Журнал

About Editorial Board Information for authors and reviewers Publication ethics Contacts User Account: send / review a manuscript
Archive
Volume 21, 2024
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5
Volume 20, 2023
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 19, 2022
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 18, 2021
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 17, 2020
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6 Number 7
Volume 16, 2019
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 15, 2018
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6 Number 7
Volume 14, 2017
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6 Number 7
Volume 13, 2016
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 12, 2015
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5 Number 6
Volume 11, 2014
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Volume 10, 2013
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Volume 9, 2012
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4 Number 5
Volume 8, 2011
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Volume 7, 2010
Number 1 Number 2 Number 3 Number 4
Issue 6, 2009
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 5, 2008
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 4, 2007
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 3, 2006
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 2, 2005
Volume 1 Volume 2
Issue 1, 2004
Volume 1
Search
Find:
русский
ISSN 2070-7401 (Print), ISSN 2411-0280 (Online)
Sovremennye problemy distantsionnogo zondirovaniya Zemli iz kosmosa
CURRENT PROBLEMS IN REMOTE SENSING OF THE EARTH FROM SPACE

  

Sovremennye problemy distantsionnogo zondirovaniya Zemli iz kosmosa, 2024, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 223-234

Analysis of soil cover of clearcuts using unmanned aerial vehicle

A.S. Ilintsev 1 , N.S. Cherkasov 2 
1 Northern Research Institute of Forestry, Arkhangelsk, Russia
2 Northern (Arctic) Federal University, Arkhangelsk, Russia
Accepted: 12.08.2024
DOI: 10.21046/2070-7401-2024-21-4-223-234
The article presents the results of a study of soil cover of 27 clearcuts in the north taiga forest of the Arkhangelsk Region. We used an unmanned aerial vehicle to measure the area and classes of soil disturbances on clearcuts in the most common forest conditions. Using desk processing of the obtained images, we created orthophotographs and manually marked disturbances caused by logging machinery on each clearcut. The depth of the ruts was calculated based on the differences in measurement between the digital surface model and the digital terrain model, with a measurement step of one meter. The data obtained were divided into three classes of disturbances: light (up to 15 cm), moderate (15 to 30 cm), and severe (more than 30 cm). To compare the data, we used the Kruskal – Wallis ANOVA test (H) and the Mann – Whitney U-Test (Z) at a 0.05 significance level (p). It has been established that the area of disturbances to the soil cover varies from 9.2 to 12.4 % of the total area of clearcut. We noted a significant influence of the timber harvesting season on the proportion of disturbances to the soil cover (H = 6.98; p = 0.030). The largest proportion of disturbed soils is observed in spring and autumn clearcuts compared to winter clearcuts (Z = 2.59; p = 0.029). On fresh soils, light disturbances prevail, accounting for 63.5 %, while moderate disturbances account for 27.0 % and severe disturbances for 9.5 % of the total disturbed area. On moist soils, light disturbances also prevail, the proportion of which is 73.0 %; the proportion of moderate ones is 21.5 % and the proportion of severe ones is 5.5 %. We noted a significant influence of the harvesting season on the distribution of light (H = 5.78; p = 0.050) and severe damages (H = 9.91; p = 0.007). The proportion of severe disturbances increases in summer logging to 9.3 % compared to winter logging, where the proportion of severe disturbances is only 1.4 % (Z = 3.09; p = 0.006). We revealed that deep ruts are confined to main skid trails and loading points, where the largest number of logging machinery passes is noted. In addition, severe soil disturbances are associated with lowered terrain areas, as well as the laying of secondary skid trails through temporary watercourses and wetlands. Sustainable forest management should be improved to limit and reduce negative soil cover disturbances.
Keywords: timber harvesting, logging machinery, technological elements of logging sites, unmanned aerial vehicle, digital surface model, digital terrain model, soil disturbances, rutting
Full text

References:

  1. Dymov A. A. Pochvennye suktsessii v boreal’nykh lesakh Respubliki Komi (Soil succession at boreal forests of the Komi Republic), Moscow: GEOS, 2020, 336 p. (in Russian), DOI: 10.34756/GEOS.2020.10.37828.
  2. Ogorodniaia S. A., Butylkina M. A., Krasikov S. R., Dymov A. A., Physical properties of upper mineral horizons of cutting area (middle taiga, Komi Republic), Lomonosov Soil Science J., 2024, Vol. 79, No. 2, pp. 15–25 (in Russian), DOI: 10.55959/MSU0137-0944-17-2024-79-2-15-25.
  3. Ratjkova E. I., Syunev V. S., Katarov V. K., Deformation properties of forest soils in Karelia affected by “freeze – defrost” cycles, Resources and Technology, 2013, No. 10(1), pp. 73–89 (in Russian).
  4. Terinov N. N., Gerts E. F., Bezgina Y. N., Development of logging technology in the Urals, Lesnoy zhurnal, 2016, Vol. 2, pp. 81–90 (in Russian), DOI: 10.17238/issn0536-1036.2016.2.81.
  5. Tsvetkov V. F., Kamo Gryadeshi (Nekotorye voprosy lesovodstva i lesovedeniya na Evropeiskom Severe) (Quo vadis (Some issues of silvics and silviculture in the European North)), Arkhangelsk: Izd-vo Arkhangel’skogo gosudarstvennogo tekhnicheskogo universiteta, 2000, 253 p. (in Russian).
  6. Bhatnagar S., Puliti St., Talbot B. et al., Mapping wheel-ruts from timber harvesting operations using deep learning techniques in drone imagery, Forestry, 2022, Vol. 95, Issue 5, pp. 698–710, DOI: 10.1093/forestry/cpac023.
  7. Cambi M., Certini G., Neri F. et al., Impact of heavy traffic on forest soils: A review, Forest Ecology and Management, 2015, Vol. 338, pp. 124–138, DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2014.11.022.
  8. DeArmond D., Ferraz J., Higuchi N., Natural recovery of skid trails: A review, Canadian J. Forest Research, 2021, Vol. 51, pp. 948–961, DOI: 10.1139/cjfr-2020-0419.
  9. Giannetti F., Chirici G., Travaglini D. et al., Assessment of soil disturbance caused by forest operations by means of portable laser scanner and soil physical parameters, Soil Science Society of America J., 2017, Vol. 81, No. 6, Article 1577, DOI: 10.2136/sssaj2017.02.0051.
  10. Heppelmann J. B., Talbot B., Fernández C. A. et al., Depthtowater maps as predictors of rut severity in fully mechanized harvesting operations, Intern. J. Forest Engineering, 2022, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 108–118, DOI: 10.1080/14942119.2022.2044724.
  11. Ilintsev A. S., Nakvasina E. N., Högbom L., Methods of protection forest soils during logging operations (Review), Lesnoy zhurnal, 2021, No. 5, pp. 92–116, DOI: 10.37482/0536-1036-2021-5-92-116.
  12. Ilintsev A., Bogdanov A., Nakvasina E. et al., Influence of ruts on the physical properties of Gleyic Retisols after logging machinery passage, Scandinavian J. Forest Research, 2022, Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 254–263, DOI: 10.1080/02827581.2022.2085785.
  13. Koren M., Slančík M., Suchomel J. et al., Use of terrestrial laser scanning to evaluate the spatial distribution of soil disturbance by skidding operations, iForest, 2015, Vol. 8, pp. 386–393, DOI: 10.3832/ifor1165-007.
  14. Labelle E. R., Hansson L., Högbom L. et al., Strategies to Mitigate the Effects of Soil Physical Disturbances Caused by Forest Machinery: a Comprehensive Review, Current Forestry Reports, 2022, Vol. 8, pp. 20–37, DOI: 10.1007/s40725-021-00155-6.
  15. Marchi E., Chung W., Visser R. et al., Sustainable Forest Operations (SFO): A new paradigm in a changing world and climate, Science of the Total Environment, 2018, Vol. 634, pp. 1385–1397, DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.04.084.
  16. Marra E., Wictorsson R., Bohlin J. et al., Remote measuring of the depth of wheel ruts in forest terrain using a drone, Intern. J. Forest Engineering, 2021, Vol. 32, Issue 3, pp. 1–11, DOI: 10.1080/14942119.2021.1916228.
  17. Picchio R., Mederski P. S., Tavankar F., How and how much, do harvesting activities affect forest soil, regeneration and stands? Current Forestry Reports, 2020, Vol. 6, pp. 115–128, DOI: 10.1007/s40725-020-00113-8.
  18. Ring E., Andersson M., Hansson L. et al., Logging mats and logging residue as ground protection during forwarder traffic along till hillslopes, Croatian J. Forest Engineering, 2021, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 445–462, DOI: 10.5552/crojfe.2021.875.
  19. Saarilahti M., Soil interaction model: Appendix report No. 8. Univ. Helsinki, Dep. Forest Resource Management, 2002, 37 p.
  20. Susnjar M., Horvat D., Seselj J., Soil compaction in timber skidding in winter conditions, Croatian J. Forest Engineering, 2006, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 3–15.
  21. Talbot B., Pierzchała M., Astrup R., Applications of remote and proximal sensing for improved precision in forest operations, Croatian J. Forest Engineering, 2017, Vol. 38, pp. 327–336.
  22. Talbot B., Rahlf J., Astrup R., An operational UAV-based approach for stand-level assessment of soil disturbance after forest harvesting, Scandinavian J. Forest Research, 2018, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp. 387–396, DOI: 10.1080/02827581.2017.1418421.