Stand and within-stand factors influencing Golden-winged Warbler use of regenerating stands in the central Appalachian Mountains

The Golden-winged Warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera) is currently being considered for protected status under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. The creation of breeding habitat in the Appalachian Mountains is considered a conservation priority for this songbird, which is dependent on extensively forested landscapes with adequate availability of young forest. We modeled abundance of Golden-winged Warbler males in regenerating harvested forest stands that were 0-17 years postharvest at both mid-Appalachian and northeast Pennsylvania regional scales using stand and within-stand characteristics of 222 regenerating stands, 2010-2011. Variables that were most influential at the mid-Appalachian scale were different than those in the northeast region. Across the mid-Appalachian ecoregion, the proportion of young forest cover, i.e., shrub/scrub cover, within 1 km of regenerating stands best explained abundance of Golden-winged Warblers. Golden-winged Warbler response was best explained by a concave quadratic relationship in which abundance was highest with 5-15% land in young forest cover. We also found evidence that the amount of herbaceous cover, i.e., the amount of grasses and forbs, within a regenerating stand positively influenced abundance of Golden-winged Warblers. In northeastern Pennsylvania, where young forest cover is found in high proportions, the distance to the nearest regenerating stand best explained variation in abundance of Golden-winged Warblers. Abundance of Golden-winged Warblers was <1 male per survey when another regenerating stand was >1500 m away. When modeling within-stand features in the northeast region, many of the models were closely ranked, indicating that multiple variables likely explained Golden-winged Warbler response to within-stand conditions. Based on our findings, we have proposed several management guidelines for land managers interested in creating breeding habitat for Golden-winged Warblers using commercial timber operations. For example, we recommend when managing for Golden-winged Warblers in the central Appalachian Mountains that managers should strive for 15% young forest in a heavily forested landscape (>70% forest cover) and cluster stands within 1-2 km of other young forest habitats.

Effects of Gunnison Sage-Grouse habitat treatment efforts on associated avifauna and vegetation structure

Conservation efforts over the last 20 years for the Gunnison Sage-Grouse (Centrocercus minimus) have involved extensive habitat manipulations done predominantly to improve brood rearing habitat for the grouse. However, the effects of Gunnison Sage-Grouse habitat treatments on sympatric avifauna and responses of vegetation to manipulations are rarely measured, and if they are, it is immediately following treatment implementation. This study examined the concept of umbrella species management by retrospectively comparing density and occupancy of eight sagebrush associated songbird species and six measures of vegetation in treated and control sites. Our results suggested that songbird densities and occupancy changed for birds at the extreme ends of their association with sagebrush and varied with fine-scale habitat structure. We found Brewer’s Sparrows (Spizella breweri) decreased in density on treated sites and Vesper Sparrows (Pooecetes gramineus) increased. Occupancy estimation revealed that Brewer’s Sparrows and Green-tailed Towhees (Pipilo chlorurus) occupied significantly fewer treated points whereas Vesper Sparrows occupied significantly more. Vegetation comparisons between treated and control areas found shrub cover to be 26% lower in treated sites. Lower shrub cover in treated areas may explain the differences in occupancy and densities of the species sampled based on known habitat needs. The fine-scale analysis showed a negative relationship to forb height and cover for the Sage Sparrow (Amphispiza belli) indicating, from vegetation measures showing grass and forb cover during a good precipitation year covered significantly more area in the treatment than the control sites, that Sage Sparrows may also not respond favorably to Gunnison Sage-Grouse habitat treatments. While the concept of an umbrella species is appealing, evidence from this study suggests that conservation efforts aimed at the Gunnison Sage-Grouse may not be particularly effective for conserving other sagebrush obligate species of concern. This is probably due to Gunnison Sage-Grouse habitat management being focused on the improvement of brood rearing habitat which reduces sagebrush cover and promotes development of understory forbs and grasses.