Fig 1.
Flow diagram of forest management decision-making process using Habplan and HabplanR.
Bold text numbered 1–4 represent the four main steps of the forest management decision-making process. Colored rectangles depict when a specific HabplanR function is run during the process, and text before inward-facing arrows show R function inputs, and text after outward-facing arrows represent R function outputs. Colors in the provided map highlight stand boundaries.
Fig 2.
Study site map highlighting the 505 forest stands that were incorporated into the Habplan harvest scheduler.
Colors in the provided map highlight stand boundaries. Map lacks a coordinate reference system for anonymity.
Fig 3.
Representations of three species “types” with divergent habitat requirements.
Red line demonstrates relationship between basal area and habitat. Black dashed line depicts Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) threshold of 0.7 used to determine if a stand hosted habitat or non-habitat (can be altered for each species, see Step 2). Left: Closed-canopy-associated species; Middle: intermediate-canopy-associated species; Right: Open-canopy-associated species.
Fig 4.
A schematic of the relationships between model targets and upper (Thhi) and lower (Thlo) thresholds (i.e., how much the target is able to positively and negatively deviate respectively).
The upper panel represents parameters set for pine pulpwood flows, where 20 “steps” were parameterized (only three steps shown for simplicity). The lower panel shows the five sets of parameters set for the HSI flow, which are run in combination with the 20 pine pulpwood steps for 100 model runs (S2 Table).
Table 1.
Selected Habplan solutions determined via the maximum mean yield/output from Habplan flow files across the projected 35 three-year study period.
Bold values depict the solution value that benefits that flow objective the most. Percentages in parentheses represent the deviation of the total flow from the maximum output possible.
Fig 5.
Flow output resulting from specific management schedules for each flow component across 100 runs of Habplan.
Grey lines indicate the output from an individual Habplan run. The four colors represented by the figure legend depict the four selected possible solutions (i.e., selected management schedule to compare).
Table 2.
Patch-level landscape metrics derived using the HabSpace function of HabplanR for the entire 35 three-year projection period, across two possible Habplan solutions.
Reported metrics include total forest area within the specific canopy openness category (acres, mean number of patches, and mean patch area [acres]). Values within parentheses represent the range of mean values across the 35 three-year projection period.
Fig 6.
Example framework for selecting an appropriate management solution for multi-species/objective forestry management.
Fig 7.
Available habitat across a portion of the study landscape projected for each species type based on selected solutions.
Landscapes are projected for four time periods, T = 5, 15, 25, and 35 3-year periods. The upper, middle, and lower panels depict closed, open, and intermediate-canopy forests, respectively.