Abstract :

Logging residue is defined as the above-ground biomass left behind after log harvesting with a chainsaw, including branches, tops, and small trees that fall to the ground during the felling process. We investigated the logging residue from rasamala wood (Altingia excelsa) harvested in the Takokak Forest of Sukabumi Regency, Indonesia. The objectives of the study were to determine the percentage of logging residue volume, the locations where logging residue occurred, the percentage of barber chairs, and the relationship between tree diameter and height to the volume of logging residue. The results showed that the percentage of logging residue was 26.36%, with the residue primarily occurring at the felling site. Barber chair damage occurred in 58.8% of the total trees harvested. The larger the tree’s diameter, the greater the volume of logging residue.

---

Keywords :

Altingia excelsa, barber chair, forest, logging residue.

---

References :

1. Company Profile. 2022. https://www.perhutani.co.id/ ; accessed on September 7^th, 2024.
2. Perhutani Forest Management Unit Sukabumi. Public Summary 2023; https://www.perhutani.co.id/kph-sukabumi/; accessed on September 1^st, 2024.
3. Matangaran JR, Rishadi H. Quantification of logging residue and biomass generated by an industrial plantation forest in Indonesia. International Journal of Ecology and Development. 2014; 27:77-88.
4. Matangaran JR, Anggoro R. Logging residue of teak harvesting in East Java, Indonesia (in Indonesian). Jurnal Perennial. 2012; 8(2):88-92.
5. Matangaran JR, Partiani T, Purnamasari DR. Exploitation factor and quantification of logging residue in order to increase the efficiency of harvesting natural forest (in Indonesian). Jurnal Bumi Lestari. 2013; 13(2):384-393.
6. Nurmi J. Recovery of logging residues for energy from spruce (Pices abies) dominated stands. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2007; 31(6): 375-380.
7. Liu W, Hou Y, Lu W, Yang M, Yan Y, Peng C, Yu Z. Global estimation of the eliminate change of logging residue utilization biofuels. Forest Ecology and Management. 2020; 462:18000.
8. Wikstrom F. The potential of energy utilization from logging residues with regard to availability of ashes. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2007; 31(1):40-45.
9. Pokharel R, Glara RK, Grebner DL, Grado SC. Nurmi J. Recovery of logging residues for energy from spruce (Pices abies) dominated stands. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2007; 31(6): 375-380.
10. Malinen J, Pesonen M, Maatta T, Kajanus M. Potential harvest for wood fuels (energy wood) from logging residues and first thinning in Southern Finland. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2001; 20(3):189-198.
11. Moskalik T, Gendek A. Production of Chips from Logging Residues and Their Qiality for Energy: A Review of European Literature. Forest. 2019; 10:262.
12. Stampfer K, Kanzian C. Current state and development possibilities of wood chip supply chains in Austria. Croation of Journal Forest Engineering. 2006; 27:135-145.
13. Matangaran JR, Putra EI, Diatin I, Mujahid M, Adlan Q. Residual stand damage from selective logging of tropical forests: A comparative case study in central Kalimantan and West Sumatra, Indonesia. Global Ecology and Conservation. 2019; e00688
14. Matangaran J, Rishadi H. Quantification of logging residue and biomass generated by an industrial plantation forest in Indonesia. International Journal of Ecology and Development. 2014; 27(1): 77e88.
15. Gabisa, E.W., Gheewala, S.H., 2018. Potential of bio-energy production in Ethiopia based on available biomass residues. Biomass Bioenergy. 2018; (111): 77e87.
16. RaniusT, Hämäläinen A, Egnell G, Olsson B, Eklof K, Stendahl J, Felton A. The effects of logging residue extraction for energy on ecosystem services and biodiversity: a synthesis. Journal of Environmental Management. 2018; 09; 409e425.
17. Vance ED, Prisley SP, Schilling EB, Tatum VL, Wigley TB, Lucier AA, Van Deusen PC. Environmental implications of harvesting lower value biomass in forests. Forest Ecology Management. 2018; (407): 47e56.
18. Pereira Jr R, Zweede J, Asner GP, Keller M. Forest canopy damage and recovery in reduce-impact and conventional selective logging in eastern Para Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management. 2002; 168:77-89.
19. Vidal E, West TAP, Putz FE. Recovery of biomass and merchantable timber volume twenty years after conventional and reduced-impact logging in Amazonian Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management. 2016; 376:1-8.
20. West TAP, Vidal E, Putz FE. Forest biomass recovery after conventional and reduced impact logging in Amazonian Brazil. Forest Ecology and Management. 2014; 314:59-63.
21. Ellis EA, Montero ES, Gomes IUH, Montera JAR, Ellis PW, Ward DR, Reyes PB, Putz FE. Reduced impact logging practices reduce forest disturbance and carbon emissions in community managed forest on Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. Forest Ecology and Management. 2019; 437:396-410.
22. Griscom BW, Ellis PW, Burivalova Z, Halperin J, Marthinus D, Runting RK, Ruslandi, Shoch D, Putz FE. Reduce impact logging in Borneo to minimize carbon emissions and impact on sensitive habitats while maintaining timber yields. Forest Ecology and Management 2019; 438:176-185.
23. Sist P, Sheil D, Kartawinata K, Priyadi H. Reduce impact Logging in Indonesian Borneo: some result confirming the need for new silviculture prescriptions. Forest Ecology and Management. 2003; 415-427.
24. Bertault JG, Sist P. An experimental comparison of different harvesting intensities with reduced impact and conventional logging in East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Forest Ecology and Management. 1997; 94:209-218.