Abstract
Best management practices are often written by researchers to guide land managers and landowners in the creation of habitat for wildlife species of interest. These documents are based on research evaluating the habitat needs of a species, but they also describe tools and strategies managers can implement to create or restore desired conditions. Shrub and sapling shearing is a management practice often used to improve habitat for early-successional species, yet little monitoring or research has focused on wildlife response to shearing. The goal of this research was to formally evaluate the effect of shrub and sapling shearing as a best management strategy for Golden-winged Warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera) conservation at a regional scale. Specifically, we surveyed for male Golden-winged Warblers during the breeding season in sheared sites and untreated reference sites across portions of the western Great Lakes to assess the effects of (1) management status (i.e., sheared aspen or alder vs. untreated sites) and (2) patch-level vegetation characteristics on male abundance. We found that male Golden-winged Warbler abundance was twice as high in sheared sites than in mature reference sites and peaked when sapling cover was ~40%. Male abundance was also negatively associated with percent cover of forbs and nonvegetated ground. These findings highlight the importance of patch-level heterogeneity when implementing shearing treatments for Golden-winged Warblers and demonstrate the potential need for pretreatment site assessments to help focus conservation efforts for this species. Ultimately, our results support the use of a site-specific, nuanced approach to shearing implementation to maximize cost efficiency and desired species outcomes.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | e4443 |
| Journal | Ecosphere |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Mar 2023 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:information Minnesota Outdoor Heritage Fund; National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Grant/Award Number: 0101.14045580; National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Grant/Award Number: 42018; Natural Resources Conservation Service, Grant/Award Number: 68-7482-12-502; University of MaineThis project was primarily funded by the United States Department of Agriculture—Natural Resource Conservation Service “Conservation Effects Assessment Project” (CEAP)—Wildlife (Agreement #68-7482-12-502) and USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture McIntire-Stennis Project 42018. Additional funding was provided by a grant from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (Agreement # 0101.14045580). Funding for habitat planning and implementation on public and tribal lands in Minnesota was provided by the Outdoor Heritage Fund as part of the Clean Water, Land, and Legacy Amendment. Additional funding was provided by the University of Maine Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Conservation Biology. The Wisconsin Young Forest Partnership identified landowners with appropriate plant communities and management using BMPs to participate in this study. We are grateful to the following for providing access for monitoring: the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Forest Service, the Red Lake Band of Chippewa Department of Natural Resources, Beltrami County, Carlton County, Itasca County, Aitkin County, St. Louis County, and Hubbard County. Additional thanks to the private landowners who provided access for monitoring. Additionally, we would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments, which improved this manuscript.
Funding Information:
This project was primarily funded by the United States Department of Agriculture—Natural Resource Conservation Service “Conservation Effects Assessment Project” (CEAP)—Wildlife (Agreement #68‐7482‐12‐502) and USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture McIntire‐Stennis Project 42018. Additional funding was provided by a grant from the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (Agreement # 0101.14045580). Funding for habitat planning and implementation on public and tribal lands in Minnesota was provided by the Outdoor Heritage Fund as part of the Clean Water, Land, and Legacy Amendment. Additional funding was provided by the University of Maine Department of Wildlife, Fisheries, and Conservation Biology. The Wisconsin Young Forest Partnership identified landowners with appropriate plant communities and management using BMPs to participate in this study. We are grateful to the following for providing access for monitoring: the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Forest Service, the Red Lake Band of Chippewa Department of Natural Resources, Beltrami County, Carlton County, Itasca County, Aitkin County, St. Louis County, and Hubbard County. Additional thanks to the private landowners who provided access for monitoring. Additionally, we would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments, which improved this manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 The Authors. Ecosphere published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Ecological Society of America.
Keywords
- Alnus
- Golden-winged Warbler
- Populus
- Vermivora chrysoptera
- alder
- aspen
- best management practices
- breeding habitat
- forest management
- mowing
- shearing
- shrubland management
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
- Ecology