Benefit–cost analysis of vegetation management alternatives: an Ontario case study

Abstract

Vegetation management practices are an integral component of forest management. In this paper, we report results of stand-level benefit–cost analyses of 12 vegetation management treatments applied at six study sites in northern Ontario. Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVSOntario) was used to project gross total and merchantable volumes to 70 years of age, and BUCK-2 was used to optimize potential products. Net present value (NPV), benefit–cost ratio (BCR), and internal rate of return (IRR) were calculated using 2009 constant dollars and variable real discount rates. Aerial herbicide treatments produced the highest NPV, BCR, and IRR. Internal rates of return of 4.32%, 2.90%, 2.82% and 2.50% for aerial herbicide, manual brush cutting, ground-applied herbicide, and brush cutting plus herbicide treatments, respectively, indicated that all of the vegetation management alternatives evaluated are economically viable.