Breeding bird response to varying amounts of basal area retention in riparian buffers

Journal of Wildlife Management

Volumn 69, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 689-698

  Hanowski, Joann ^a   Danz, Nick ^a   Lind, Jim ^a   Niemi, Gerald ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA DULUTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Birds; Breeding; Buffers; Forest; Harvest; Minnesota; Riparian; Streams

Indexed keywords

AVIFAUNA; BASAL AREA; BUFFER ZONE; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; ECOLOGICAL IMPACT; RIPARIAN FOREST; TIMBER HARVESTING;

MINNESOTA; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES; WESTERN HEMISPHERE; WORLD;

AVES;

EID: 23744463109     PISSN: 0022541X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2193/0022-541X(2005)069[0689:BBRTVA]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. DARVEAU, M., P. BEAUCHESNE, L. BELANGER, J. HUOT, AND P. LARUE. 1995. Riparian forest strips as habitat for breeding birds in boreal forest. Journal of Wildlife Management 59:67-78.
2. DICKSON, J. G., J. H. WILLIAMSON, R. N. CONNER, AND B. ORTEGO. 1995. Streamside zones and breeding birds in eastern Texas. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23:750-755.
3. FRAMPTON, G. K., P. J. VAN DEN BRINK, AND P. J. L. GOULD. 2000. Effects of spring precipitation on a temperate arable collembolan community analyzed using principal response curves. Applied Soil Ecology 14:231-248.
4. HAGAR, J. C., 1999. Influence of riparian buffer width on bird assemblages in western Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:484-496.
5. HANOWSKI, J. M., G. J. NIEMI, AND J. G. BLAKE. 1990. Statistical perspectives and experimental design in counting birds with line transects. Condor 92:326-335.
6. _, AND _. 1995. Experimental design for establishing an off-road, habitat specific bird monitoring program using point-counts. Pages 145-150 in Monitoring bird populations by point counts. U.S. Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-GTR-149.
7. _, N. DANZ, J. LIND, G. NIEMI, AND P. WOLTER. 2001. Wildlife species: responses to forest harvesting and management in riparian stands and landscapes. Minnesota Forest Resources Council and National Council for Air and Stream Improvement. NRRI/TR-2001/02.
8. _, AND _. 2003. Breeding bird response to riparian forest harvest and harvest equipment. Forest Ecology and Management 174:315-328.
9. _, P. W. WOLTER, AND G. J. NIEMI. 2002. Effects of prescriptive riparian buffers on landscape characteristics: implications for forest management. American Water Resources Association 38:633-639.
10. HOBSON, K. A., AND J. SCHIECK. 1999. Changes in bird communities in boreal mixed wood forest: harvest and wildfire effects over 30 years. Ecological Applications 9:849-863.
11. JONES, M. T., G. J. NIEMI, J. M. HANOWSKI, AND R. R. REGAL. 2002. Poisson regression: a better approach to modeling abundance data? Pages 411-418 in J. M. Scott, P. J. Heglund, M. L. Morrison, et al. J. B. Haufler, and M. G. Raphael, editors. Predicting species occurrences: issues of accuracy and scale. Island Press, Washington, D.C., USA.
12. KEDWARDS, T. J., S. J. MAUND, AND P. F. CHAPMAN. 1999a. Community level analysis of ecotoxicological field studies I: biological monitoring. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18:149-157.
13. _, AND _. 1999b. Community level analysis of ecotoxicological field studies II: replicated design studies. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18:158-166.
14. KINLEY, T. A., AND N. J. NEWHOUSE. 1997. Relationship of riparian reserve zone width to bird density and diversity in southeastern British Columbia. Northwest Science 71:75-87.
15. LEGENDRE, P., AND E. D. GALLAGHER. 2000. Ecologically meaningful transformations for ordination of species data. Oecologia 129:271-280.
16. PARKER, G., P. LAWRENCE, D. DOUCETTE, AND D. HACHÉ. 1998. The Hayward Brook Project - 2: avifaunal studies. Fundy Model Forest Partnership Technical Notes Volume 1 Number 3. Fundy Model Forest Network, Sussex, New Brunswick, Canada.
17. PERRY, J., C. BLINN, R. NEWMAN, N. HEMSTAD, E. MERTEN, K. FREDERICK, M. K. FOX, B. PALIK, J. MATTSON, M. THOMPSON, S. VERRY, L. JOHNSON, C. RICHARDS, R. NEWMAN, E. MERTEN, K. STROOM, J. SHOMBERG, R. DAHLMAN, AND P. EMERSON. 2001. Evaluating riparian area dynamics, management alternatives and impacts of harvest practices. Final report to Minnesota Forest Resources Council. RR-0601.
18. SIBLEY, P. K., M. L. HARRIS, K. T. BESTARI, T. A. STEELE, R. D. ROBINSON, R. W. GENSEMER, K. E. DAY, AND K. R. SOLOMON. 2001. Response of zooplankton communities to liquid creosote in freshwater microcosms. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 20:394-405.
19. SOKAL, R. R., AND N. L. ODEN. 1978. Spatial autocorrelation in biology I. Methodology. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 10:199-228.
20. STEWART-OATEN, A., W. W. MURDOCH, AND K. R. PARKER. 1986. Environmental impact assessment: "pseudoreplication" in time? Ecology 67:929-940.
21. TER BRAAK, C. J. F., AND P. ŠMILAUER. 1998. CANOCO reference manual and user's guide to Canoco for Windows: software for Canonical community ordination. Fourth version. Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, New York, USA.
22. VAN DEN BRINK, P. J., AND C. J. F. TER BRAAK. 1999. Principal response curves: analysis of time-dependent multivariate responses of biological community to stress. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 18:138-148.
23. VASIEVICH, J. M., AND C. EDGAR. 1998. Economic implications of proposed forest management guidelines for Minnesota. Report to Minnesota Forest Resources Council, St. Paul, USA. SE-0998N.
24. WEGNER, S. 1999. A review of the scientific literature on riparian buffer width, extent and vegetation. Office of Public Service and Outreach, Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, USA.
25. WHITTAKER, D. M., AND W. A. MONTEVECCHI. 1999. Breeding bird assemblages inhabiting riparian buffer strips in Newfoundland, Canada. Journal of Wildlife Management 63:167-179.