The forest in Germany has been radically changed within 300 years. German foresters have learned something from numerous calamities, as the results of the Federal Forest Inventory show. Speidel (1972) gives reasons why the application of the normal forest model should be relativised. The ideal case is not the rule, the normal forest model is an explanatory model and only illustrates the conditions of sustainability, which poses risks to sustainability. According to Obergföll (2000), forest structure is increasingly moving away from typical age-group structures and thus also from yield table models. Huth and Wagner (2013) recently analysed the ecosystem services of permanent forests and came to the conclusion that new perspectives in dealing with permanent forest concepts need to be given due consideration. In particular, the uncertain climate development and the social pressure on forest ecosystems - or forest enterprises, respectively - are enormous. The aim of yield regulation in forest enterprises with structurally rich forests must be to realise the multiple functions of the forest; this means that the system of objectives laid down must be implemented. This is done in the study by designating treatment types according to the general tree species-specific development according to the tree species-specific height development. The terms target forest, real forest and normal forest are mainly used to outline the theoretical possibilities. Target stocking planning, strategy development and theoretical backgrounds for forest use, yield regulation, growth management, sustainability and ideals provide the basis for an investigation. The particular challenge of today's accurate yield regulation with reliable results on stockpiling, increment, stem numbers, base areas and utilisation possibilities for structurally rich forests was the impetus to carry out a separate study that goes beyond Wirnsberger's (2011) partially hermeneutic approach.weiterlesen