Analysis of natural-production conditions for timber harvesting in European North of Russia

Open access


Natural-production conditions determine operational efficiency of logging machines. This influence needs to be taken into account at different levels of forest management. It is necessary to allocate areas with similar natural-production conditions for effective forest management. It allows simplifying the decision making process for selecting logging technology and machines. The purpose of this study was to establish areas with similar natural and production conditions in the European North of Russia (ENR). In addition, for small enterprises, we recommend logging technologies and logging machines that can be used in established areas. We determined the indicators of the natural-production conditions of ENR regions and compared them. Cluster analysis was used to compare the indicators. We found that ENR can be divided into three main zones A, B, C and two subzones B1 and B2 with similar natural-production conditions. In the zones A, B and the subzones B1 and B2, small logging enterprises should use a harvester and a forwarder. In the zone C, the enterprises can use a logging system including a harvester and a forwarder or a logging system including a feller buncher, a skidder and a processor. The logging system should be based on the light class of logging machines for the zone A, the medium class or the heavy class for the zones B, C and the subzones B1, B2, the heavy class of machines for the zone C.

Ackerman, S., F., Ackerman, P., Williams, C., Nathi, C., 2017: Diesel Consumption and Carbon Balance in South African Pine Clear-Felling CTL Operations: a Preliminary Case Study. Croatian Journal of Forest Engineering, 38:65–72.

Alam, M., Walsh, D., Strandgard, M., Brown, M., 2014: A Log-by-Log Productivity Analysis of Two Valmet 475EX Harvesters. International Journal of Forest Engineering, 25:14–22.

Bergroth, J., Palander, T., Kärhä, K., 2006: Excavator-based harvesters in wood cutting operations in Fin-land. Forestry Studies, 45:74–88.

Castro, G. P., Malinovski, J. R., Nutto, L., Malinovski, R. A., 2016: Harvesting Systems. Tropical Forestry Handbook. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, p. 2445–2485.

Eliasson, L., 1998: Analyses of single-grip harvester productivity. Doctoral thesis. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Operational Efficiency, Umeå, 24 p.

Glöde, D., 1999: Single- and double-grip harvesters – productive measurements in final cutting of shelter-wood. Journal of Forest Engineering, 10:63–74.

Goltsev, V., Tolonen, T., Syunev, V., Dahlin, B., Gerasimov, Y. et al., 2011: Wood harvesting and logistics in Russia. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute, 210 p. Available at:

Häggström, C., Lindroos, O., 2016: Human, technology, organization and environment – a human factors perspective on performance in forest harvesting. International Journal of Forest Engineering, 27:67–78.

Jiroušek, R., Klvac, R., Skoupý, A., 2007: Productivity and costs of the mechanised cut-to-length wood harvesting system in clear-felling operations. Journal of Forest Science, 53:476–482.

Kärhä, K., Rönkkö, E. & Gumse S.-I., 2004: Productivity and cutting costs of thinning harvesters. International Journal of Forest Engineering, 15:43–56.

Kellogg, L. D., Bettinger, P., 1994: Thinning productivity and cost for mechanized cut-to-length system in the Northwest Pacific coast region of the USA. Journal of Forest Engineering, 5:43–52.

Kellogg, L., D., Bettinger, P., 1994: Thinning Productivity and Cost for a Mechanized Cut-to-Length System in the Northwest Pacific Coast Region of the USA. Journal of Forest Engineering, 5:43–54.

Klaes, B., Struck, J., Schneider, R., Schueler, G., 2016: Middle-term effects after timber harvesting with heavy machinery on a fine-textured forest soil. European Journal of Forest Research, 135:1083–1095.

Kormanek, M., Baj, D., 2018: Analysis of Operation Performance in the Process of Machine Wood Harvesting with Fao Far 6840 Mini-Harvester. Agricultural Engineering, 22:73–82.

Laitila, J., Väätäinen, K., 2013: The cutting productivity in integrated harvesting of pulpwood and delimbed energy wood with a forestry-equipped peat harvesting tractor. Suo, 64:97–112.

Lyumanov, R., 1990: Mašinnaja valka lesa. Moscow, Timber industry, 280 p.

McNeel, J., F., Rutherford, D., 1994: Modeling harvester-forwarder system performance in a selection harvest. Journal of Forest Engineering, 6:7–14.

Nurminen T., Korpunen H., Uusitalo J., 2006: Time consumption analysis of the mechanized cut-to-length harvesting system. Silva Fennica, 40:335–363.

Ovaskainen, H., 2005: Comparison of harvester work in forest and simulator environments. Silva Fennica, 39:89–101.

Palander, T., Bergroth, J., Kärhä, K., 2012: Excavator technology for increasing the efficiency of energy wood and pulp wood harvesting. Biomass and Bio-energy, 40:120–126.

Pētersons, J., 2014: Productivity of harvesters in commercial thinnings in the forest stands of different composition of species. Research for rural development, 2:76–82.

Picard, D., Gasparotto, D., 2016: Liocourt’s law for tree diameter distribution in forest stands. Annals of Forest Science, 73:751–755.

Proto, A. R., Macrì, G., Visser, R., Harrill, H., Russo, D., Zimbalatti, G., 2018: Factors affecting forwarder productivity. European Journal Forest Research, Available at:

Reza, N., Bagheri, I., Lotfalian, M., Setodeh, B., 2009: Rutting and soil displacement caused by 450C Timber Jack wheeled skidder (Asalem forest northern Iran). Journal of Forest Science, 55:177–183.

Rozītis, A., Zimelis, A., Lazdins,A., 2017: Evaluation of productivity and impact on soil of tracked ProSilva F2/2 forwarder in forest thinning. Research for Rural Development, 1:94–100.

Schack-Kirchner, H., Fenner, P., T., Hildebrand, E. E., 2007: Different responses in bulk density and saturated conductivity to soil deformation by logging machinery on a Ferralsol under native forest. Soil Use and Management, 23:286–293.

Strandgard, M., Mitchell, R., Acuna, M., 2017: Time consumption and productivity of a forwarder operating on a slope in a cut-to-length harvest system in a Pinus radiata D. Don pine plantation. Journal of Forest Science, 63:324–330.

Syunev, V., Sokolov, A., Konovalov, A., Katarov, V., Seliverstov, A., Gerasimov, Y. et al., 2009: Comparison of Wood Harvesting Methods in the Republic of Karelia. Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute, 120 p. Available at:

Tiernan, D., Zeleke, G., Owende, P., M., O., Kanali, C., L., Lyons, J., Ward, S., M., 2004: Effect of working conditions on for-warder productivity in cut-tolength timber harvesting on sensitive forest sites in Ireland. Biosystems Engineering, 87:167–177.

Tufts, R. A., 1997: Productivity and cost of the Ponsse 15-series, cut-to-length harvesting system in southern pine plantations. Forest Products Journal, 47:39–46.

Tyabera, A. P., 1980: Principy issledovanij stroenija drevostoev po tolščine derevjev. Forest Journal, 1:5–9.

Vacek, Z., Vacek, S., Bílek, L., Král, J., Ulbrichová, I., Simon, J., Bulušek, D., 2018: Impact of applied silvicultural systems on spatial pattern of hornbeam-oak forests. Central European Forestry Journal, 64:33–45.

Vinogorov, G. K., 1972:K metodike obosnovanija rasčetnych derevjev pri rešenii lesoekspluatacionnych zadač. Works of TSNIME, 122:52–64.

Vinogorov, G. K., 1986: Tipizacija prirodnoproizvodstvennych uslovij lesozagotoviteľnych rajonov. TSNIME, Ximki, 23 p.

Wang, J., Haarla, R., 2002: Production analysis of an excavator-based harvester: a case study in Finnish forest operations. Forest Product Journal, 52:85–90.

Central European Forestry Journal

The Journal of National Forest Centre – Forest Research Institute Zvolen

Journal Information

CiteScore 2018: 0.68

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.18
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.399


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 57 57 36
PDF Downloads 56 56 23