Featured Photo

Oscar (Astronotus ocellatus). Image credit, Jón Helgi Jónsson.

Funding Board Highlights

Attn: Funders - Post to the funding board with our online form


   Funding Board: click here

Announcements

Seeking photos -Contact us, if you have photos or videos to share. We will feature them in our video library and featured photo section.

Sign up for our newsletter - We profile the latest conservation studies from over 100 journals plus new funding opportunities... straight to your email.

Featured Comments

Jason on Does land conservation affect the local housing supply? The paper does not seem to consider the affect on prices. The prices are more... Mar 3, 2010


Guest on Not all species are created equal (in the eyes of scientific study) Dan that is true if you subscribe to the idea that only top-down... Mar 2, 2010


Eddie on Land conservation not strategically targeting projects to control growth This is not surprising. Much land conservation is... Feb, 26, 2010


markjordahl on When wildlife avoids perfectly good habitat: the perceptual trap Given that many toxins are endocrine disruptors and affect... Feb 24, 2010


Dr Dan on Snakes interrupted: roads causing genetic decline Wow!! This could be appropriate for thousands of species. For example I know... Feb 18, 2010


Michele Deakin on Can animal rights activists and conservationists find comon ground? It would be nice to think that the two groups can find... Jan 26, 2010


Julie on When an invasive species becomes media hype I completely agree. While both non-native Lonicera and Rhamnus have lots of... Oct 29, 2009

Thursday
03Sep2009

Can harvesting trees improve habitat for birds?

Red headed woodpecker (Melanerpes erythrocephalus).

Overview
In a new study, scientists look at the effects of wildlife-friendly silviculture on birds in the bottomland hardwood forests of Louisiana. Wildlife forestry tries to balance economic and conservation objectives by clearing small patch cuts and preserving large live trees and woody debris. The goal is to mimic natural disturbance and maintain structural heterogeneity in the forest canopy thereby benefiting birds and other species while at the same time harvesting wood of economic value.

The researchers found that creating patch cuts and thinning trees seems to improve the habitat for a number of birds compared to untreated forest. This study is particularly timely. While recent rates of bottomland hardwood forest loss have slowed, resident songbird populations continue to decline. It is unclear what role different types of forestry practices are playing in the population loss.

Methods
The study examined wildlife-forestry practices at Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge in northeast Louisiana. Researchers set out to answer two questions: 1) how do species respond to wildlife-forestry treatments and 2) how does this response change over time.

The researchers conducted bird surveys in three types of forest stands: a) nine stands which had not undergone any silvicultural treatment; b) five stands which had undergone thinning and patch cuts, and c) nine stands which had just undergone thinning.  They calculated Avian Conservation Scores (ACS) for the stands based on the species present. They looked at how avian response to the treatments changed over time, by selecting stands of different treatment age for their sample.

Findings
Overall, mean ACS scores were higher in both treated stands, indicating these forested areas provide more viable habitat for songbirds than reference sites. Nine species responded positively to the treated versus the untreated stands. Notably, six of the nine species are listed as Partners In Flight birds of concern. Three out of the nine bird species (Orchard oriole, Red-headed woodpecker, and Yellow-breasted chat) were rarely detected in any of the untreated, control stands. Meanwhile four species responded negatively to the treated stands.

Implications for conservation
According to the researchers, these results provide evidence that wildlife-forestry can enhance the density of birds, including certain species of conservation concern. The most interesting aspect of this study, though, are the findings of how the birds responded to the treatments over time. For those species that benefited, most saw population increases within five to eight years after silvicultural treatment, before decreasing to pre-treatment numbers within twelve to thirteen years. However, not all species responded the same way. These findings are particularly valuable because they allow the researchers to give very specific recommendations to managers on the ideal time-intervals between implementing treatments depending on the birds being targeted for conservation.

--Reviewed by Evyan Borgnis


Twedt, D., & Somershoe, S. (2009). Bird Response to Prescribed Silvicultural Treatments in Bottomland Hardwood Forests Journal of Wildlife Management DOI: 10.2193/2008-441

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (1)

What a concise and well crafted review. I found it both informative and interesting.
Sep 3, 2009 at 5:54 PM | Unregistered CommenterDanny

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.