A Comparison of Forest Biomass and Conventional Harvesting Effects on Estimated Erosion, Best Management Practice Implementation, Ground Cover, and Residual Woody Debris in Virginia

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorGarren, Austin M.en
dc.contributor.authorBolding, Michael Chaden
dc.contributor.authorBarrett, Scott M.en
dc.contributor.authorHawks, Eric M.en
dc.contributor.authorAust, Wallace Michaelen
dc.contributor.authorCoates, Thomas Adamen
dc.date.accessioned2024-02-01T14:35:06Zen
dc.date.available2024-02-01T14:35:06Zen
dc.date.issued2023-11-17en
dc.date.updated2023-12-22T13:44:56Zen
dc.description.abstractExpanding markets for renewable energy feedstocks have increased demand for woody biomass. Concerns associated with forest biomass harvesting include increased erosion, the applicability of conventional forestry Best Management Practices (BMPs) for protecting water quality, and reduced woody debris retention for soil nutrients and cover. We regionally compared the data and results from three prior independent studies that estimated erosion, BMP implementation, and residual woody debris following biomass and conventional forest harvests in the Mountains, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain of Virginia. Estimated erosion was higher in the Mountains due to steep slopes and operational challenges. Mountain skid trails were particularly concerning, comprising only 8.47% of the total area but from 37.9 to 81.1% of the total site-wide estimated erosion. BMP implementation varied by region and harvest type, with biomass sites having better implementation than conventional sites, and conventional Mountain sites having lower implementation than other regions. Sufficient woody debris remained for BMPs on both harvest types in all regions, with conventional Mountain sites retaining twice that of Coastal Plain sites. BMPs reduced the estimated erosion on both site types suggesting increased implementation could reduce potential erosion in problematic areas. Therefore, proper BMP implementation should be ensured, particularly in Mountainous terrain, regardless of harvest type.en
dc.description.versionPublished versionen
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.identifier.citationGarren, A.M.; Bolding, M.C.; Barrett, S.M.; Hawks, E.M.; Aust, W.M.; Coates, T.A. A Comparison of Forest Biomass and Conventional Harvesting Effects on Estimated Erosion, Best Management Practice Implementation, Ground Cover, and Residual Woody Debris in Virginia. Biomass 2023, 3, 403-421.en
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.3390/biomass3040024en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10919/117817en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherMDPIen
dc.rightsCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en
dc.subjectenergywooden
dc.subjectsite impactsen
dc.subjectlogging residuesen
dc.subjectBest Management Practices (BMPs)en
dc.subjectdowned woody debrisen
dc.titleA Comparison of Forest Biomass and Conventional Harvesting Effects on Estimated Erosion, Best Management Practice Implementation, Ground Cover, and Residual Woody Debris in Virginiaen
dc.title.serialBiomassen
dc.typeArticle - Refereeden
dc.type.dcmitypeTexten

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
biomass-03-00024.pdf
Size:
3.22 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Published version
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.5 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections

Journal Articles, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)
Scholarly Works, Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation