Are avian population targets achievable through programs that restore habitat on private‐lands?

Reiley, Bryan M.; Stodola, Kirk W.; Benson, Thomas J.

doi:10.1002/ecs2.2574

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although some grassland obligate songbirds, such as eastern meadowlark ( Sturnella magna ), may use fields dominated by nonnative grasses for nesting (McCoy et al 2001, Moorman et al 2017), conversion to native plant communities offers benefits to a broad suite of species. Species benefiting from conversion include conservation‐priority species such as grasshopper sparrow and Henslow's sparrow ( Ammodramus henslowii ) as well as species commonly selected for management by private landowners, such as white‐tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) and wild turkey (Nagy‐Reis et al 2019, Reiley et al 2019, Lituma and Buehler 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant Community Response and Implications for Wildlife Following Control of a Nonnative Perennial Grass

Harper

GeFellers

Buehler

et al. 2021

Wildlife Society Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Restoration of early successional plant communities dominated by nonnative plant species is a central focus of many state and federal agencies to improve habitat for wildlife associated with these communities. Restoration efforts largely have concentrated on controlling nonnative species followed by planting native grasses and forbs. However, there are numerous establishment problems associated with planting that warrant evaluation of alternative approaches for restoration. We conducted a field experiment to compare vegetation composition and structure as related to habitat for focal wildlife among plant communities established by planting (Planted) native grasses and forbs and revegetation from the seedbank (Seedbank) without planting following control of tall fescue (Schedonorus arundinaceus) at 15 replicated sites in Tennessee and Alabama, USA. Planted and Seedbank treatments produced similar plant communities. Vegetation structure providing cover for nesting and brooding northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) and wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo) was similar between Seedbank and Planted treatments except native grass cover was greatest in Planted, and we recorded greater openness at ground level in Seedbank than Planted or tall fescue control (Control). Abundance of northern bobwhite food plants and selected white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) forage were similar between Planted and Seedbank treatments, but nutritional carrying capacity for deer was greatest in Seedbank. Despite similarities in food abundance, and even though all forbs included in the planting mixtures were food plants, the majority of food plants in Planted were from the seedbank. The compositional and structural characteristics deemed most influential in previous studies to selection of breeding sites by dickcissel (Spiza americana), field sparrow (Spizella pusilla), grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum), Henslow's sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii), and northern bobwhite were similar in Planted and Seedbank. Tall fescue Control was most similar to characteristics of eastern meadowlark (Sturnella magna) breeding sites. Revegetation following Seedbank produced a plant community that provided habitat for many wildlife species equal to or better than Planted and was 3.7 times less expensive than Planted. © 2021 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant Community Response and Implications for Wildlife Following Control of a Nonnative Perennial Grass

Harper

GeFellers

Buehler

et al. 2021

Wildlife Society Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, each case should be analyzed individually and depends on the eventual goal, since studies evaluating passive restoration in grassland habitats have demonstrated positive results for recovery of the flora and fauna (e.g. Torchelsen et al ; Reiley et al ; Silva et al ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Success of active restoration in grasslands: a case study of birds in southern Brazil

Silva

Fontana

2020

Restoration Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grasslands in southeastern South America have been extensively converted to various land uses such as agriculture, threatening regional biodiversity. Active restoration has been viewed as a management alternative for recovery of degraded areas worldwide, although most studies are conducted in forests and none has evaluated the effect of active restoration of grasslands in southeastern South America. From 2015 through 2017 we monitored a federally owned tract of grassland from the beginning of the active-restoration process. We compared the bird community in this active-restoration area (AR) with a reference area (NG) in Pampa grasslands in southern Brazil. We sampled birds by point counts and surveyed vegetation structure in plots. Over the 3 years of active restoration, bird species richness and abundance were higher in AR (30 species, 171 individuals) than NG (22 species, 154 individuals). The species composition also differed between the two habitats. Grassland bird species were present in both AR and NG. The vegetation structure differed between AR and NG in five attributes: height, short and tall grasses, herbs, and shrubs. Since it has been found that active restoration is useful in promoting species diversity, we encourage studies of the use of long-term restoration efforts. Our study, even on a local scale, showed a rapid recovery of the bird community in the active-restoration compared to native grassland, and suggests the potential for recovery of the degraded grasslands of the Brazilian Pampa biome.

show abstract

“…Whereas habitat restoration research on private land in North America has previously focused on grassland species, our results suggest that habitat enrolled in CREP, as noted by Pabian et al (2013), provides important conservation opportunities for birds occupying later successional stages as well. In our study area, these sites may already be helping to achieve statewide conservation goals for Bell's vireos and willow flycatchers, while making notable contributions to populations of other priority species (Reiley et al 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does Conservation Practice and Site Age Influence Vegetation Structure and Avian Abundance in Restored Fields?

Reiley

Benson

2020

Wildlife Society Bulletin

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farmland set-aside programs provide important habitat for many wildlife species, yet little information exists regarding how vegetation structure and species respond to conservation practice and site age. This information could provide managers with a guide for how to implement, enhance, and maintain wildlife benefits of conservation programs. We describe how vegetation structure and avian species respond to conservation practice and time since restoration at 172 sites enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) in Illinois, USA. We surveyed 172 sites enrolled in 4 different conservation practices (CP) within CREP during the breeding seasons of 2012-2015 using avian point counts and vegetation surveys. Vegetation structure and composition varied among CPs, with hardwood tree plantings (CP3A) having the greatest amount of understory vegetation and tree cover. Conversely, permanent wildlife habitat (CP4D) had the greatest grass cover and least tree cover. Many bird species were found in similar numbers across CP types; however, only dickcissel (Spiza americana) density was greater in sites enrolled as permanent wildlife habitat. Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii) and yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) were more numerous in hardwood tree plantings. Dickcissel density decreased and field sparrow (Spizella pusilla) density increased as fields aged, but the relationships were not consistent among CP types. Differences among CPs largely resulted from differences in dominance in woody vegetation due to initial habitat management and differential succession rates. Interestingly, many of our focal species had wider successional tolerances than previously suggested. Overall, our results demonstrate that conservation benefits change over time depending on the starting CP, that there can be considerable similarity in vegetation structure and bird communities among what appear to be very different conservation practices. This information can be used to target conservation benefits toward conservation priority species.

show abstract

Are avian population targets achievable through programs that restore habitat on private‐lands?

Abstract: Agricultural intensification has negatively affected biodiversity throughout the world. In the

Cited by 7 publications

References 36 publications

Plant Community Response and Implications for Wildlife Following Control of a Nonnative Perennial Grass

Plant Community Response and Implications for Wildlife Following Control of a Nonnative Perennial Grass

Success of active restoration in grasslands: a case study of birds in southern Brazil

Does Conservation Practice and Site Age Influence Vegetation Structure and Avian Abundance in Restored Fields?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About