Hubbry Logo
WindthrowWindthrowMain
Open search
Windthrow
Community hub
Windthrow
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Windthrow
Windthrow
Windthrow
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Windsnap in the Bavarian Forest National Park
An old dried out windthrow. Ystad.
A large-scale event in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains.
Juniperus virginiana var. silicicola windsnapped by Hurricane Irma.
Young spruce group marginal windthrow area twelve years after Kyrill
Video of windthrow in Tammneeme, Estonia

In forestry, windthrow refers to trees uprooted by wind. Breakage of the tree bole (trunk) instead of uprooting is called windsnap.[1] Blowdown refers to both windthrow and windsnap.

Causes

[edit]

Windthrow is common in all forested parts of the world that experience storms or high wind speeds. The risk of windthrow to a tree is related to the tree's size (height and diameter), the 'sail area' presented by its crown, the anchorage provided by its roots, its exposure to the wind, and the local wind climate. A common way of quantifying the risk of windthrow to a forest area is to model the probability or 'return time' of a wind speed that would damage those trees at that location. Another potential method is the detection of scattered windthrow based on satellite images.[2] Tree senescence can also be a factor, where multiple factors contributing to the declining health of a tree reduce its anchorage and therefore increase its susceptibility to windthrow. The resulting damage can be a significant factor in the development of a forest.

Windthrow can also increase following logging, especially in young forests managed specifically for timber. The removal of trees at a forest's edge increases the exposure of the remaining trees to the wind.

Trees that grow adjacent to lakes or other natural forest edges, or in exposed situations such as hill sides, develop greater rooting strength through growth feedback with wind movement, i.e. 'adaptive' or 'acclimative' growth. If a tree does not experience much wind movement during the stem exclusion phase of stand succession, it is not likely to develop a resistance to wind. Thus, when a fully or partially developed stand is bisected by a new road or by a clearcut, the trees on the new edge are less supported by neighbouring trees than they were and may not be capable of withstanding the higher forces which they now experience.

Trees with heavy growths of ivy, wisteria, or kudzu are already stressed and may be more susceptible to windthrow, as the additional foliage increases the tree's sail area.

Trees with decayed trunk, fungus-induced cankers, and borer damages are more susceptible to windsnap.[1]

Young trees (less than 100 years old) can snap when pushed by wind gusts, while older trees usually do not snap but are uprooted.[3]

Ecological effects

[edit]

Windthrow disturbance generates a variety of unique ecological resources on which certain forest processes are highly dependent. Windthrow can be considered a cataclysmic abiotic factor that can generate an entire new chain of seral plant succession in a given area.[4] Windthrow can also be considered to act as a rejuvenating process whereby regeneration is made possible with new resource availability.

Severe uprooting opens bare patches of mineral soil that can act as seed sinks. These patches have been shown, in the Pacific Northwest of the United States, to have higher biodiversity than the surrounding forest floor. Additionally, the gap created in the forest canopy when windthrow occurs yields an increase in light, moisture, and nutrient availability in near proximity to the disturbance.

Toppled trees have the potential to become nurse logs, nurturing habitats for other forest organisms.

Tree throws contribute to bedrock weathering and soil formation. In thin soils, fresh bedrock fragments are a large proportion of the upturned rootwad, but trees are sparse, so rates of weathering are low; in intermediate-depth soils less rock is upturned, but trees are more common, so weathering reaches a maximum; in soils deeper than the depth of roots, no bedrock is upturned, and weathering is slow.[3] The advent of trees roughly 370 million years ago led to dramatic ecosystem changes, as before then bedrock weathering was too slow to maintain thick soils in hilly terrain.[3]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Bibliography

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Windthrow

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Windthrow, also known as blowdown, is the uprooting, bole snapping, or top breakage of trees caused by strong winds, often acting as a key natural disturbance regime in boreal and ecosystems. This event typically involves the failure of the tree at the soil-root interface due to wind forces exceeding the anchorage provided by the , resulting in trees toppling with their root plates exposed. Windthrow can affect individual trees or vast areas, creating canopy gaps that range from small openings of tens of square meters to expansive blowdowns covering thousands of hectares, depending on storm intensity and local conditions. The primary cause of windthrow is high wind speeds, sustained generally exceeding 90 km/h (Beaufort force 10 or higher) during intense storms such as hurricanes, derechos, or extratropical cyclones, which generate mechanical forces that trees cannot withstand. These events are exacerbated by predisposing factors, including shallow or poorly drained s that limit depth and anchorage, as high water tables reduce soil strength and promote shallow rooting patterns. Tree-specific vulnerabilities, such as decay in the collar or excessive relative to spread, further increase susceptibility, with dead or weakened trees being most at . Stand-level conditions like dense spacing, recent , or even-aged monocultures amplify the by creating uniform vulnerabilities across the , while topographic exposure on ridges or coastal areas heightens wind impacts. is projected to intensify windthrow through more frequent and severe storms, increased winter rainfall leading to soil saturation, and faster tree growth that outpaces development in suitable conditions. Ecologically, windthrow plays a vital role in dynamics by promoting through the creation of heterogeneous habitats, including that supports fungi, , and , and by facilitating nutrient cycling and species succession in the resulting gaps. However, it also poses challenges, such as opening pathways for invasive pests like bark beetles, which can trigger secondary outbreaks leading to further mortality, and altering carbon storage as disturbed may temporarily shift from net sinks to sources. Economically, windthrow causes substantial losses in , with annual damages in exceeding $2 billion (as of the 2010s) from associated pest epidemics and reduced timber quality, while increasing harvesting costs and safety risks in affected stands. Management strategies focus on through site preparation like mole drainage to improve soil stability, species selection for wind-firmness, and diversified planting to reduce uniform risk.

Definition and Characteristics

Definition

Windthrow specifically refers to the uprooting of trees due to the mechanical forces exerted by strong winds, representing a form of at the soil-root interface in forested ecosystems. This distinguishes windthrow from windsnap (bole snapping) or other wind damage such as defoliation or minor branch breakage, though the term is sometimes used more broadly for major wind-induced . Events can occur as isolated incidents affecting single trees or as widespread disturbances impacting entire stands, with affected trees often aligned parallel to the prevailing . The scale of windthrow varies considerably, ranging from individual trees in localized gaps to extensive blowdowns covering hundreds of hectares, depending on factors like intensity and structure. As a recurrent natural disturbance, windthrow shapes dynamics across biomes, with larger events more frequent in regions prone to . The related term "windfall" dates to the in early English usage, originally describing trees or fruit felled by wind, while "windthrow" emerged in early 20th-century literature, particularly in European texts from the onward as a standard descriptor for -induced tree uprooting, reflecting observations of widespread losses during that period. Quantification of windthrow typically involves assessing the spatial extent through affected area in hectares, timber volume loss in cubic meters, number of impacted trees, or percentage of stand mortality. These metrics, often derived from field surveys or , provide essential data for evaluating disturbance severity and informing .

Types and Patterns

Windthrow events manifest in distinct types based on the mode of tree failure, which determines the physical form of damage observed in affected forests. The primary modes include uprooting, where the entire plate is lifted from the , exposing a characteristic and pit; stem breakage (windsnap), in which the trunk snaps at varying heights, often due to bending forces exceeding wood strength; and stripping, involving the loss of branches, foliage, or entire upper canopies without trunk failure. Uprooting is the most common mode in saturated soils, accounting for a significant portion of damage in temperate and boreal forests, while stem breakage predominates in denser stands where leverage from height amplifies stress. stripping typically occurs in exposed or isolated trees, reducing aerodynamic drag but leaving the stem intact. These modes are not mutually exclusive and can occur simultaneously within a single event, influencing post-disturbance regeneration patterns. Spatial patterns of windthrow vary widely, reflecting interactions between , , and forest structure, and range from scattered to extensive configurations. Mosaic patterns feature isolated gaps or clusters of fallen trees interspersed with intact forest, often forming irregular patches that enhance structural heterogeneity at the stand level. Linear strips commonly align with forest edges, ridges, or wind corridors, where abrupt exposure increases vulnerability, as seen in cutblock boundaries where damage extends 10–50 meters inward. Large-scale blowdowns, covering areas exceeding 100 hectares, produce uniform clearings resembling harvested zones, such as the , which devastated around 16,500 hectares in the UK and additional areas in . These patterns arise from , where wind penetration is amplified at boundaries, leading to progressive failure from perimeter trees inward. Windthrow operates across scales from micro- to landscape-level, with patterns emerging from localized vulnerabilities to regional storm dynamics. At the micro-scale, individual trees or small groups (<1 hectare) succumb in sheltered interiors, often due to inherent weaknesses, creating pinpoint gaps that minimally disrupt canopy continuity. Landscape-scale events, conversely, encompass thousands of hectares, as in Amazonian blowdowns from convective storms, where fan-shaped clearings follow wind trajectories and alter regional carbon dynamics. Edge effects exemplify scale-dependent pattern formation, with wind speed doubling at forest margins and triggering sequential failures that propagate inward, particularly in fragmented landscapes. Temporally, windthrow can be acute, resulting from a single intense storm that causes immediate, widespread failure, or chronic, involving repeated exposure to lower-intensity winds that cumulatively weaken trees over seasons or years. Acute events, like hurricanes, dominate in tropical and coastal regions, felling vast areas in hours and initiating rapid successional shifts. Chronic patterns prevail in windy but storm-poor environments, such as coastal boreal forests, where ongoing gusts erode stability through iterative minor damage, fostering a steady-state mosaic of disturbance rather than abrupt clearings.

Causes and Mechanisms

Meteorological Factors

Windthrow is primarily initiated by extreme wind forces that exceed the structural stability of trees, with critical thresholds typically involving gust speeds surpassing 150 km/h for mature trees in exposed conditions. These gusts create overturning moments through drag forces acting on the tree canopy, which, when leveraged over the stem height, generate torque that can uproot or snap the tree if it overcomes anchorage or bending strength. Turbulence and wind shear amplify this effect; turbulent eddies in the atmospheric boundary layer increase dynamic loading on crowns, while vertical shear enhances gust persistence, prolonging exposure to high winds. Gust factors, often 1.9 times the mean hourly wind speed, further elevate peak loads during storm passages. The primary storm types driving windthrow are extratropical cyclones, hurricanes, derechos, and downbursts, each generating distinct wind profiles that produce overturning moments. Extratropical cyclones, common in mid-latitudes, deliver sustained high winds over large areas through cyclonic circulation, with gusts amplified by frontal boundaries creating shear layers that apply asymmetric forces on forest canopies. Hurricanes and tropical cyclones impose rotational winds with radial inflow, leading to intense, localized gusts that twist and uplift trees, particularly in coastal zones where forward storm motion adds translational speed. Derechos, associated with mesoscale convective systems, propagate straight-line winds via evaporatively cooled downdrafts, producing horizontal roll vortices that exert uniform but severe shear across swaths of forest, often exceeding 45 m/s. Downbursts, smaller-scale features within these systems, release concentrated downdrafts that diverge at the surface, creating divergent wind fields that maximize torque on individual trees. Synoptic conditions interact with local topography to intensify windthrow risk, as orographic enhancement accelerates airflow over elevated terrain, funneling and compressing winds to produce locally higher gusts. For instance, when storm systems approach ridges or hillslopes, air acceleration upwind can substantially increase local wind speeds compared to flat areas, heightening overturning moments in upland forests. Climate patterns like El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) modulate storm frequency; during El Niño phases, weakened easterly trades in the tropics reduce convective activity in regions like the Amazon, potentially lowering windthrow incidence, whereas La Niña strengthens these trades, fostering more frequent mesoscale convective storms and associated downdrafts. In extratropical zones, El Niño can shift storm tracks southward, increasing gale frequency in southern Europe and North America. Historical data from major events underscore these dynamics, with European gales often recording gusts over 200 km/h; for example, Storm Lothar in 1999 produced gusts up to 216 km/h across France, Switzerland, and Germany, resulting in widespread windthrow from extratropical cyclone forces enhanced by topographic channeling in the Jura Mountains. Similarly, derechos in North American forests have generated gusts of 42-46 m/s, sufficient to threshold stability in mature stands, as observed in southern Indiana events where slight gust increases (e.g., 0.8 m/s) amplified damage by 38%. In the Amazon, convective storms during La Niña years like 1999 correlated with elevated windthrow densities, driven by high convective available potential energy (CAPE) exceeding 1000 J/kg.

Biological and Site Factors

Biological factors significantly influence tree susceptibility to windthrow, primarily through structural attributes that affect mechanical stability. The height-to-diameter ratio (H/D) at breast height serves as a key indicator of tree slenderness, with ratios exceeding 80 indicating heightened vulnerability to uprooting or snapping under wind loads, as slender trees experience greater leverage from gusts. Root architecture further modulates this risk; shallow-rooted species, such as many conifers, are more prone to anchorage failure compared to deep-rooted hardwoods, where extensive lateral roots provide superior resistance to overturning moments. Species-specific vulnerabilities also play a role, with Norway spruce (Picea abies) exhibiting particularly high susceptibility—up to 6.8 times greater than oaks (Quercus spp.)—due to its brittle wood and shallow rooting habits, whereas oaks demonstrate greater resilience through robust stem form and root systems. Site conditions amplify these biological traits by altering soil-tree interactions and wind exposure patterns. Saturated or poorly drained soils, such as those with high water tables or clay textures, reduce root-soil cohesion, increasing the likelihood of uprooting during storms by promoting soil saturation and plate failure. Shallow or rocky soils similarly constrain root depth, limiting anchorage and elevating windthrow risk, particularly on exposed sites. Slope angles contribute by influencing wind acceleration and soil stability; steeper slopes (e.g., >°) can channel winds and erode root support, while leeward positions offer partial shelter. Stand density affects and load distribution, with dense canopies reducing individual tree exposure through mutual sheltering, but overly sparse stands increasing vulnerability by allowing unimpeded wind penetration. Forest management practices can either mitigate or exacerbate these predispositions. Uniform age-class stands, often resulting from even-aged , heighten risk by synchronizing tree dimensions and reducing structural diversity, making entire cohorts more uniformly susceptible as they reach critical heights. Previous disturbances like create abrupt edges that expose previously sheltered trees to full wind profiles, substantially elevating windthrow rates in adjacent stands—up to several times higher along clearcut boundaries. Disease-weakened trees, affected by root or stem decay from pathogens such as spp., further compromise stability by reducing wood strength and root integrity, rendering them prone to failure at lower wind speeds. Quantitative models of critical wind speeds incorporate these factors to predict thresholds for , emphasizing tree slenderness as a primary ; for instance, mechanistic approaches like those in ForestGALES simulate the wind required for failure based on H/D ratios, rooting depth, and site exposure, highlighting how H/D values above 80 can lower critical speeds by 20-30% in .

Ecological Impacts

Immediate Effects on Forests

Windthrow events cause abrupt physical alterations to forest structure, primarily through the uprooting or snapping of trees, which creates large canopy gaps that can range from small patches to expansive clearings spanning several hectares. These gaps result from the mechanical failure of trees under high wind forces, leading to the immediate exposure of the forest floor to direct sunlight and altered wind patterns. Additionally, fallen trees generate substantial accumulations of coarse woody debris, including trunks, branches, and snapped limbs. Uprooted trees also produce distinctive soil disturbances in the form of root plates—elevated mounds of soil and roots—and corresponding pits, which disrupt the soil profile, mix organic and mineral layers, and expose subsurface materials, often resulting in 34% lower soil carbon content and 11% higher soil pH in severely impacted sites within the first year. At the stand level, windthrow leads to a rapid reduction in basal area, as mature trees comprising the bulk of the stand's are toppled or broken. This structural change sharply increases light penetration into the in gap centers compared to intact canopy areas. Initial modifications follow, including warmer temperatures and fluctuating humidity levels in the gaps due to reduced shading and increased airflow, which can stress surviving and alter rates in the short term. Wildlife experiences immediate disruptions from these changes, with arboreal species such as canopy-dependent birds and facing temporary habitat loss as interconnected crowns are fragmented, potentially reducing nesting sites and foraging opportunities in affected zones. Conversely, ground-foraging animals, including certain mammals and like carabid beetles, gain enhanced access to previously shaded areas, where the new pit-and-mound and piles create diverse microhabitats that boost for open-habitat foragers within months. communities shift quickly, with saproxylic species exploiting fresh deadwood, though outbreaks can emerge, increasing mortality in bordering trees. The scale of these effects varies by storm intensity, but moderate blowdowns—such as those from gusts of 150-200 km/h—typically result in 10-50% stand mortality, as observed in southern boreal forests where like black spruce and paper birch suffered 12-82% losses across dominant trees in a single event.

Long-term Biodiversity Changes

Following windthrow disturbances, begins in the created gaps, where such as light-demanding herbs, shrubs, and advance regeneration rapidly colonize due to elevated light levels and reduced competition from the former canopy. Over subsequent decades, these areas transition from dominance by early seral, light-demanding to more shade-tolerant as lateral canopy ingrowth and vertical growth lead to partial closure, fostering a phased recovery toward pre-disturbance conditions. This dynamic process is evident in temperate and boreal forests, where like rowan () and Norway spruce () often dominate initial regeneration. These succession patterns generally enhance by promoting structural heterogeneity across the forest landscape, with windthrow gaps forming a mosaic that supports varied microhabitats and beneficial to diversity. Edge habitats emerging from such disturbances foster increased colonization by plants and , while the accumulation of decaying wood from uprooted trees bolsters nutrient cycling through gradual , releasing , , and other elements while serving as substrate for fungi and detritivores. In central European beech forests, for instance, this leads to elevated and richness during mid-succession phases. However, prolonged or frequent windthrow can introduce negative outcomes, such as the establishment of in open gaps, where increased light and soil exposure initially favor exotics like certain invasives before native competitors recover. If disturbances recur before full succession, they may promote homogenization by favoring resilient pioneer or grass-dominated communities over diverse late-seral assemblages, potentially delaying recovery to complex structures. Research indicates that windthrow-affected areas often exhibit 17-33% higher in plants and s compared to undisturbed stands after 10-20 years, with diversity peaking early post-event and remaining elevated for two decades before stabilizing. In one long-term study of communities, numbers remained elevated two decades after disturbance, underscoring the lasting boost from such events in mountain forests.

Human and Economic Dimensions

Forestry and Timber Losses

Windthrow imposes substantial economic burdens on the forestry sector worldwide, with annual global losses estimated in the tens of millions of cubic meters of timber volume due to storm damage. In , a key region for timber production, wind damage alone affects approximately 46 million m³ of timber each year, representing about 46% of total disturbance-related losses and contributing to average annual economic costs of around €1.7 billion from and related disturbances. These figures underscore the scale of disruption, where major storms can amplify losses to €1-2 billion in direct timber value and associated expenses across affected countries. The timber industry faces immediate operational challenges from windthrow, including disruptions to planned harvest schedules as resources shift to urgent salvage logging, which incurs 10-30% higher costs than standard operations due to tangled stems and difficult access. Windthrown trees are prone to rapid quality degradation, such as blue staining from fungal invasion and structural damage that reduces usable wood volume, often lowering the value per cubic meter by 20-50% if not processed within months. This oversupply of lower-grade timber floods markets, triggering fluctuations; for example, post-storm roundwood prices in the United States and have declined by 1-4% annually on average, with sharper drops of up to 50% in severely impacted areas, affecting supply chains and profitability for sawmills and exporters. Regional events highlight the magnitude of these losses, such as the 1999 and Martin storms, which felled 193 million m³ of roundwood across , , , and other countries—equivalent to two years of normal harvest volume in the affected regions and causing timber value losses exceeding €3 billion. In and specifically, these storms damaged over 140 million m³ combined, severely straining local industries and requiring multi-year salvage efforts. Forest and government policies provide critical buffers against these economic shocks, covering timber value losses, salvage costs, and replanting expenses in countries like and . However, uptake varies; following the 2005 Gudrun storm in , where many owners lacked coverage, the government disbursed approximately €300 million in compensation to stabilize the sector. European frameworks, including EU-coordinated response plans, facilitate insurance claims processing and market interventions to prevent price collapses, though challenges persist in insuring high-risk stands predisposed to wind exposure. Climate projections indicate that annual economic costs from forest disturbances in could rise to €2.8–3.7 billion by 2076–2100 under different emissions scenarios (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5), driven largely by intensified .

Management and Mitigation Strategies

Silvicultural practices play a central role in reducing windthrow vulnerability by promoting stand stability and resilience. operations must be carefully managed to avoid increasing windthrow risk; for instance, maintaining spacings less than 2 meters in high-risk areas can decrease damage risk by providing mutual support among trees, without overly compromising growth. Diversifying and age classes within stands enhances overall resistance, as mixed-species forests with deep-rooting trees like oaks or spruces are less prone to uniform failure compared to monocultures of shallow-rooted such as poplars. Retaining windbreaks, such as irregular forest edges or buffer strips of mature trees, shields interior stands from ; in coastal , retention systems leaving trees within one tree-height of harvest edges effectively maintain protective cover. Technological aids enable proactive and . Windthrow risk modeling tools, such as ForestGALES, integrate mechanistic and empirical to calculate critical speeds for stands, achieving 70-80% accuracy in predicting damage vulnerability across landscapes. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) facilitate exposure mapping by overlaying topographic, soil, and pattern layers; for example, empirical models in mountainous forests use within GIS to identify high-hazard zones based on slope and aspect. Early warning systems leverage meteorological forecasts from services like national weather agencies to alert forest managers of impending storms, allowing temporary measures such as securing equipment or delaying operations in exposed areas. Post-event responses focus on rapid recovery to minimize further losses and restore function. Salvage protocols prioritize the removal of windthrown timber to prevent secondary issues like infestations; in , guidelines under the Forest Damage Prevention Act mandate salvage if damage exceeds 20 m³/ha for (or 10 m³/ha for ), using efficient harvesters to optimize productivity despite 20-30% higher costs compared to undamaged stands. Replanting emphasizes resilient adapted to local wind regimes, such as those with strong anchorage, combined with natural regeneration to accelerate stand re-establishment; monitoring post-salvage windthrow, with thresholds like >20% damage triggering reassessment, ensures ongoing stability. Policy integration embeds these strategies within sustainable forest management frameworks. Certifications like the (FSC) and Sustainable Forestry Initiative (SFI) require risk assessments and adaptive practices in management plans, such as adjusting harvest boundaries to avoid high-exposure edges, aligning with broader goals of biodiversity and long-term productivity. Economic incentives, including subsidies for windfirming treatments like crown topping, encourage adoption of these measures in certified operations.

Historical and Global Perspectives

Notable Events and Storms

One of the earliest recorded major windthrow events in was the White Hurricane of 1913, which impacted and the broader from November 7 to 10. The storm developed as a rapidly intensifying over , tracking southeastward across Lakes Huron and Erie with sustained winds of 70 mph (113 km/h) and gusts up to 90 mph (145 km/h). These conditions caused widespread uprooting and breakage of trees along shorelines and inland forests in , contributing to the storm's overall devastation that included blocked roadways and damaged infrastructure across the province. In Europe, the stands as a benchmark for windthrow damage in the , occurring on –16. Originating in the Atlantic near the , the moved northeastward across and into the , producing gusts exceeding 100 mph (161 km/h) in southeast for several consecutive hours. The event felled an estimated 15 million trees, equivalent to approximately 4 million cubic meters of timber volume, with broadleaved species comprising the majority of losses in privately owned woodlands. Forestry assessments documented the damage through ground surveys, revealing that 72% of affected trees were in non-commercial settings, prompting immediate salvage operations by the . More recently, Cyclone Christian in , also referred to as St. Jude's Storm, caused extensive blowdowns across from October 27 to 28. The storm formed off and tracked eastward across the , , , and , with peak gusts of 120 mph (194 km/h) recorded in southern and 99 mph (159 km/h) on the Isle of . It resulted in the felling of around 10 million trees and damage to approximately 2 million cubic meters of standing timber, particularly impacting and stands in commercial forests. Post-event evaluations using from helped map the extent of blowdown areas, showing concentrated damage in coastal and upland regions. In 2022, struck the on February 18, generating gusts up to 122 mph (196 km/h) and felling an estimated 8 million trees during a severe season, causing widespread disruption to forests and . In 2023, affected on November 1–2, with gusts exceeding 100 mph (161 km/h) in parts of , the , and Iberia, leading to significant localized windthrow, including hundreds of trees downed in areas like and . These notable events underscore the vulnerability of plantations to extreme winds and have influenced practices globally. For instance, following the 1999 storms and Martin, which devastated over 180 million cubic meters of timber across , , and with gusts up to 115 mph (185 km/h), European countries implemented policy shifts toward species diversification and structural improvements to enhance tree stability. In , post-storm strategies included delaying timber market release to stabilize prices and promoting mixed-species stands to mitigate future windthrow risks, as detailed in UNECE reports. Similar adaptations, informed by assessments from ground inventories and , have been adopted in the UK and to build resilience against intensifying storm patterns linked to broader trends.

Regional Variations and Climate Influence

Windthrow exhibits significant regional variations influenced by local climate patterns, forest types, and disturbance regimes. In boreal forests of , windthrow is a recurring disturbance driven by maritime influences and extratropical storms, with return intervals varying from decades to centuries depending on stand age and soil conditions, often altering soil chemistry more substantially than other factors like deposition. In contrast, Southeast Asian forests, particularly in coastal and areas, experience higher windthrow frequencies from tropical cyclones, where winds exceeding 32 m/s frequently damage degraded stands, leading to alternative forest dynamics in wind-sheltered versus exposed sites. Temperate European forests, especially in central and mountain regions, are prone to widespread windthrow from gales and storms, accounting for about 46% of natural disturbances, while Mediterranean ecosystems face compounded risks from interacting with seasonal droughts, creating canopy gaps in drought-prone plantations. Climate change is projected to exacerbate windthrow through intensified storm events and interacting stressors. According to IPCC assessments, tropical cyclone intensity is expected to increase by 5-10% by 2050 under high-emission scenarios, with higher peak wind speeds and rainfall, amplifying windthrow in vulnerable regions like . In and , extratropical storm tracks may shift poleward, leading to small but regionally variable increases in extreme wind speeds, with models projecting increases in disturbance rates due to warmer conditions. Droughts, increasingly frequent in warming climates, weaken tree anchorage and hydraulic systems, making forests more susceptible to wind damage; for instance, drought-stressed stands show positive interactions with storm strength, elevating stem breakage risks by up to 78% in carbohydrate reserves. Adaptation challenges vary by forest location, with coastal areas facing heightened from intensified cyclones and sea-level rise, compared to inland where drought-wind synergies dominate. Coastal ecosystems, exposed to hurricanes and , experience more frequent uprooting due to saturated soils post-rainfall, while inland temperate and boreal stands suffer from reduced wind resistance after prolonged dry periods. Long-term monitoring reveals increasing windthrow rates in warming climates; European Forest Institute reports indicate disturbances have significantly increased since the , with as the primary agent (46% of damage), and projections suggest further rises in annual losses by 2050 due to climate-driven .

References

  1. https://www.fs.usda.gov/r10/natural-resources/forest-health/windthrow
  2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/windthrow
  3. https://teagasc.ie/crops/forestry/research/reducing-windthrow-losses-in-farm-forestry/
  4. https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/climate-change/risks/windthrow/
  5. http://www.fs.usda.gov/r10/natural-resources/forest-health/windthrow
  6. https://www.coford.ie/media/coford/content/publications/2018/SM23ManagingWindthrow160418.pdf
  7. https://www.naturalnavigator.com/news/2019/08/whats-the-difference-between-windthrow-and-windsnap-in-trees/
  8. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2023AV001030
  9. https://academic.oup.com/forestry/article/86/2/147/544682
  10. https://www.etymonline.com/word/windfall
  11. https://www.oed.com/dictionary/windthrow_n
  12. https://cdn.forestresearch.gov.uk/1995/03/fcbu114.pdf
  13. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378112718321042
  14. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/13/2/350
  15. https://academic.oup.com/forestry/article/91/1/27/3926544
  16. https://cdn.forestresearch.gov.uk/1989/03/fcbu087.pdf
  17. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9934067/
  18. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-35570-1
  19. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4433/8/2/28
  20. https://www.wsl.ch/en/news/reinvigorated-forests-20-years-after-windstorm-lothar/
  21. https://academic.oup.com/treephys/article-pdf/16/11-12/891/4678168/16-11-12-891.pdf
  22. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10342-024-01754-1
  23. https://academic.oup.com/forestry/article/86/2/159/545775
  24. https://auf.isa-arbor.com/content/40/2/53
  25. https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/fthr/forestgales/
  26. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378112718321546
  27. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12370869/
  28. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223262700_Bouget_C_Duelli_P_The_effects_of_windthrow_on_forest_insect_communities_a_literature_review_Biol_Conserv_118_281-299
  29. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2745.2007.01301.x
  30. https://annforsci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1007/s13595-018-0765-z
  31. https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ecs2.4600
  32. https://iforest.sisef.org/contents/?id=ifor2754-011
  33. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0103711
  34. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/7/8/168
  35. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8462171/
  36. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2745.13254
  37. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/8/3/88
  38. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/252731179_Windthrow-induced_changes_in_faunistic_biodiversity_in_alpine_spruce_forests
  39. https://www.fs.usda.gov/nrs/pubs/jrnl/2019/nrs_2019_slyder_001.pdf
  40. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2664.14860
  41. https://www.slu.se/en/research/knowledge-bank/s/wind-damages-expected-to-increase-in-a-warmer-climate/
  42. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-025-02408-9
  43. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/9/5/280
  44. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40725-021-00144-9
  45. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2024EF004742
  46. https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM//timber/docs/rev-00/03.pdf
  47. https://www.fcba.fr/
  48. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/farming-natural-resources-and-industry/forestry/bc-timber-sales/ems-sfm-certification/business-area/strait-of-georgia/tch-tsg-windthrow_mgmt_sop.pdf
  49. https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/news/138693-interview-how-forestgales-is-the-essential-tool-for-wind-risk/
  50. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/9/2/96
  51. https://www.weather.gov/news/131107-white
  52. https://www.escarpmentmagazine.ca/history/the-great-storm-of-1913/
  53. https://weather.metoffice.gov.uk/learn-about/weather/case-studies/great-storm
  54. https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/publications/archive-the-1987-storm-impacts-and-responses/
  55. https://www.theblackoutreport.co.uk/2020/10/16/great-storm-1987/
  56. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/29/st-jude-storm-killed-10-million-trees-forestry-commission
  57. https://user.eumetsat.int/resources/case-studies/storm-st-jude-batters-the-uk
  58. https://www.protect.earth/articles/the-impact-of-storms-on-the-uks-trees-a-closer-look
  59. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c983rgxkdeno
  60. https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2023/nov/02/storm-ciaran-live-latest-updates-uk-weather-europe
  61. https://www.timber-online.net/content/holz/holzkurier/en/blog/biggest-windthrow-volumes.html
  62. https://www.guycarp.com/insights/2025/02/anatol-lothar-martin-lessons-learned-improvements-made.html
  63. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Relative-frequency-of-windthrow-return-intervals-for-each-homogeneous-wind-regime-zone_fig5_317597703
  64. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0304380016300199
  65. https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/nph.20350
  66. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9661952/
  67. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378112722000652
  68. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4907/12/7/817
  69. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter11.pdf
  70. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/chapter/chapter-11/
  71. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28580624/
  72. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0302714
  73. https://www.fs.usda.gov/pnw/pubs/gtr802/Vol1/pnw_gtr802vol1_beach.pdf
  74. https://efi.int/news/increased-forest-disturbances-require-better-reporting-and-data-collection-2023-03-07
  75. https://nhess.copernicus.org/articles/25/77/2025/
  76. https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2020-05/pesetaiv_task_13_windstorms_final_report.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.