Modeling Habitat Suitability for Moose in Coastal Northern Sweden: Empirical vs Process-oriented Approaches

Ambio

Volumn 32, Issue 8, 2003, Pages 549-556

  Dettki, Holger ^a   Löfstrand, Ronny ^a,b   Edenius, Lars ^a  

^a SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^b Sveaskog AB   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GPS; HABITAT SELECTION; SATELLITE IMAGERY; UNGULATE;

EURASIA; EUROPE; NORTHERN EUROPE; SCANDINAVIA; SWEDEN;

ALCES ALCES; ANIMALIA; CERVIDAE; UNGULATA;

EID: 0347253653     PISSN: 00447447     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1579/0044-7447-32.8.549     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Bergström, R. and Hjeljord, O. 1987. Moose and vegetation interactions in Northwestern Europe and Poland. Swed. Wildl. Res., Suppl. 1, 213-228.
2. Ericsson, G. 1999. Demographic and life history consequences of harvest in a Swedish moose population. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae, Silvestra 97. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå.
3. Näslund, B.-Å. 1986. Simulation of damage and mortality in young stands and associated stand development effects. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Silviculture, Umeå, Sweden. Report 18.
4. Morrison, M.L., Marcot, B.G. and Mannan, R.W. (eds) 1992. Wildlife-habitat Relationships. Concepts and Application. Univ. of Wisconsin Press.
5. Schamberger, M.L. and O'Neil, L.J. 1986. Concepts and constraints of habitat-model testing. In: Wildlife 2000: Modeling Habitat Relationships of Terrestrial Vertabrates. Verner, J., Morrison. M.L. and Ralph, C.J. (eds). Univ. of Wisconsin Press, Madison, pp. 5-10.
6. Edenius, L. 1997. Field test of a GPS location system for moose Alces alces under Scandinavian boreal conditions. Wildl. Biol. 3, 39-43.
7. Moen, R., Pastor, J. and Cohen, J. 1997. Accuracy of GPS telemetry collar with differential correction. J. Wildl. Manage. 61, 530-539.
8. Kurttila, M., Pukkala, T. and Loikkanen, J. 2002. The performance of alternative spatial objective types in forest planning calculations: a case for flying squirrel and moose. For. Ecol. Manage. 166, 245-260.
9. Hall, L.S., Krausman, P.R. and Morrison, M.L. 1997. The habitat concept and a plea for standard terminology. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 25, 173-182.
10. Manly, B.F.J., McDonald, L.L. and Thomas, D.L. 1993. Resource Selection by Animals. Chapman and Hall, London.
11. Levins, R. 1966. The strategy of model building in population ecology. Am. Sci. 54, 421-431.
12. Loehle, C. 1983. Evaluation of theories and calculation tools in ecology. Ecol. Model. 19, 239-247.
13. Guisan, A. and Zimmermann, N.E. 2000. Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecol. Model. 135, 147-186.
14. Hirzel, A.H., Hausser, J., Chessel, D. and Perrin, N. 2002. Ecological-niche factor analysis: How to compute habitat-suitability maps without absence data? Ecology 83, 2027-2036.
15. Edenius, L., Bergman, M., Ericsson, G. and Danell, K. 2002. The role of moose as a disturbance factor in managed boreal forest. Silva Fenn. 36, 57-67.
16. Angelstam, P., Wikberg P.-E., Danilov, P., Faber, W.E., and Nygren, K. 2000. Effects of moose density on timber quality and biodiversity restoration in Sweden, Finland, and Russian Karelia. Alces 36, 133-145.
17. Kliskey, A.D., Lofroth, E.C., Thompson, W.A., Brown, S. and Schreier, H. 1999. Simulating and evaluating alternative resource-use strategies using GIS-based habitat suitability indices. Landsc. Urban Plan. 45, 163-175.
18. Ahti, T., Hämet-Ahti, L. and Jalas, J. 1968. Vegetation zones and their sections in northwestern Europe. Ann. Bot. Fenn. 5, 169-211.
19. Raab, B. and Vedin, H. (eds) 1995. Swedish National Atlas. Climate, Lakes and Streams. SNA, Stockholm. Sweden, 176 pp. (In Swedish).
20. Kilkki, P and Päivinen, R. 1987. Reference sample plots to combine field measurements and satellite data in forest inventory. In: Remote Sensing-Aided Forest Inventory. Seminars organised by SNS and Taksaattoriklubi, Hyytiälä, Finland, pp. 209-212.
21. Tomppo, E. 1993. Multi-source national forest inventory of Finland. In: Proc. Ilvessalo Symposium on National Forest Inventories, August 17-21, Finland, pp. 52-59.
22. Nilsson, M. 1997. Estimation of Forest Variables Using Satellite Image Data and Airborne Lidar. PhD Thesis. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden.
23. Isaaks, E.H. and Srivastava, R.M. (eds) 1989. An Introduction to Applied Geostatistics. Oxford University Press, New York.
24. Reese, H., Nilsson, M., Granqvist Pahlén, T., Hagner, O., Joyce, S., Tingelöf, U., Egberth, M. and Olsson, H. 2003.Country-wide estimates of forest variables using satellite data and field data from the National Forest Inventory. Ambio 33, 541-547.
25. Ortigosa, G.R., De Leo, G.A. and Gatto, M. 2000. VVF: Integrating modeling and GIS in a software tool for habitat suitability assessment. Environ. Modell. Softw. 15, 1-12.
26. Löfstrand, R., Folving, S., Kennedy, P., Puumalainen, J., Coch, T., Kenter, B., Köhl, M., Lämås, T., Petersson, H., Tuominen, S. and Vencatasawmy, C. Habitat characterization and mapping for umbrella species - An integrated approach using satellite and field data. In: Proc. IUFRO Conference, Collecting and Analyzing Information for Sustainable Forest Management and Biodiversity Monitoring with Special Reference to Mediterranean Countries, December 04 to 07, 2001, Palermo, Italy. (In press).
27. Allen, A.W., Jordan, P.A. and Terrell, J.W. 1987. Habitat suitability index models: moose, Lake Superior region. U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Report 82(10.155). 47 pp.
28. Wissel, C. 1992. Aims and limits of ecological modeling exemplified by island theory. Ecol. Model. 63, 1-12.
29. Ball, J.P. and Dahlgren, J. 2002. Browsing damage on pine (Pinus sylvestris and P. contorta) by a migrating moose (Alces alces) population in winter: relation to habitat composition and road barriers. Scand. J. For. Res. 17, 427-435.
30. Allen, A.W., Terrell, J.W., Mangus, W.L. and Lindquist, E.L. 1991. Application and partial validation of a habitat model for moose in the Lake Superior region. Alces 27, 50-64.
31. Hepinstall, J.A., Queen, L.P. and Jordan, P.A. 1996. Application of a modified habitat suitability index model for moose. Photogramm. Eng. Remote Sens. 62, 1281-1286.
32. Pickett, S.T.A., Kolasa, G. and Jones, C.G. (eds) 1994. Ecological Understanding: The Nature of Theory and the Theory of Nature. Academic Press, New York.
33. Tamis, W.L.M. and Van't Zelfde, M. 1998. An expert habitat suitability model for the disaggregation of bird survey data - Bird counts in the Netherlands downscaled from atlas block to kilometer cell. Landsc. Urban Plan. 40, 269-282.
34. Korzukhin, M.D., Ter-Mikaelian, M.T. and Wagner, R.G. 1996. Process versus empirical models: which approach for forest ecosystem management? Can. J. For. Res. 26, 879-887.
35. Lyon, J.G., Heinen, J.T., Mead, R.A. and Roller, N.E.G. 1987. Spatial data for modeling wildlife habitat. J. Survey. Eng. 113, 88-100.
36. Johnson, D.H. 1980. The comparison of usage and availability measurements for evaluating resource preference. Ecology 61, 65-71.
37. Senft, R.L., Coughenour, M.B., Bailey, D.W., Rittenhouse, L.R., Sala, O.E. and Swift, D.M. 1987. Large herbivore foraging and ecological hierarchies. Bioscience 37, 789-799.
38. Ericsson, G., Edenius, L., and Sundström, D. 2001. Factors affecting browsing by moose (Alces alces L.) on European aspen (Populus tremula L.) in a managed boreal landscape. Ecoscience 8, 344-349.
39. Edenius, L., Ericsson G., and Näslund, P. 2002. Selectivity by moose versus the spatial distribution of aspen: a natural experiment. Ecography 25, 289-294.
40. The authors would like to thank Tina Granqvist-Pahlén and Mikael Egberth for help with the kNN estimates, and Håkan Olsson, Göran Ericsson and Niklaus E. Zimmermann for valuable comments on the manuscript. The study was funded by MISTRA through grants to the research program 'Remote Sensing for the Environment' (RESE).