Use of habitat features, edges and harvest treatments by spruce grouse in subalpine forest

Forest Ecology and Management

Volumn 175, Issue 1-3, 2003, Pages 531-544

  Huggard, David J ^a  

^a 2424 Main Mall   (Canada)

Author keywords

Edge effect; Falcipennis canadensis; Silvicultural systems; Spruce grouse; Wildlife habitat models

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; TIMBER; WETLANDS;

SURFICIAL ROCKS;

FORESTRY;

EDGE EFFECT; GAMEBIRD; HABITAT USE; SILVICULTURE; SUBALPINE ENVIRONMENT;

FORESTRY;

CANADA;

ABIES; DENDRAGAPUS CANADENSIS; FALCIPENNIS; FALCIPENNIS CANADENSIS; PHASIANIDAE; PICEA;

EID: 0037416119     PISSN: 03781127     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-1127(02)00212-8     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Allan, T.A., 1985. Seasonal change in habitat use by Maine spruce grouse. Can. J. Zool. 63, 2738-2742.
2. Andreev, A.V., 1990. The winter biology of Siberian spruce grouse Falcipennis falcipennis in the Priamurie. Zoologicheskii Zhurnal 69, 69-80.
3. Boag, D.A., McCourt, K.H., Herzog, P.W., Alway, J.H., 1979. Population regulation in Spruce Grouse: a working hypothesis. Can. J. Zool. 57, 2275-2284.
4. Boag, D.A., Schroeder, M.A., 1987. Population fluctuations in spruce grouse: what determines their numbers in spring? Can. J. Zool. 65, 2430-2435.
5. Boag, D.A., Schroeder, M.A., 1992. Spruce grouse. In: Poole, A., Stettenheim, P., Gill, F. (Eds.), The Birds of North America, No. 5. The Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, PA.
6. Braun, C.E., Martin, K., Remington, T.E., Young, J.R., 1994. North American grouse: issues and strategies for the 21st century. Trans. North Am. Wildlife Nat. Resources Conf. 59, 428-438.
7. Bryant, J., Kuropat, P., 1980. Selection of winter forage by subarctic browsing vertebrates. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11, 261-285.
8. Chen, J., Franklin, J.F., Spies, T.A., 1995. Growing-season microclimate gradients from clearcut edges into old-growth Douglas-fir forests. Ecol. Applic. 5, 74-86.
9. Clifford, P., Richardson, S., Hémon, D., 1989. Assessing the significance of the correlation between two spatial processes. Biometrics 45, 123-134.
10. CSP (Scientific Panel for Sustainable Forest Practices in Clayoquot Sound), 1995. Sustainable ecosystem management in Clayoquot Sound. Planning and Practices, Report 5. Victoria, BC.
11. de Franceschi, P.F., Bottazzo, M., 1991. Capercaillie Tetrao urogallus and forest management in the Tarvisio Forest (Eastern Alps, Italy) in 1982-1988. Ornis. Scand. 22, 192-196.
12. Ellison, L.N., 1974. Population characteristics of Alaskan spruce grouse. J. Wildlife Manage. 38, 383-395.
13. FEMAT (Forest Ecosystem Management and Assessment Team), 1993. Forest ecosystem management: an ecological, economic, and social assessment. Report of the Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
14. Franklin, J.F., 1989. Toward a new forestry. Am. For. 95, 37-44.
15. Franklin, J.F., Forman, R.T.T., 1987. Creating landscape patterns by forest cutting: ecological consequences and principles. Landscape Ecol. 1, 5-18.
16. Franklin, J.F., Spies, T.A., Perry, D., Harmon, M., McKee, A., 1986. Modifying Douglas-fir management regimes for non-timber objectives. In: Oliver, C.D, Hanley, D.P., Johnson, J.A. (Eds.), Douglas-fir: Stand Management for the Future, Contribution 55. College of Forest Resources, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, pp. 373-379.
17. Fritz, R.S., 1979. Consequences of insular population structure: distribution and extinction of Spruce Grouse populations. Oecology 42, 57-65.
18. Gjerde, I., 1991. Cues in winter habitat selection by Capercaillie. Part I. habitat characteristics. Ornis. Scand. 22, 197-204.
19. Gjerde, I., Wegge, P., 1989. Spacing pattern, habitat use and survival of Capercaillie in a fragmented winter habitat. Ornis. Scand. 20, 219-225.
20. Haila, Y., 1994. Preserving ecological diversity in boreal forests: ecological background, research, and management, Ann. Zool. Fenn. 31, 203-217.
21. Hedberg, J., 1980. Habitat Selection by Spruce Grouse in Eastern Maine. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Maine, Orono.
22. Herms, D.A., Mattson, W.J., 1992. The dilemma of plants: to grow or defend. Q. Rev. Biol. 67, 283-335.
23. Huggard, D.J., Klenner, W., Vyse, A., 1999. Windthrow following four harvest treatments in an Engelmann spruce - subalpine fir forest in southern interior British Columbia, Canada. Can. J. For. Res. 29, 1547-1556.
24. Krebs, C.J., 1989. Ecological Methodology. Harper and Row, New York.
25. Kremsater, L.L., Bunnell, F.L., 1999. Edges: theory, evidence and implications for management of western forests. In: Rochelle, J.A., Lehmenn, L.A., Wisniewski, J. (Eds.), Forest Fragmentation: Wildlife and Management Implications. Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands, pp. 117-153.
26. Lindenmayer, D.B., Margules, C.R., Botkin, D.B., 2000. Indicators of biodiversity for ecologically sustainable forest management. Conserv. Biol. 14, 941-950.
27. Lloyd, D., Angove, K., Hope, G., Thompson, C., 1990. A guide to site identification and interpretation for the Kamloops Forest Region, BC. Min. For. Land Manage. Handb. 23. Victoria, BC.
28. Mattson Jr., W.J., 1980. Herbivory in relation to plant nitrogen content. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 11, 119-161.
29. Mueller, F., 1993. Herbivore - Plant - Soil Interactions in the Boreal Forest: Selective Winter Feeding by Spruce Grouse. M.Sc. Thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC.
30. Parish, R., Antos, J.A., Fortin, M.J., 1999. Stand development in an old-growth subalpine forest in southern interior British Columbia. Can. J. For. Res. 29, 1347-1356.
31. Pekins, P.J., Lindzey, F.G., Gessaman, J.A., 1991. Physical characteristics of blue grouse winter use-trees and roost sites. Great Basin Nat. 51, 244-248.
32. Pendergast, B.A., Boag, D.A., 1970. Seasonal changes in the diet of Spruce Grouse in central Alberta. J. Wildlife Manage. 34, 605-611.
33. Pietz, P.J., Tester, J.R., 1982. Habitat selection by sympatric spruce and ruffed grouse in north central Minnesota. J. Wildlife Manage. 46, 391-403.
34. Ratti, J.T., Mackey, D.L., Alldredge, J.R., 1984. Analysis of spruce grouse habitat in north-central Washington. J. Wildlife Manage. 48, 1188-1198.
35. Rolstad, J., 1989. Effects of logging on Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) leks. I. Cutting experiments in southcentral Norway. Scand. J. For. Res. 4, 99-109.
36. Rolstad, J., Wegge, P., 1987. Distribution and size of capercaillie leks in relation to old forest fragmentation. Oecology 72, 389-394.
37. Ruel, J.-C., 1995. Understanding windthrow: silvicultural implications. For. Chron. 71, 434-445.
38. Schroeder, M.A., 1985. Behavioral differences of female Spruce Grouse undertaking short and long migrations. Condor 85, 281-286
39. Schroeder, M.A., Boag, D.A., 1991. Spruce Grouse populations in successional lodgepole pine. Ornis. Scand. 22, 186-191.
40. Smith, D.M., Larson, B.C., Kelty, M.J., Aston, P.M.S., 1997. The Practice of Silviculture: Applied Forest Ecology. Wiley, New York, p. 537.
41. Storch, I., 1991. Habitat fragmentation, nest site selection, and nest predation risk in Capercaillie. Ornis. Scand. 22, 213-217.
42. Swenson, J.E., Angelstam, P., 1993. Habitat separation by sympatric forest grouse in Fennoscandia in relation to boreal forest succession. Can. J. Zool. 71, 1303-1310.
43. Swenson, J.E., Olsson, B., 1991. Hazel grouse night roost site preferences when snow-roosting is not possible in winter. Ornis. Scand. 22, 284-286.
44. Vyse, A., 1999. Is everything all right up there? A long term interdisciplinary silvicultural systems project in a high-elevation fir-spruce forest at Sicamous Creek BC. For. Chron. 75, 467-472.
45. Wegge P., Rolstad, J., Gjerde, I., 1992. Effects of boreal forest fragmentation on capercaillie grouse: empirical evidence and management implications. In: McCullough, D.R., Barrett, R.H. (Ecs.), Wildlife 2001: Populations. Elsevier, London, UK, pp. 738-749.
46. Whitcomb, S.D., Servello, F.A., O'Connell Jr., A.F., 1996. Patch occupancy and dispersal of spruce grouse on the edge of its range in Maine. Can. J. Zool. 74, 1951-1955.
47. Wilcove, D.S., 1989. Protecting biodiversity in multiple-use lands: lessons from the US forest service. Trends Ecol. Evol. 4, 385-388.