Future directions for biodiversity conservation in managed forests: Indicator species, impact studies and monitoring programs

The validity and use of the indicator species concept, the design of logging impact studies, the need for long-term monitoring programs and how they might be designed, and, trade-offs between conservation strategies and economic costs are topics critical to the future direction of biological conservation in managed forests. The indicator species concept can make an important contribution to biodiversity conservation because of the impossibility of monitoring all taxa in species-rich forest environments. However, the concept has yet to be rigorously tested by validating relationships between an indicator species and entities for which it is hypothesized to be indicative. There can be serious negative consequences if the indicator species concept is incorrectly applied or inappropriate species are selected as indicators. Long-term monitoring will be critical for assessing not only the validity of concepts like indicator species, but also for appraising other rarely tested approaches to conservation in managed forests such as: (1) stand level management strategies to create and maintain key structural and floristic attributes that form critical habitat components for wildlife (e.g. large living and dead trees), (2) landscape level strategies to ensure the maintenance of landscape heterogeneity and connectivity, such as the establishment of networks of riparian protection zones and wildlife corridors, and, (3) landscape and regional level management involving the identification of reserves. While the importance of monitoring is often discussed, more programs are needed to gather the data needed to inform the development of ecologically sustainable forest management practices. Treating forestry activities as an experiment and overlaying well-designed monitoring programs on such disturbance regimes is one useful way to accumulate key information on the effects of logging on biodiversity and how to mitigate such impacts. However, some major changes will be needed to instigate greater commitment to monitoring programs. These include: (1) identifying innovative ways to secure long-term funding that can be guaranteed beyond typical political and institutional timeframes, (2) education of funding bodies to ensure they recognise that useful results may take a prolonged period to obtain and that monitoring is not a second-rate science, (3) greater participation in the design and execution of monitoring programs by the scientific community, and, (4) stronger links among researchers and between researchers and managers to both improve the quality and validity of monitoring studies and to ensure that the results of such programs are incorporated into management practices.