1

Forest Management Master Plan According to the

Principles of the new Forest Management Policy of Israel

(2014) – Kedoshom Forest as a Model

Yahel Porat

1, Chanoch Zoref

2, Yagil Osem

3

1 Forest Dept., Keren Kayemeth Leisrael (KKL), Israel yahelp@kkl.org.il

2 Mountain District, KKL, Israel Chanoch@kkl.org.il

3 Field Crops and Natural Resources Dept., Volcani Inst., Israel yagil@volcani.agri.gov.il

Abstract

Forest Management Policy of Israel: Guidelines for Planning and Management (2014) provides a

professional and mandatory basis for goal-oriented, sustainable forest management (SFM) in Israel. This document also necessitates the preparation of a management master plan for forestlands. The

Kedoshim-Forest was chosen as a case study for applying this approach. First, the plan’s boundaries

were defined to allow for a detailed study of the area’s elements at the regional level. The mapping of vegetation formations was a central component of this stage. The resultant database on vegetation

units of the forest served as the foundation for developing a predictive model of future, potential

vegetation for each unit. The next stage dealt with defining a vision for the forest, and the necessary

planning and management principles for the forest, which were subsequently applied towards defining forest land-use types for each management unit. These categories were selected as a way to deliver a

variety of ecosystem services and to preserve its biological diversity. The following stage involved the

determination of management units (MU): a designated land-use unit with similar existing and projected vegetation formations. Planning principles for each type of MU, in conjunction with its

designated land-use, helped in determining the desired vegetation formation for each MU. Meaning,

the most appropriate vegetation formation for the MU’s primary land-use that can be achieved

through a minimal level of site intervention or change in the natural vegetation dynamic. Next, specific stand treatments were established to obtain the desired vegetation formation for the MU. In

2014, the KKL began the preparation of a number of forest management master plans based on the

Kedoshim-Forest model. Introduction and main objective

“Forest Management Policy of Israel: Guidelines for Planning and Management” was approved by the KKL Board of Directors in August 2012. This document lays the foundation for the professional

and compulsory goal-oriented, sustainable management of forestlands and open spaces managed by

the Keren Kayemeth Leisrael (KKL) in Israel (Osem et al. 2014). According to this document, the

principal goal of Israeli forestry is to supply a variety of ecosystem services to Israel’s citizens. Primary management principles laid out in the document include: goal-oriented management,

adaptive management; multiple-use land management; determination of forest objectives and

structure as a function of site characteristics; and a reliance on natural processes where possible. A structured process of long-term planning is necessary for the sustainable management of forestlands

and the attainment of management goals. Therefore, the policy document describes several types of

management plans at different spatial and temporal scales.

This article deals with the development of a forest master plan and multi-year work (management)

plan. The master plan is valid for 25 years - it outlines a set of primary management goals for the

forest, while defining specific uses and desired vegetation formations for management sub-units. The

multi-year work plan is valid for 10 years - it outlines practical pathways for implementing and

2

attaining management goals defined in the master plan. The primary land-use types defined in the

master plan framework include:

recreation - areas designated for outdoor recreational and leisure activities;

cultural heritage assets - areas designated for the protection and enhancement of heritage

and landscape assets of major cultural significance;

natural assets - areas designated for the protection and enhancement of unique natural assets

e.g. specific habitats or species;

fuelbreaks - areas managed to impede the spread of forest fires;

community forest - forest areas adjacent to communities and made available for their use;

research forests - areas designated for research projects to better understand and improve

forest management activities;

multiple-use forests (MUF): areas designated to preserve the continuity and connectivity of

open-spaces, to emphasize the diversity of Israel’s landscape resource, and to provide a wide

variety of ecosystem services. The majority of Israel’s forestlands are MUF. Management is

of an extensive nature, based upon a reliance on the processes of natural regeneration,

succession and adaptation. The MUF is characterized by a multi-age, multi-layered structure, patchiness and a diversity of vegetation formations.

Following the classification of land-use types the desired vegetation formation (“future forest” type) is defined for each management unit as a function of land-use type, and current and predicted forest

vegetation formation. The attainment of a desired vegetation formation for each management unit can

be accomplished through management activities that are coordinated with the designated use of each

unit. For example, management of a recreational forest will be of an intensive nature, aimed to achieve high canopy cover for shade and increasing access and safety aspects of the site for the

public’s use. In comparison, management of a multiple-use forest will be of an extensive nature,

emphasizing natural ecological processes and biological diversity. The Multi-year work plan takes into consideration the site’s current vegetation type and endeavors to attain the stated site’s land-use

goal via the application of the appropriate techniques with a minimalistic level of intervention. This

approach signifies a major departure from current management which is based for the most part on general statutory definitions of forest types (National Master Plan 22: Forests and Afforestation and

detailed statutory plans) and on current stand-level parameters (species, age, density, health status

etc.).

The main objective of this project was to prepare a specific forest master plan as a means of demonstrating the practical implementation of the new planning and management guidelines

embodied in the document “Forest Management Policy of Israel: Guidelines for Planning and

Management” (FMPI) . The Kedoshim Forest was selected as the candidate model forest.

Methodology

The Planning Team The planning team included the forest supervisor, the forester and the community ranger of Kedoshim

Forest (KKL), forest ecologist from the Agricaltural Research Organization and a landscape architect.

The plan was developed using a GIS platform (ArcMap 10) to facilitate accessibility for all field-level

managers. The Planning process is graphically described in Figure 1.

Preliminary Landscape Analysis and Forest Vegetation Mapping (current and projected) Kedoshim forest is located in the Judean mountains west of Jerusalem, it covers an area of 2,500

hectares (10,000 acres) and presents a unique set of management challenges due to the complexity of

its landscape, ecology and cultural assets. In the initial stage, an area was chosen for analysis that was larger than the actual boundaries of the forest planning area. Several analyses were conducted on

3

existing data regarding physical, ecological and landscape aspects as well as human impacts and

forest management.

A central feature of this stage included the mapping of existing vegetation formations according to the

designations detailed in the FMPI and which is based on a specific model that translates KKL forest

inventory data into vegetation types. For each forest stand an existing “forest vegetation type” was

assigned. They detailed the percent of canopy cover for different vegetation layers within the stand, and the dominant species of each layers. This analysis revealed that 50% of the Kedoshim-Forest are

dense coniferous plantations dominated by Pinus halepensis and P. brutia, accompanied by P.

canariensis, P. pinea and Cupressus semperverins. Additional vegetation types include patches of mixed coniferous-broadleaved forests (10%), native oak woodlands (15%), shrublands (10%),

traditional orchards (5%), dwarf-shrublands and grasslands (2%) (Figs. 2 & 3).

This comprehensive database provided the basis for a vegetation development trajectory model which defines the expected natural dynamics and future outcome for each vegetation type. The model takes

into account environmental conditions for each area, as well as current vegetation structure and

condition.

Figure 1: The Forest Master Plan Process Flowchart

4

Figure 2: Proportions of existing forest vegetation types, Kedoshim-Forest 2013.

Figure 3: Distribution of existing forest vegetation types, Kedoshim-Forest 2013.

5

Results

The Forest Vision and the Planning Principles The preliminary analysis stage facilitated the process of developing a vision for the forest and the

necessary planning principles to achieve it. The vision for the Kedoshim-Forest denotes it as a central link in the open space matrix of the Jerusalem mountains; a matrix considered the “national heartland”

of Israel’s open spaces, representing the full array of its Mediterranean landscapes. As an important

element of this matrix, it will continue to function as a high quality, uninterrupted open space that

provides numerous opportunities for recreation while preserving the area’s natural, historical and cultural assets.

Planning principles developed for this forest include: 1) encouraging outdoor recreational activities

based on hiking and bicycling; 2) preserving the forest’s core area in a natural-like state while concentrating areas for intensive recreational use on the forest’s perimeter, close to existing

infrastructure; 3) strengthening the link between surrounding communities and the forest’s

recreational infrastructure; and, 4) strengthening recreational activity linkages between the mountainous area and the foothills.

Planning and management principles for vegetation and biological diversity include: 1) articulate the

area’s diversity of vegetation formations and landscape patchiness; 2) express natural vegetation

formations (native oak woodlands andshrubland) as well as traditional cultural formations (coniferous plantations , traditional orchards); 3) encourage forest development pathways from simply structured

coniferous plantations into a complex, diverse forest structure; 4) high-intensity thinning of over-

stocked conifer plantations to reduce risk from catastrophic wildfire events and encourage natural regeneration and understory diversity ; 5) increased cover of open vegetation formations ( e.g.

shrublands and grasslands); 6) encourage dense tall forest formations for the shading of recreational

sites; 7) revealing and emphasizing unique landscape elements and habitats e.g., cliffs and stream

courses; 8) control of invasive species; and, 9) preserve the area’s open landscape continuity for use as ecological corridors.

The Forest Master Plan The foundation for the Kedoshim-Forest master plan is built upon its vision and the planning principles established for it. The forest is subdivided into land units. For each unit the following

attributes are designated: primary and secondary land-uses, planning principles, detailed vegetation

management guidelines (Figs. 4 & 5).

Sixty-six percent (66%) of the forest area is designated as multiple-use forests that will supply

the following ecosystem services: water runoff prevension, carbon sequestration, wood

supply, rangelands for livestock and support of local biodiversity.

Seventeen percent (17%) of the forest area is designated as natural assets land-use zones,

located primarily along riparian corridors of major stream courses, cliffs and areas of developed Arbutus andrachne woodland and high quality patches of dwarf-shrubland.

Detailed management guidelines were drawn up to preserves the unique attributes of these

assets.

Nine percent (9%) of the forest area is designated as cultural heritage assets land-use zones,

supplying cultural services via important archeological and historic sites and typical landscape features on highly visible areas.

Five percent (5%) of the forest area is designated as fuelbreaks, most of which are located

along roads and around neighboring communities and infrastructures.

Two percent (2%) of the forest area is designated as recreational sites (picnic and

campgrounds) providing areas for intensive human's use.

One percent (1%) of the forest area is designated as long-term ecological research (LTER)

sites, managed according to a detailed research plan specifically developed for it.

6

Figure 4: Proportions of forest area according to primary land-use designation, kedoshim-Forest

2013.

Figure 5: Distribution of forest land-use designations, Kedishim-Forest 2013

7

Management Units and Desired Vegetation Formations

Forest management units (MU) were determined by means of integrating two existing GIS mapping layers: 1) existing vegetation formations and 2) designated land-uses of the forest. A MU is a

relatively homogeneous and continuous unit to which a particular management activity can be

equally applied. For each MU the desired forest vegetation formation can be assigned that will best meet the unit’s preset management goals and guidelines. As a rule, for multiple-use forests the desired

vegetation formation is primarily based upon the site’s natural vegetation dynamics, whereas for MUs

with a more specific designation, such as recreation sites or fuelbreaks, a more intensive management

regime is foreseen . A steady changeover from monospecific even-aged conifer stands to a mixed-species multilayered type of forest (coniferous-broadleaved forest) is the most significant change to be

expected when transforming the forest from its current state to the desired state. Accordingly, a

mixed-species forest with a intermediate degree of overstory cover will typify 30% of the area of the Kedoshim-Forest as its desired vegetation formation. On the other hand, only 2% of the forest’s area

will be designated as closed-canopy conifer forest (particularly for recreational sites). An additional

20% of the forest’s area will be designated as woodlands and shrublands, whereas the current level of dwarf-shrublands and grasslands is expected to double itself in size. It should be emphasized that a

large number of MUs are assigned a spectrum of desired forest vegetation formations, as opposed to a

precise definition of the desired one. This is due to the difficulty in foreseeing the various trajectories

that the unit’s vegetation dynamic may take in the future, as well as the desire to avoid unnecessary intervention when it is not warranted (Figs. 6 & 7).

Figure 6: Proportions of forest areas according to desired vegetation formations, kedoshim-Forest

2013.

8

Figure 7: distribution of management units (MU) with desired vegetation formations, Kedoshim-Forest 2013.

Multi-year Forest Work Plan

Management actions for each MU are determined by its designated land-use, its current vegetation formation and its desired vegetation formation.

For approximately 40% of the forest’s area (designated as multiple-use forest), a program of

thinning conifer stands to varying densities and the creation of open patches to encourage

landscape and species diversity is recommended.

A program of clearcutting conifer stands with the subsequent grazing of goat herds is

recommended for approximately 10% of the forest area - this will help preserve specific

natural assets and habitats as well as uncover cultural and historic assets, and unique

landscape formations (i.e. uncovering of cliff walls in stream courses).

On 5% of the forest area, it is recommended to create fuelbreaks via high-intensity thinning of

stands accompanied by intensive goat grazing to reduce fuel loading.

The creation of dense, high, conifer stands, which create a comfortable microclimate for

humans, is recommended for 2% of the forest area which are used as recreational sites.

Stand specific management treatments are to be used for the preservation and fostering of

Arbutus andrachne woodland, Quercus boisseri groves, native Pinus halepensis populations

and traditional orchards.

The MUs are ranked by priority for treatment in the multi-year management plan. A ranking index for

their implementation was developed based on the following parameters: land-use designation,

9

accessibility to the site for stand treatments, and stand health and vitality status. Fuelbreaks and

recreational sites will always receive a high-level priority ranking for treatment. Sites designated as “cultural heritage assets” or “natural assets" will receive a high- or intermediate-level priority ranking

depending on specific considerations. Multiple-use forests will receive an intermediate- or low-level

priority ranking depending mainly on their condition and degree of accessibility. For example, a

young, dense conifer stand will be ranked at higher-priority whereas a mature, low-density conifer stand will be ranked at a lower level. Accordingly, 25% of the forest area is ranked high-priority, 43%

intermediate-priority and 30% low-priority. Priority ranking is an important new tool for management

that will allow foresters to apply their management efforts in a more efficient manner, based on a broad context of management considerations.

Thematic Master Plans Three thematic management plans were developed as addenda to the overall forest management

master plan, wherein each one emphasizes a specific and overriding management concern: 1) Forest

Fire Prevention Master Plan (Fig. 8), 2) Forest Recreation Master Plan, and 3) Master Plan for Natural Assets. All of these plans, accompanied by maps and data tables, present in-depth management

guidelines which go beyond the standard guidelines for vegetation management detailed above.

Figure 8: Map of Forest Fire Prevention Master Plan, Kedoshim-Forest 2013.

11

Discussion and Conclusions

The outline developed for a forest management master plan, based on the FMPI, facilitates long-term

planning of the forest’s overall structure and treatment regime as a function of its vision and defined

goals. The forest is subdivided into designated land-use units, each one with an individualized treatment regime to attain the desired vegetation formation, based on its land-use, current vegetation

formation and expected vegetation dynamics. Consequently, forest stands with similar vegetation

formations (species mix, tree density) may receive different treatment regimes (type, intensity) due to their specific designated land-uses.

This is a significant departure from current forest management practice in which the treatment regime

is set mainly according to current stand condition. As a result of adopting the new policy document and testing it on a model forest, in 2013 the KKL commenced with a broad program in preparing

forest management master plans for other forests. Plans for two additional forests were completed in

2014, while those for three more will be completed in 2015. Annual work plans for three forests were

prepared and are currently under implementation, as a result of the master plans prepared for them.

References

Aronson, S. 1983. Landscape and Recreation in the Judean Hills. Jewish Agency Settlement Dept.,

Mateh Yehuda Regional Council, Israel Nature & Parks Authority, Keren Kayemeth

Leisrael. [in Hebrew].

Bashan, G. 2012. Personnel communication.

Ben-Yosef, S. 1980. A Guide to Israel, A Useful Encyclopedia to Know the Land: Yehuda. Keter.

Ministry of Defense Publishing House. [in Hebrew].

BioGis – Israel Biodiversity Website. (2012). biogis@huji.ac.il.

Israel Nature and Parks Authority. 2012. GIS map layers of Israel. Jerusalem. [in Hebrew].

Kaplan, M., I. Kimchi, M. Hushan. 2000. Jerusalem Mountains and the Shfela: Preservation Policy

and Sustainable Development. Ministry of environmental Protection, Israel nature and Parks Authority, Keren Kayemeth Leisrael, Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel, Israel

Antiquities Authority. [in Hebrew].

KKL. 2010. Forest of the Martyrs forest inventory. Eshtaol. [in Hebrew].

KKL. 2012. GIS layers of forests.

Osem, Y., D. Brand, I. Tauber, A. Perevolotsky, C. Zoref. 2014. Forest Management Policy of Israel:

Guidelines for Planning and Management. KKL Jerusalem. 86 p. [in Hebrew w/ English

summary].

Puettman K.J., K.D. Coats, C. Messier. 2008. A Critique of Silviculture: Managing for Complexity.

Islands Press, Washington D.C.

Ran, Z. 1966. Agricultural Terraces in the Judean Mountains. Teva V’Aretz, Vol. 8. [in Hebrew].

Shkedi, Y., E. Sadot. 2000. Open Space Ecological Corridors as a Tool for Nature Conservation.

Israel Nature and Parks Authority. [in Hebrew].

11

Survey of Israel. 2012. GIS map layers of Israel. Tel Aviv. [in Hebrew].

Zohar, Y., Ron, M., Ramon U. 2009. The Mountains of Western Jerusalem: A Survey and Analysis of Natural Resources, Landscape and Cultural Heritage. The Open Landscape Institute, Tel

Aviv. [in Hebrew].

Zuckerman, M. 2012. Personnel communication.