, cov-ering 57% of the forestland area of Ostrobothnia (Table 14).
Between 1992 and 1996, the an-nual increment of the total grow-ing stock was estimated at 2.10 mill.m3 per year (Table 15). The realized drain, orthe volume of the stands logged (which includes waste wood from felling) between 1995 and 1999 was 1.444 mill.m3 per year (Table 16). The difference between these numbers indicates that more logging could be prac-ticed while still applying sustain-able forestry.
However, the volume of the maxi-mum sustainable drain will be re-duced by approximately 0.278 mill.m3per year (Table 15). This is due to the volume of trees that die naturally each year and to an in-crease in areas reserved for nature conservation. Therefore, the esti-mated maximum sustainable drain by logging volumes can only reach 1.8 mill.m3 per year (Source:
Pohjanmaan Puualan
Kehitysstrategia 2000-2006).
In order to prevent the decrease of forest resources, the realized drain must not exceed the maximum tainable drain. The maximum sus-tainable drain of logs is of vital importance for the mechanical wood-processing industry as it di-rectly affects a company's poten-tial production figures within a cer-tain period. The different parts of a drain are shown in Table 15 and are compared with the annual in-crement of the total growing stock.
According to a WOODPOINT re-port (Source: Pohjanrnaan Puualan
WOODPOINT A Network of Mechanical Wood Processors
Kehitysstrategia 2000-2006), pine cuttings in Ostrobothnia increased while cuttings of spruce were at a maximum between 1998 and 2000 (Table 17). There is also a large potential for the logging of pine pulpwood (Table 17). However, not a single larger-scale mechani-cal wood-processing company in Ostrobothnia uses logs from broad leave trees such as birch (Betula pendula and Betula pubescens), aspen (Populus tremula) , and al-der (Alnus glutinosa and Alnus incana). According to WOODPOINT, small to medium-sized enterprises in Ostrobothnia could find new business
opportu-nities by using these broad leave trees.
The mean growing stock volume in Ostrobothnia for 1997 was 106.0m3per hectare. In Southern Finland, this amounted to 125.1 m3 per hectare between 1996 and 2000, while in the whole country the figure was only 97.0m3per hectare between 1992 and 2000.
A mean annual increment of the growing stock in Ostrobothnia was estimated at 4.4 m3 per hectare, while in Southern Finland it was 5.4 m3per hectare and in the whole country the average was 3.9 m3per hectare (Table 18).
Table 19 shows the total removal
of roundwood in 2000. Spruce is the most removed log in Ostrobothnia, Southern Finland, and the whole country with 61.1 %, 60.5% and 56.2%, respectively.
Ostrobothnia's share of pine logs (37%) and hardwood logs (1.7%) is below the national average (39%
and 4.8%). However, pine is the pulpwood with the largest removal vol ume (411 m3) and shares (45.8%) in Ostrobothnia, exceed-ing shares for Southern Finland (38.3%) and the whole country (45.0%). The share of spruce pulp-wood is remarkably lower in Ostrobothnia (29.1 %) when com-pared to that of Southern Finland
Table 19: Total roundwood removals in 2000 in Ostrobothnia, Southern Finland, and Finland.
Ostrobothnia Southern Finland Finland
Timber Assortment
Tree species 1000 m3 % 1000 m3 % 1000 m3
%
Pine 218 37.3 8,680 34.3 11,379 39.0
Spruce 357 61.1 15,306 60.5 16,372 56.2
Logs
Hardwood 10 1.7 1,331 5.3 1,392 4.8
Total 584 100.0 25,316 100.0 29,143 100.0
Pine 411 45.8 7,944 38.3 12,448 45.0
Spruce
I 261 29.1 8,761 42.2 9,901 35.8
Pulpwood
Hardwood 226 25.2 4,043 19.5 5,332 19.3
Total 897 100.0 20,748 100.0 27,682 100.0
Pine 23 12.1 625 16.0 802 17.2
Spruce 31 16.3 700 17.9 777 16.6
Fuelwood
Hardwood 136 71.6 2,590 66.2 3,096 66.2
Total 190 100.0 3,915 100.0 4,675 100.0
Pine I 652 39.0 17,249 34.5 24,629 40.0
Spruce 649 38.8 24,766 49.6 27,051 44.0
Total
Hardwood 372 I 22.2 7,964 15.9 9,820 16.0
Total 1,672 100.0 49,979 100.0 61,500 100.0
Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001. Roundwood markets,p.173. Table 4.14. Finnish Forest Research Institute.
28
A Network of Mechanical Wood Processors
Table 20: Age structure of forest stands in Ostrobothnia (1997), Southern Finland (1996-2000), and Finland (1992-2000).
WOODPOINT
(42.2%) and the whole country (35.8%).
Ostrobothnia Southern Finland Finland
Age class %of forest land area %of forest land area %of forest land area
Treeless 1.4 1.5 1.4
<20 21.3 18.3 16.0
21·40 19.5 21.8 18.4
41·60 13.7 16.6 17.0
61·80 12.5 15.7 15.6
81·100 14.2 13.3 11.2
101·120 11.3 79 7.0
121·140 4.4 3.3 4.4
141+ 1.8 1.7 9.2
Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001. Forest resources, p. 54, Table 1.14. Finnish Forest Research Institute.
Table 21: Forest stands by development class in Ostrobothnia (1997), Southern Finland (1996-2000), and Finland (1992-2000).
Ostrobothnia Southern Finland Finland
I Development classes % % %
of the forestIIand area of the forest land area Of the forest land area
Open regeneration area 1.2 1.2 1.2
Small seedling stand 60 6.4 6.5
Advanced seedling stand 16.4 141 14.4
Young thinning stand 28.2 32.0 33.1
Advanced thinning stand 236 26.4 20.7
Mature stand 168 13.7 12.8
Shelterwood stand 0.1 02 03
Seed·tree stand 06 1.0 1.1
I
Low-yeldlng 7.0 5.1 9.9
Definitions of Development Classes:
1) Open regeneration area: treeless or scattered with retention trees left on a regeneration site 2) Small seedling stand: dominant height of the seedlings <13m 3) Advanced seedling stand:
dominant height >1.3m and diameters at breat height (13) normally below 8 cm 4) Young thinning stand: stand on a thinnning stage, logging removals consists primarily of pulpwood 5) Advanced thinning stand: stand on a thinning stage, consists primarily of logs 6) Mature stand: stand is to be regenerated in the next logging operation7) Shelterwood stand: a remaining stand after felling that aimed for natural regeneration with 150 to 300 trees per hectare left on a site 8) Seed-tree stand
normally 30 10 150 trees per hectare left standing for natural regeneration. Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001. Forest resources, p.34. Finnish Forest Research Institute.
Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001 Forest Resources, p.56, Table 1.16. Finnish Forest Research Institute
Forest Stand Characteristics and its Silvicultural State
Forest stands in Finland currently have a more even age structure than in the pre-World War II pe-riod. This is also true of Ostrobothnia, which has a larger share of stands under the age of20 (21.3%) than Southern Finland (18.3%) and the whole of Finland (16.0%) on average (Table 20).
Table 21 shows the development classes in Ostrobothnia, which have a low share of shelterwood (0.1 %) and seed-tree stands (0.6%) when compared to Southern Fin-land and the whole country. Oth-erwise, Ostrobothnia's proportions of development classes do not dif-fer significantly from those in other regions of Finland.
The silvicultural states of stands in Finland are classified as such:
Good, Satisfactory, Passable, and Low- Yielding (Table 22). These grades do not vary significantly between Ostrobothnia and the whole of Finland. But when com-pared to Southern Finland, Ostrobothnia has fewer stands that are considered "Good". Southern Finland, however, has fewer "Pass-able" stands than Ostro bothnia.
Approximately 73% of the forest-land in Ostrobothnia received rat-ings of either "Good" or "Satisfac-tory."
Regeneration of Stands
According to the Coastal Forestry Center in Ostrobothnia, only 9% of mature forest stands are naturally regenerated using shelterwood and seed-tree methods; the rest are re-29
WOODPOINT A Network of Mechanical Wood Processors
Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001, Forest resources, p, 59, Table 1,19, Finnish Forest Research Institute,
Table 22: Silvicultural state of forest stands in Ostrobothnia (1997), Southern Finland (1996·2000), and Finland (1992-2000).
Ostrobothnia Southern Finland Finland
% of forest land area % of forest land area % of forest land area Evaluatio,n
- I
Good 314 44,9 36,6
Satisfactory 39,2 37.5 35,7
Passable 20,4 12,6 17.7
Low-yielding 7,0 5,1 9,9
Definitions of evaluation classes for the state of the stand.
Good - The tree species is suitable for the growing site and the management of the stand is according to the requirements of good silvicullural practice.
Satisfactory - The stand is slightly too low in tree density and volume,
Passable - The density and volume of the stand is too low and the stand is lacking good silvicullural practice or the stand is not managed at aiL
Low-yielding - Forest regeneration has failed on the site and the dominant tree species is either not suitable for the growing site or the stand suffers from different forest damages or the stand
is remarkably low in volume and density,
Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001, Forest resources, p, 35, Finnish Forest Research Institute,
generated artificially through planting or sowing. In the early 1970s, it became common practice to regenerate old spruce (Picea abies) stands with pine (Pinus sylvestris) after clear felling.
Therefore, as much as 57% of the area, excluding peat lands, is now pine-dominated. However, the planting of spruce is becoming in-creasingly popular again (Source:
Karlsson, 1997).
Environmental Issues
For over a decade, conservation issues regarding the clear-cutting of old growth forests in Finland have provided stormy debates.
Because these forests provide a natural habitat for many endan-gered species, environmental non-government organizations (NGOs) such as Greenpeace, WWF, and the Finnish Nature League have often 30
protested against logging opera-tions in Finland.
However, these protests do not af-fect the region visited by IIASA's ERD team, since most of the country's old growth forests are in Eastern and Northern Finland.
Ostrobothnia, in Western Finland, has some 100 hectares of protected old growth forest (Source: Finnish Forest Research Institute). Table 20 shows the low share of old stands in Ostrobothnia. In Ostrobothnia's non-protected forests, the share of stands over 140 years ofage is low.
Approximately 95% of Finland's forests are certified by the Finnish Forest Certification System (FFCS), which is in accordance with the Pan European Forest Cer-tification System (PEFC) but is not mandatory. The certification aims at promoting ecologically,
eco-nomically, and socially sustainable forest management, and serves as a market-oriented means for doing so in the consumer's interest. Prod-ucts made with wood from a certi-fied forest are entitled to a so-called
"eco-label" intended to highlight its high environmental quality.
The largest shares of nature con-servation areas on forestry lands are in Northern Finland, at 18.4%
(Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001. Forest resources, p.48, Table 1.8. Forest health and biodiversity, p.96. Finnish Forest Research Institute). There are fewer protected areas of forestry lands in Southern Finland (I %) primarily due to the large amount of privately owned forests.
Ostrobothnia has almost no such areas while the whole of Finland can boast some 10.4% ofprotected lands. In this report, the term "con-servation areas" refers to areas hosting nature reserves, national parks, and peat land reserves with no form of forestry.
However, the proportion of so-called "key biotypes protected by law" is relatively high in Ostrobothnia, covering some 3.4%
of forestry land, including both state- and private-owned lands (Source: Statistical Yearbook of Forestry 2001. Forest health and biodiversity, p. 96, Finnish Forest Research Institute). The term "key biotype" refers to a particularly valuable area of land that is pro-tected under Finland's Nature Con-servation Act (Source: The Finn-ish Forest Research Institute). Key biotypes are normally relati vely small patches inside commercial forests.
A Network of Mechanical Wood Processors WOODPOINT
Evaluation Human Factors
During the visit of IIASA's ERD team to WOODPOINT and four of its member companies, our impres-sion was that the network had
During the visit of IIASA's ERD team to WOODPOINT and four of its member companies, our impres-sion was that the network had