Articles by Laura Pikkarainen

We evaluated the consistency of video, ordinary photo, and panoramic photo surveys in measuring the attractiveness (recreational use, scenic values etc.) of forest stands managed with varying intensities. We also evaluated possible effects on the results caused by the personal background of citizen respondents and how the respondents experienced the evaluation events. Our experimental sites were in mature Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) forests in eastern Finland and included two replicate sites which were unharvested (control, basal area 26 m² ha^–1), a selective cutting site (basal area 18 m² ha^–1), small openings sites (gap cut) with 5 and 20% retained trees, respectively, and one site which was clear cut with 3% retained trees. In our study, 71 volunteer forestry students evaluated the attractiveness of these sites from an ordinary photo, a panoramic photo, and a video, with a 0–10 scale. Based on this study, the unharvested forest was the most attractive and clear cutting was the least attractive, regardless of the evaluation method. This result was in line with a previous study using on-site evaluations of the same sites. The differences of respondents considering in how easy they felt to assess the attractiveness of the environment as a whole and in using different visualisation methods affected the result, unlike background variables of the respondents. The results of forest attractiveness were consistent between panoramic and ordinary photos, and the attractiveness scoring was slightly higher for them than for the video. We conclude that all the compared visualisation methods seem to be suitable for assessment of the attractiveness of forest views.

• Silvennoinen, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9095-7986 E-mail: harri.silvennoinen@uef.fi
• Pikkarainen, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5301-3639 E-mail: laura.pikkarainen@uef.fi
• Nakola, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland E-mail: heini.nakola@gmail.com
• Koivula, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6415-4904 E-mail: matti.koivula@luke.fi
• Tyrväinen, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Latokartanonkaari 9, FI-00790 Helsinki, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5144-7150 E-mail: liisa.tyrvainen@luke.fi
• Tikkanen, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9693-8209 E-mail: jukka.tikkanen@uef.fi
• Chambers, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0586-3142 E-mail: philip.chambers@uef.fi
• Peltola, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, P.O. Box 111, FI-80101 Joensuu, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1384-9153 E-mail: heli.peltola@uef.fi

We used forest ecosystem model simulations to study how forest conservation and management intensity affected timber yield, ecosystem carbon stocks, amount of dead wood, and habitat suitability area in a middle boreal forest region of Finland under changing climate over a 90-year simulation period. We used the following forest conservation and management scenarios: baseline forest management (BM), BM with 10 or 20% increase of conservation area with or without intensified forest management (i.e. improved forest regeneration material and forest fertilization). The simulations were done under current climate (reference period of 1981–2010), and Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) climate change projections under the RCP2.6 and RCP4.5 forcing scenarios. Overall, increasing the forest conservation area decreased timber yield and increased the ecosystem carbon stock, the amount of dead wood and consequently the area of suitable habitat for saproxylic species. The use of intensified forest management reduced the loss of timber yield, increased ecosystem carbon stock, the amount of dead wood and area of suitable habitat for saproxylic species. At the end of simulation period, the use of intensified forest management even overcompensated (4–6% higher) the timber loss from 10% increase of conservation area. Under changing climate, timber yield, the amount of dead wood and the area of suitable habitats for saproxylic species increased. To conclude, with intensified forest management it is possible, in the short term, to decrease the loss of timber yield through increased forest conservation area and in the long term maintain or even increase it compared to baseline forest management.

• Pikkarainen, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistokatu 7, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5301-3639 E-mail: laura.pikkarainen@uef.fi
• Strandman, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistokatu 7, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9400-6424 E-mail: harri.strandman@uef.fi
• Vento, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistokatu 7, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland E-mail: eerik.vento@gmail.com
• Petty, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistokatu 7, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland https://orcid.org/0009-0006-6595-1386 E-mail: aaron.petty@uef.fi
• Tikkanen, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistokatu 7, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3875-2772 E-mail: olli-pekka.tikkanen@uef.fi
• Kilpeläinen, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistokatu 7, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4299-0578 E-mail: antti.kilpelainen@uef.fi
• Peltola, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistokatu 7, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland E-mail: heli.peltola@uef.fi

In Nordic countries, tree planting of seedlings is mainly performed during spring and early summer. Interest has increased in extending the planting window throughout the unfrozen growing season. This study compared the success of one-year-old spring, summer and autumn plantings in practical forestry in Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) and Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) in southern and central Finland. Planting success was based on the number of viable seedlings per hectare relative to a species-specific target density. The influence of different factors to poor planting results were determined, including quality of site preparation and planting, and sources of natural damage. Overall, in Norway spruce, 85, 69 and 84% and in Scots pine 53, 55 and 40% of spring, summer and autumn plantings succeeded. In Norway spruce, the planting results were consistent between the southern and central regions, whereas in Scots pine, the success was slightly lower in the south. The poor work quality and a low density of appropriate planting spots, contributed to poor planting results, regardless of planting season, region or tree species. Considering different damages, especially mammal damage contributed to the failure of Scots pine spring plantings, whereas in summer plantings, corresponding single failure reason could not be identified. Based on our findings, extending the planting season of Norway spruce could be recommended in both regions. For Scots pine, there is still significant uncertainty about the success of summer and autumn plantings, partially due to the limited number of plantings available for analyses.

• Pikkarainen, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistonkatu 7, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland E-mail: laura.pikkarainen@uef.fi
• Luoranen, Natural Resources Institute Finland (Luke), Production Systems, Neulaniementie 5, FI-70210 Kuopio, Finland E-mail: jaana.luoranen@luke.fi
• Kilpeläinen, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistonkatu 7, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland E-mail: antti.kilpelainen@uef.fi
• Oijala, Metsä Group, Metsä Forest, Kuormaajantie 7, FI-40320 Jyväskylä, Finland E-mail: teppo.oijala@metsagroup.com
• Peltola, School of Forest Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistonkatu 7, FI-80100 Joensuu, Finland E-mail: heli.peltola@uef.fi