Protection of Natural Processes ("Process Protection" and Managed Forests

Less than 2% of Germany's forests are entirely untouched, allowing them to develop naturally without human influence. This progression toward a natural state—though not a "primal state" or primeval forest, as it is unlikely that the final outcome will resemble forests prior to human use—is designated as a "process" that begins once human activities cease. Unused (=unmanaged) forests, which fall under this “process protection” (= “Wilderness”), are typically located in the natural zones (= core zones) of national parks or biosphere reserves, as well as in small areas known as "Bannwald" or natural forest cells. As part of the National Biodiversity Strategy, Germany aims to increase the proportion of forests under process protection to 5% (National Strategy on Biological Diversity, Cabinet decision of November 7, 2007).

Untouched forests typically host a greater diversity of species compared to both intensively managed and near-to-nature-ural managed forests, with biodiversity increasing the longer these forests remain untouched (Paillet et al. 2009, Müller 2015). The decay and early regeneration phases are particularly rich in species, which are largely absent even from near-nature-managed  forests (Müller, 2015; Hilmers et al., 2018). In these phases, even species that typically avoid dense forests and primarily inhabit open landscapes can temporarily establish populations  (e.g., capercaillie, redstart) (Müller et al., 2010; Rösner et al., 2014). However, untouched “process-protected” forests are not more diverse than near-to-nature-managed forests in every considered species group. It is particularly true for species associated with deadwood, while vascular plants are often more diverse in near-too-nature-managed forests, and there is no difference in bird diversity between untouched and near-to-nature-managed forests (Paillet et al., 2009). Both near-to-naturemanagement and “process protected” forests appear to impact species based on their functional characteristics (Gossner et al., 2013). However, the complete abandonment of use positively influences the species count of fungal groups that decompose organic materials such as humus or dead wood. In contrast, the diversity of ectomycorrhizal fungi, including familiar edible and poisonous species, does not benefit from process protection and may even decline. Nevertheless, across all fungal groups, fruiting bodies in untouched “process protected” forests are larger (Bässler et al., 2014).

Old, entirely untouched forests are also significantly important for certain rare and less dispersive "primeval relic species." These species can only survive and recover where remnants of "primeval forest," meaning original old forests, have always existed and have never completely vanished (Bässler & Müller, 2010; Busse et al., 2022).

Finally, “process-protected” forests allow natural disturbances like droughts, bark beetle infestations, and wildfires to occur. This approach poses significant challenges for both national park administrations and for nature conservation in general, as these disasters can negatively impact Natura 2000 habitat types and species (Schuldt et al., 2018; Brunzel & Hill, 2022).

Photo Gallery

Sources

Brunzel, S. & Hill, B. (2022): Climate Change and Natura 2000: The Necessary Flexibility of the Habitats Directive. Nature and Landscape, 95: 252–258.

Bässler, C., Ernst, R., Cadotte, M., Heibl, C., Müller, J. (2014): Near-to-nature Logging Influences Fungal Community Assembly Processes in a Temperate Forest. Journal of Applied Ecology.

Gossner, M., Lachat, T., Brunet, J., Isacsson, G., Bouget, C., Brustel, H., Brandl, R., Weisser, W., Müller, J. (2013): Current Near-to-Nature Forest Management Effects on Functional Trait Composition of Saproxylic Beetles in Beech Forests. Conservation Biology, 27.

Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) (2007): National Strategy on Biological Diversity, October 2007.

Hilmers, T., Friess, N., Bässler, C., Heurich, M., Brandl, R., Pretsch, H., Seidl, R., Müller, J. (2018): Biodiversity along Temperate Forest Succession. Journal of Applied Ecology, 55: 2756–2766.

Müller, J., Reed, F.N., Bussler, H., Brandl, R. (2010): Learning from a “Benign Neglect Strategy” in a National Park: Response of Saproxylic Beetles to Dead Wood Accumulation. Biological Conservation, 143: 2559–2569.

Müller, J. (2015): Process Protection and Biodiversity. Surprises and Lessons from the Bavarian Forest. Nature and Landscape, 9/10: 421-425.

Paillet, Y. et al. (2009): Biodiversity Differences between Managed and Unmanaged Forests: Meta-Analysis of Species Richness in Europe. Conservation Biology, 24(1): 101-112.

Rösner, S., Mussard-Forster, E., Lorenc, T., & Müller, J. (2014): Genetic Assessment Reveals a Viable and Coherent Population of a Highly Endangered Forest Bird. Journal of Wildlife Management, 60: 789–801.

Schuldt, B., Buras, A., Arend, M., et al. (2018): A First Assessment of the Impact of the Extreme Summer Drought of 2018 on Central European Forests. Basic and Applied Ecology, 45: 86–103.