Forest fragmentation and forest management: A plea for empirical data

2002 ◽  
Vol 78 (5) ◽  
pp. 686-689 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert G G. D'Eon

Forest fragmentation is one of the most important conservation issues of recent times. Most of what we know about forest fragmentation is based on speculation and untested theory due to a paucity of empirical data. The lack of empirical data can be attributed to (1) the extreme difficulty in conducting good fragmentation studies, and (2) confusion between habitat loss and fragmentation effects. Empirical data from well-designed fragmentation studies is direly needed to validate theoretical predictions stemming from the fragmentation paradigm. Since the best data will come from landscape-scale experiments in managed forests, partnerships and support from researchers and forest managers is critical in this pursuit. Key words: empirical data, forest fragmentation, landscape spatial patterns

1995 ◽  
Vol 3 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 277-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Silbaugh ◽  
David R. Betters

Forest managers faced with incorporating the maintenance of biodiversity into their analyses, plans, and decisions need reliable, quantitative measures of biodiversity. This paper reviews and critiques quantitative approaches that have been developed to measure the three basic attributes of diversity: species richness, heterogeneity, and evenness. These approaches are discussed in terms of application to fine- and large-scale land areas. The advantages and disadvantages of each measure are described relative to forest management. Habitat modeling, which combines aspects of both fine- and landscape-scale analysis, may hold the greatest potential for monitoring forest-level diversity in ways that are meaningful, measurable, and manageable.Key words: biodiversity, quantitative indices, forest management.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan E Gallagher ◽  
Shannon L Farrell ◽  
René H Germain ◽  
Vanessa G Rojas

Abstract There has been limited research investigating summer habitat use of bats in managed forests in the northeastern United States. Consequently, there is limited knowledge to inform forest managers seeking to maintain or enhance bat habitat, particularly for several federally threatened, endangered, or candidate species. In summer 2017–2018, we conducted repeated acoustic surveys to determine what forest characteristics are associated with bat habitat use in managed forests in the Adirondack region of upstate New York. We modeled detection corrected probability of occupancy for bats in three phonic groups: high, mid, and low frequency. Across all phonic groups, probability of occupancy increased with decreasing canopy cover. High-, mid-, and low-frequency bats were more likely to use recently harvested sites (<10 years since harvest). High-frequency bats also used mature stands. Midfrequency bats demonstrated a preference for further distances from forest roads, whereas low-frequency bats preferred areas with a higher percentage of clutter. Our results suggest that tending and regenerating even-aged forest management practices can provide habitat for foraging bats in the Adirondacks. Study Implications: Several northeastern bat species have been granted or are candidates for federal endangered or threatened status; therefore, forest managers may increasingly need to consider how forest management actions affect bats. This research elucidates the effects of forest management practices on summer bat habitat use in northeastern forests. Foresters can use this information to limit negative impacts to bat habitat from management actions and identify management opportunities that protect or enhance bat habitat. All bat species we studied showed higher probability of use in stands with lower percent canopy cover, including stands recently harvested with the shelterwood method. However, special attention is owed to postharvest management to maintain suitable conditions, particularly concerning American beech. It is common in northeastern forests for beech to sprout root suckers following harvesting activities that can result in dense thickets, impeding bat flight abilities and limiting habitat connectivity for bats and other wildlife. Our findings also show that several bat species forage in mature stands that have a natural open understory and in areas around or near waterbodies. Consequently, even-aged tending and regeneration techniques in hardwood and mixed-wood forests, coupled with maintenance of nearby aquatic habitats, can provide habitat for bats.


2014 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yvette Dickinson ◽  
Eric K. Zenner ◽  
Douglas Miller

We used novel remote sensing techniques to compare the landscape-scale patterns of forest structure in Pennsylvania, USA under the management of four different agencies with varying primary objectives, including production forestry, wildlife habitat, recreation, and private ownership. We (i) developed a forest structure classification scheme using publicly available LiDAR and orthographic aerial imagery data, (ii) mapped the forest structure across twenty forested landscapes, and (iii) compared the landscape-scale forest structure patterns among the four forest management types. Our results indicate that different management philosophies and their associated forest management approaches have resulted in contrasting landscape-scale patterns of forest structure. Privately managed forests had shorter forests, higher densities of distinct patches, higher interspersion of patch types, and higher forest structure diversity at fine-scales (1.5 ha grain size) compared to forests lightly managed for recreation. Production forests under ecosystem management and forests managed for wildlife habitat exhibited intermediate patterns of forest structure. This variation in forest structure patterns among the forest managers is likely to have implications for wildlife habitat and other ecosystem services. Furthermore, greater emphasis is needed on encouraging private landowners to manage across property boundaries and providing the resources and tools to manage forests at the landscape scale.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. e64968 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guy Pe'er ◽  
Gustavo A. Zurita ◽  
Lucia Schober ◽  
Maria I. Bellocq ◽  
Maximilian Strer ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 43 (11) ◽  
pp. 1050-1062 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian D. Thompson ◽  
David A. Kirk ◽  
Christopher Jastrebski

Habitat change following forest management may reduce biodiversity in boreal forests, as it has done globally in many forest types. Postharvest silviculture (PHS) is implemented to improve the yield of commercial tree species and has been applied to large areas of boreal forests. PHS may also influence animal communities and so we assessed songbird responses to these treatments in stands 20–52 years old in Ontario, Canada. We expected that several old-forest species would respond positively to PHS, that avian assemblages in treated forests would be distinct from those in untreated managed forests regardless of age, and that assemblages in our oldest treated stands would begin to converge with those of mature unmanaged forests. PHS stands had higher conifer density than naturally regenerating managed stands. The avian assemblage differed between treated and untreated stands at 20–30 years but not at 31–52 years. Convergence with old-forest assemblages was incomplete at 31–52 years after harvesting, although abundances of seven of 13 old-forest species did not differ from those in unmanaged forests. Of 10 old-forest species with competitive models, only Bay-breasted Warbler (Setophaga castanea (Wilson, 1810)) responded positively to PHS at the stand level, whereas two species responded positively at the landscape scale. Brown Creeper (Certhia americana Bonaparte, 1838), Boreal Chickadee (Poecile hudsonicus Forster, 1772), and Blackburnian Warbler (Setophaga fusca (Müller, 1776)) were absent from most managed stands and so require specific attention in planning for forest management, including retention of old-forest and delaying harvest of second-growth stands to ensure their occurrence and persistence.


1970 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
H Meilby ◽  
L Puri ◽  
M Christensen ◽  
S Rayamajhi

To monitor the development of four community-managed forests, networks of permanent sample plots were established in 2005 at sites in Chitwan, Kaski and Mustang Districts, Nepal. This research note documents the procedures used when preparing for establishment of the plot networks, evaluates the applied stratification of the forest on the basis of data gathered in pilot surveys conducted in the early 2005, and provides a discussion on the implications of the choices made. Key words: Community-managed forests; permanent sample plots; stratification; allocation; estimates Banko Janakari Vol.16(2) 2006 pp.3-11


Plant Ecology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daichi Makishima ◽  
Rui Sutou ◽  
Akihito Goto ◽  
Yutaka Kawai ◽  
Naohiro Ishii ◽  
...  

Forests ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 990
Author(s):  
Casey A. Lott ◽  
Michael E. Akresh ◽  
Bridgett E. Costanzo ◽  
Anthony W. D’Amato ◽  
Shengwu Duan ◽  
...  

Forest management planning requires the specification of measurable objectives as desired future conditions at spatial extents ranging from stands to landscapes and temporal extents ranging from a single growing season to several centuries. Effective implementation of forest management requires understanding current conditions and constraints well enough to apply the appropriate silvicultural strategies to produce desired future conditions, often for multiple objectives, at varying spatial and temporal extents. We administered an online survey to forest managers in the eastern US to better understand how wildlife scientists could best provide information to help meet wildlife-related habitat objectives. We then examined more than 1000 review papers on bird–vegetation relationships in the eastern US compiled during a systematic review of the primary literature to see how well this evidence-base meets the information needs of forest managers. We identified two main areas where wildlife scientists could increase the relevance and applicability of their research. First, forest managers want descriptions of wildlife species–vegetation relationships using the operational metrics of forest management (forest type, tree species composition, basal area, tree density, stocking rates, etc.) summarized at the operational spatial units of forest management (stands, compartments, and forests). Second, forest managers want information about how to provide wildlife habitats for many different species with varied habitat needs across temporal extents related to the ecological processes of succession after harvest or natural disturbance (1–2 decades) or even longer periods of stand development. We provide examples of review papers that meet these information needs of forest managers and topic-specific bibliographies of additional review papers that may contain actionable information for foresters who wish to meet wildlife management objectives. We suggest that wildlife scientists become more familiar with the extensive grey literature on forest bird–vegetation relationships and forest management that is available in natural resource management agency reports. We also suggest that wildlife scientists could reconsider everything from the questions they ask, the metrics they report on, and the way they allocate samples in time and space, to provide more relevant and actionable information to forest managers.


1970 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
K.P. Acharya ◽  
K.R. Goutam ◽  
B.K. Acharya ◽  
G. Gautam

The Community Forestry has been the most effective means of managing common forest resources in Nepal. Besides rehabilitating degraded hills, improving environment and contributing to the rural livelihoods, community forestry is claimed to be a major means of biodiversity conservation. It is also argued that the prevalent approach of community forest management threats to the conservation of biodiversity. This paper is based on the findings from two community forest user groups from Central Nepal and argues that the users’ innovative practices of active forest management favor biodiversity conservation. The study has documented users’ innovations to conserve biodiversity in community managed forests. Key words: Nepal, community forestry, biodiversity conservation and livelihoods Banko Janakari Vol.16(1) 2006 pp46-56


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document