Timber-management and natural-disturbance effects on moose habitat: Landscape evaluation

Journal of Wildlife Management

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 1997, Pages 517-524

  Rempel, Robert S ^a   Elkie, Philip C ^a   Rodgers, Arthur R ^a   Gluck, Michael J ^a  

^a LAKEHEAD UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Adaptive management; Alces alces; Boreal forest; GIS; Habitat ecology; HSI; Hunting; Landscape ecology; Moose; Natural disturbance; Policy evaluation

Indexed keywords

ALCES ALCES;

FIRE; FORESTRY MANAGEMENT; HABITAT SUITABILITY; HUNTING; MOOSE;

CANADA, ONTARIO;

EID: 0030619082     PISSN: 0022541X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3802610     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. ALLEN, A. W., P. A. JORDAN, AND J. W. TERRELL. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: moose, Lake Superior region. U.S. Fish and Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82. 47pp.
2. BISSET, A. R. 1991. Standards and guidelines for moose aerial inventory in Ontario. Ont. Minist. Nat. Resour., Toronto 37pp.
3. _, AND R. S. REMPEL. 1991. Linear analysis of factors affecting the accuracy of moose aerial inventories. Alces 27:127-139.
4. CONGALTON, R. G. 1991. A review of assessing the accuracy of classifications of remotely sensed data. Remote Sensing Environ. 37:35-46.
5. EASON, G. 1985. Overharvest and recovery of moose in a recently logged area. Alces 21:55-75.
6. EULER, D. 1981. A moose habitat strategy for Ontario. Alces 17:180-192.
7. _. 1983. Selective harvest, compensatory mortality and moose in Ontario. Alces 19:148-161.
8. FORBES, G. J., AND J. B. THEBERGE. 1993. Multiple landscape scales and winter distribution of Moose, Alces alces, in a forest ecotone. Can. Field-Nat. 107:201-207.
9. GLUCK, M., AND R. REMPEL. 1996. Structural characteristics of post-wildfire and clearcut landscapes. Environ. Monit. and Assess. 39:435-450.
10. HOLLING, C. S. 1992. Cross-scale morphology, geometry, and dynamics of ecosystems. Ecol. Monogr. 62:447-502.
11. HUNTER, M. L. 1993. Natural fire regimes as spatial models for managing boreal forests. Biol. Conserv. 65:115-120.
12. INTERA TYDAC. 1993. SPANS GIS. Reference manual. Intera Tydac Technol. Inc., Nepean, Ont. 550pp.
13. LILLESAND, T. M., AND R. L. KIEFER. 1987. Remote sensing and image interpretation. John Wiley and Sons, Toronto, Ont. 621pp.
14. MACNAB, J. 1983. Wildlife management as scientific experimentation. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 11:397-401.
15. MCGARIGAL, K., AND B. J. MARKS. 1993. Fragstats: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. Ref. Man. For. Sci. Dep., Oreg. State Univ., Corvallis. 62pp.
16. ONTARIO MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES. 1980. Moose management policy. WM.6.02.01. Ont. Minist. Nat. Resour., Toronto, Ont. 6pp.
17. _. 1988. Timber management guidelines for the provision of moose habitat. Ont. Minist. Nat. Resour., Toronto, Ont. 31pp.
18. ROWE, J. S. 1972. Forest regions of Canada. Dep. Environ., Can. For. Serv., Publ. 47-1300, Ottawa, Ont. 172pp.
19. SAS INSTITUTE INC. 1989. SAS/STAT user's guide. Version 6. SAS Inst. Inc., Cary, N.C. 846pp.
20. SINCLAIR, A. R. E. 1991. Science and the practice of wildlife management. J. Wildl. Manage. 55:767-773.
21. SPSS INC. 1993. SPSS for windows:trends. Version 6. SPSS Inc., Chicago, Ill. 353pp.
22. STORY, M., AND R. G. CONGALTON. 1986. Accuracy assessment: a user's perspective. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sensing 52:397-399.
23. TIMMERMAN, H. R., AND R. GOLLAT. 1982. Age and sex structure of harvested moose related to season manipulation and access. Alces 18:301-328.
24. WALTERS, C. J., AND C. S. HOLLING. 1990. Large-scale management experiments and learning by doing. Ecology 71:2060-2068.