Forest harvesting generates variable amounts of residue that represent a fire hazard and a hindrance to regeneration and must be managed accordingly. In South Africa, burning is the most common residue management method, but there is an interest in introducing safer and more effective techniques, such as mulching. For that reason, a productivity study was conducted in the Eastern Cape province to gather information on the productivity, cost, and work quality of the three main alternatives: manual broadcasting, manual broadcasting followed by mulching with an adapted farm tractor and mulching with a purpose-built mulcher. Manual broadcasting required 16 h/ha, mulching with a farm tractor 3.6 h/ha, and mulching with a purpose-built mulcher 0.9 h/ha (one pass). Manual broadcasting was the cheapest option, at a cost of 400 ZAR/ha. Mulching with a farm tractor and a purpose-built mulcher incurred a cost of 3 267 ZAR/ha and 4 083 ZAR/ha, respectively. Manual broadcasting achieved a minimal reduction of residue size, with 50% of the slash (branches and stem wood) having a mean length above 40 cm. When mulching with a farm tractor was applied, 49% of the slash (branches and stem wood) length reduced to about 30 cm. When a purpose-built mulcher was used, only 10% of the slash elements exceeded 40 cm length.

Planting plays a significant role in commercial forestry. Labour-related issues (scarcity, increased wages, absenteeism, ageing and high turnover), inconsistent work quality, increased operational costs, and poor ergonomics prompted the development of innovative planting techniques. This study aimed to assess the productivity (plants/PMH), worker productivity (plants/worker PMH), work quality and tree survival of a manual and a semi-mechanised planting method. Two study sites at Flatcrown and Kwambonambi, consisting of 37 plots, were planted at 1333 stems per ha, alternating across the study sites. Block-level and elemental-level time studies were conducted, followed by work quality assessments. The manual method planted 7.23 ha/shift (Flatcrown) and 5.89 ha/shift (Kwambonambi), whilst the semi-mechanised method planted 4.72 ha/shift (Flatcrown) and 3.19 ha/shift (Kwambonambi). The manual method was 50 to 60% more productive (plants/PMH) than the semi-mechanised method. In terms of plants/worker PMH, higher worker efficiency of 30 - 40% was observed at the Flatcrown site, which was characterised by level terrain and low residue presence compared to the Kwambonambi site, which had a gentle (< 20%) terrain and medium residue presence. Planting quality was conducted according to planting specifications. The two methods did not significantly differ, although the study suggests that the proportion of good-quality plantings could be somewhat higher for the manual method. There was no significant difference in tree survival across methods and sites after one month.