Chapter 5: Assessment techniques for terrestrial vertebrates of conservation concern

USDA Forest Service - General Technical Report PNW

Volumn , Issue 610, 2004, Pages 64-72

  Wales, Barbara C ^a   Suring, Lowell H ^b  

^a PACIFIC NORTHWEST RESEARCH STATION   (United States)

^b ROCKY MOUNTAIN RESEARCH STATION   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision support; Habitat modeling; Species of concern; Wildlife

Indexed keywords

ASSESSMENT METHOD; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ECOLOGICAL MODELING; HABITAT QUALITY; VERTEBRATE;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES; WESTERN HEMISPHERE; WORLD;

HEXAPODA; INSECTA; VERTEBRATA;

EID: 11044220546     PISSN: 08874840     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Association for Biodiversity Information. 2001. NatureServe: an online encyclopedia of life (Web application), version 1.4. Arlington, VA. http://www.natureserve.org/. (July 6).
2. Bate, L.J.; Wisdom, M.J. 2001. Pre-proposal to investigate snag-log-road relations at stand and landscape scales in the interior Columbia basin. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. On file with: Michael Wisdom, USDA Forest Service, Forestry and Range Sciences Laboratory, 1401 Gekeler Lane, La Grande, OR 97850.
3. Bettinger, P.; Graetz, D.; Ager, A.A.; Sessions, J. 2004. The SafeD forest landscape planning model. In: Hayes, J.L.; Ager, A.A.; Barbour, R.J., tech. eds. Methods for integrating modeling of landscape change: Interior Northwest Landscape Analysis System. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-610. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 41-63. Chapter 4.
4. Bull, E.L.; Wisdom, M.J. 1992. Fauna of the Starkey Experimental Forest and Range. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-291. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. [Not paged].
5. Dunn, C.P.; Sharpe, D.M.; Guntenspergen, QR. [et al.]. 1991. Methods for analyzing temporal changes in landscape pattern. In: Turner, M.G.; Gardner, R.H., eds. Quantitative methods in landscape ecology: the analysis and interpretation of landscape heterogeneity. New York: Springer-Verlag: 173-198.
6. Hemstrom, M.; Ager, A.A.; Vavra, M. [et al.]. 2004. State and transition approach for integrating landscape models. In: Hayes, J.L.; Ager, A.A.; Barbour, R.J., tech. eds. Methods for integrating modeling of landscape change: Interior Northwest Landscape Analysis System. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-610. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 17-32. Chapter 2.
7. Kagan, J.S.; Halk, J.C.; Csuti, B. [et al.]. 1999. Oregon Gap Analysis Project final report: a geographic approach to planning for biological diversity. Portland, OR: Oregon Natural Heritage Program. 72 p.
8. Knick, S.T.; Rotenberry, J.T. 2000. Ghosts of habitat past: contribution of landscape change to current habitats used by shrubland birds. Ecology. 81: 220-227.
9. Lee, D. 2000. Assessing land-use impacts on bull trout using Bayesian belief networks. In: Ferson, S.; Burgman, M., eds. Quantitative methods for conservation biology. New York: Springer: 127-147.
10. Marcot, B.G.; Holthausen, R.S.; Raphael, M.G. [et al.]. 2001. Using Bayesian belief networks to evaluate fish and wildlife population viability under land management alternatives from an environmental impact statement. Forest Ecology and Management. 153: 29-42.
11. McGrath, M.T.; DeStefano, S.; Riggs, R.A. [et al.]. 2003. Spatially explicit influences on northern goshawk nesting habitat in the interior Pacific Northwest. Wildlife Monographs. 154. 63 p.
12. National Forest Management Act of 1976 [NFMA]. Act of October 22, 1976; 16 U.S.C. 1600.
13. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. 1997. Sensitive species. Portland, OR, 9 p.
14. Raphael, M.G.; Wisdom, M.J.; Rowland, M.M. [et al.]. 2001. Status and trends of habitats of terrestrial vertebrates in relation to land management in the Interior Columbia River basin. Forest Ecology and Management. 153: 63-87.
15. Roloff, G.J.; Haufler, J.B. 1997. Establishing population viability planning objectives based on habitat potentials. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 25: 895-904.
16. Roloff, G.J.; Wilhere, G.F.; Quinn, T.; Kohlmann, S. 2001. An overview of models and their role in wildlife management. In: Johnson, D.H.; O'Neil, IA., eds. Wildlife-habitat relationships in Oregon and Washington. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press: 512-536.
17. Rowland, M.M.; Wisdom, M.J.; Johnson, D.H. [et al.]. 2003. Evaluation of landscape models for wolverine in the interior Northwest U.S.A. Journal of Mammalogy. 84(1): 92-105.
18. Sallabanks, R.; Riggs, R.A.; Cobb, L.E. 2002. Bird use of forest structural classes in grand fir forests of the Blue Mountains, Oregon. Forest Science. 48(2): 311-322.
19. Wisdom, M.J.; Holthausen, R.S.; Wales, B.C. [et al.]. 2000. Source habitats for terrestrial vertebrates of focus in the interior Columbia basin: broad-scale trends and management implications. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-485. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 3 vol. 1119,p. (Quigley, T.M., tech. ed. Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project: scientific assessment).
20. Wisdom, M.J.; Wales, B.C.; Rowland, M.M. [et al.]. 2002. Performance of greater sage-grouse models for conservation assessment in the Interior Columbia basin, USA. Conservation Biology. 16: 1232-1242.
21. Wondzell, S.; Howell, P. 2004. Developing a decision-support model for assessing condition and prioritizing the restoration of aquatic habitat in the interior Columbia basin. In: Hayes, J.L.; Ager, A.A.; Barbour, R.J., tech. eds. Methods for integrating modeling of landscape change: Interior Northwest Landscape Analysis System. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-610. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station: 73-81. Chapter 6.