5 resultados para tree patches
Resumo:
Forestry and other activities are increasing in the boreal mixedwood of Alberta, with a concomitant decrease in older forest. The Barred Owl (Strix varia) is an old-growth indicator species in some jurisdictions in North America. Hence, we radio-tagged Barred Owls in boreal mixedwood in Alberta to determine whether harvesting influenced habitat selection. We used three spatial scales: nest sites, i.e., nest tree and adjacent area of 11.7 m radius around nests, nesting territory of 1000 m radius around nests, and home range locations within 2000 m radius of the home range center. Barred Owls nested primarily in balsam poplar (Populus balsamifera) snags > 34 cm dbh and nest trees were surrounded by large, > 34 cm dbh, balsam poplar trees and snags. Nesting territories contained a variety of habitats including young < 80-yr-old, deciduous-dominated stands, old deciduous and coniferous-dominated stands, treed bogs, and recent clear-cuts. However, when compared to available habitat in the study area, they were more likely to contain old conifer-dominated stands and recent cutblocks. We assumed this is because all of the recent harvest occurred in old stands, habitat preferred by the owls. When compared with random sites, locations used for foraging and roosting at the home range scale were more likely to be in young deciduous-dominated stands, old conifer-dominated stands and cutblocks > 30 yr old, and less likely to occur in old deciduous-dominated stands and recent cutblocks. Hence, although recent clearcuts occurred in territories, birds avoided these microhabitats during foraging. To meet the breeding requirements of Barred Owls in managed forests, 10–20 ha patches of old deciduous and mixedwood forest containing large Populus snags or trees should be maintained. In our study area, nest trees had a minimum dbh of 34 cm. Although cut areas were incorporated into home ranges, the amount logged was low, i.e., 7%, in our area. Hence more research is required to determine harvest levels tolerated by owls over the long term.
Resumo:
Ecological traps are attractive population sinks created when anthropogenic habitat alteration inadvertently creates a mismatch between the attractiveness of a habitat based upon its settlement cues, and its current value for survival or reproduction. Traps represent a new threat to the conservation of native species, yet little attention has been given to developing practical approaches to eliminating them. In the northern Rocky Mountains of Montana, Olive-sided Flycatchers (Contopus cooperi) prefer to settle in patches of selectively harvested forest versus burned forest despite the lower reproductive success and higher nest predation risk associated with the former habitat. I investigated characteristics of preferred perch sites for this species and how these preferences varied between habitats and sexes. I then built on previous research to develop a range of management prescriptions for reducing the attractiveness of selectively harvested forest, thereby disarming the ecological trap. Female flycatchers preferred to forage from shorter perch trees than males, and females’ perches were shorter than other available perch trees. Both sexes preferred standing dead perch trees (snags) and these preferences were most obvious in harvested forest where snags are rarer. Because previous research shows that snag density is linked to habitat preference and spruce/fir trees are preferred nest substrate, my results suggest these two habitat components are focal habitat selection cues. I suggest alternative and complementary strategies for eliminating the ecological trap for Olive-sided Flycatchers including: (1) reduced retention and creation of snags, (2) avoiding selective harvest in spruce, fir, and larch stands, (3) avoiding retention of these tree species, and (4) selecting only even-aged canopy height trees for retention so as to reduce perch availability for female flycatchers. Because these strategies also have potential to negatively impact habitat suitability for other forest species or even create new ecological traps, we urge caution in the application of our management recommendations.