Our planet’s forests are facing challenges that will have a major impact on the environment. Ecosystems are already changing, but too few people are aware to push for decisions to be made on the global, national and regional levels.
It's a well-known fact that the climate has always been changing, and bringing with it changes to vegetation and wildlife. But the current changes are happening too fast, leaving ecosystems, including forests, unable to adapt and doomed to catastrophic man-made and natural disturbances such as the massive forest fires in 2019 that engulfed millions of square kilometers of tropical and boreal forests.
Meanwhile, the spread of diseases and mass reproduction of harmful insects have forced forestry enterprises to cut down mature forests and sick tree plantations. In some cases when forests are sick businesses are forced to cut down twice as much wood as projected and planned. But this wood is of low quality and it affects the world timber market. These dead forests are left for decades in preserves and remote areas where the timber cannot be harvested.
Large storms, snows and winds have, unfortunately, become commonplace in many regions, not only because of frequent abnormal weather conditions but also low resistance to pathogens and general weakening of trees.
According to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (UN FAO), human impact on forests has decreased over the last thirty years, but every year many millions of hectares of forest are felled. The main reason is agriculture. For example, slash and burn agriculture still exists in many African countries.
In Ukraine thousands of hectares of young forests are being cut down on agricultural lands that were abandoned 20-30 years ago and are again being used for agribusiness. It’s not illegal, because the status of the forested land de jure hasn’t changed, but the forest is still disappearing in those areas. In addition to agriculture, urbanization and infrastructure construction also play a role. Unfortunately, in some countries forest loss is also linked to military conflict.
The transformation of Ukraine’s forest ecosystems is particularly acute because the country is located in the transition zone between mixed forests and steppe. The pattern is obvious: the less moisture, the less forests. Steppe conditions that are extreme for forests are spreading north at a fast pace. The health of forests is deteriorating rapidly and the risk of large-scale disruptions is increasing.
Scientists (Shvidenko et al., 2017) predict that by the end of this century the vast majority of the plain territory of Ukraine may be unsuitable for the growth of major forest species. That is, climate change according to the A1B scenario (Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change) will dramatically change Ukraine’s forests over the next several decades.
Particularly alarming is the official report by the State Forest Resources Agency of Ukraine that 413,000 hectares of forest died in 2019 alone, including 222,000 hectares of pine plantations, 27,000 hectares of common spruce, 100,000 hectares of common oak, and 64,000 hectares of other species. Unfortunately the reports don’t provide detailed explanations for why the trees died and the methods used to determine the area. It can be assumed that reports refer to areas of forest where there has been selective or clear-cutting. Nonetheless, even more alarming are figures that point to serious problems with the health of Ukraine’s forests and confirmation of disappointing forecasts.
Management and protection of forests in Ukraine is usually carried out by state and municipal forestry enterprises, which spend money received from the sale of timber for the planting and protection of forests. However, the most difficult situation is in the south of Ukraine, where protected forests are concentrated, and in the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone, where the most radionuclide contaminated lands are located. In both cases, the protection of forests has limited capabilities since there is almost no opportunity for timber trade and proper funding is not provided by the state budget.
In the last decade particular attention has been paid by Ukrainian society to forestry, deforestation and poaching, often critical. Despite the active informational work done by forest management departments and enterprises covering the relevance and complexity of the work of foresters, in the eyes of society, forestry workers are sometimes seen as violators rather than protectors and guard of the forests. The fact that in the last decade individuals without a forestry education and management experience have been appointed top managers of the Forest Resources Agency also doesn’t build confidence.
This raises the question: What if the forest grew on its own without the attention of foresters? Would the forest be as natural as hundreds of thousands of years ago?
If you want to imagine what would happen to Ukrainian forests without foresters or with their minimal participation, then one should look no further than the forests of the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone. Clearly the forests of the exclusion zone don’t need typical Ukrainian forest management since there is practically no forest use and therefore the volume of forest restoration and care of young forests is minimal. However, the most difficult and costly tasks are the protection of forests. Monitoring of forest ecosystems, constant patrolling of the forest stock and other lands, reducing the risks of threats to forests and responding quickly to address them are extremely complex tasks that require modern technical support, infrastructure development and a high level of logistics.
I’m certain that those working in the exclusion zone and responsible for forest conservation are doing everything to protect them, but it’s obvious that their resources are limited, because the scale of forest fires and death from diseases and insects is great enough to be considered catastrophic.
At least 20,000 hectares of forest have been affected by fires in the last three decades. Two large fires in the Chornobyl Exclusion Zone in April and August 2015 destroyed nearly 10,000 hectares of forest (see Fig. 1) and affected more than 16,000 hectares of ecosystems. There are dead forests in the Chornobyl zone the size of the average regional city in northern Ukraine. This may be an inappropriate comparison, but it’s necessary to understand the magnitude of the effects of fires. Imagine driving for 30-40 minutes and seeing nothing but burned out forest. The picture is spooky, but it’s probably how natural forests look, and that’s not very bad from an environmental point of view for biodiversity conservation. However, Ukrainian society should be prepared for the fact that natural forests don’t always look as charming as a desktop screensaver.
This example was given for one purpose only – to point specifically to changes in forest ecosystems due to the sharp decrease in the level of forest conservation and protection and significant transformation of forest ecosystem services.
With the impact of natural and anthropogenic disturbances increasing, deterioration of forest health, low level of trust in forest protection and inefficient management of forest resources, Ukraine in the next 10-20 years can expect large losses from emergencies in mountainous regions, decrease in agricultural efficiency in the south, and loss-making forestry in the forest-steppe and Polissia.
If the Ukrainian state and society do not change their attitude to forestry today, then in two or three decades we’ll be paying a very high price.
-Andrii Bilous, Prof. Dr. Sci., (Forestry), Institute of Forestry and Landscape-Park Management, National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine
(translated by USUF)
Read about the Ukrainian scientists in Ivano-Frankivsk combating the deforestation problem in Western Ukraine
USUF Biotech Initiative visits the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine in Kyiv
