Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) habitat characteristics in north-boreal Finland

Abstract

This study aimed to identify tools for taking capercaillie habitats into consideration in forest management. This would provide new alternatives for ecologically more sustainable forest management. Capercaillie summer and winter locations, from wildlife monitoring counts (1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003)(2004) in northern Finland, and reference, non-capercaillie locations were combined with forest planning data, and the area proportions of different landscape classes in an 800-m radius circle surrounding capercaillie and reference locations were compared. Thinning stands (in summer and winter) and spruce mires (in summer) were more abundant in capercaillie habitats than in reference landscapes, whereas e.g. seedling stands, mature stands and waste land areas were less abundant. The relative habitat use was highest in mean tree diameter (DBH) classes from 10.5 to 14.5 cm in summer habitats of adult capercaillie in heath forests, whereas in peatland forests, in brood habitats and in winter habitats it peaked in diameter classes 14.5 to 18.5 cm. The tree layer density was positively associated with the relative habitat use. A trend of lower habitat use was detected in the largest diameters (17-40 cm) in comparison to middle-sized diameters (10-16 cm) in heath forests, but not in peatland forests. Relatively young managed forests (age 30-40 years or more) can form suitable capercaillie habitats in north-boreal forests. However, this suitability is not necessarily permanent. Understorey management, longer rotations and multicohort forest management are suitable tools for capercaillie habitat management, because they can increase the available cover close to the ground, canopy cover, overall forest cover at the landscape scale and bilberry cover.

Clearcutting forestry and Eurasian boreal forest grouse: Long-term monitoring of sympatric capercaillie Tetrao urogallus and black grouse T. tetrix reveals unexpected effects on their population performances

“…Instead, our results concur more with recent reports from Finland: a steep decline of CAP during 1965-1988 could not be explained by a proportional increase in younger forest (Sirkiä et al, 2010;Miettinen, 2009), on the basis of analyses of time-series data on the landscape scale, concluded that the long-term decline of CAP had stopped in the 1990s. He and co-workers (Miettinen et al, 2010) reported extensive use of middle-aged pine and spruce plantations by both adult birds and broods -a result very much in agreement with our findings.…”

The effect of human‐modified landscape structure on forest grouse broods in two landscape types

“…, Miettinen et al. ). Further, in older age fresh leaves and stems of bilberry form the important food source for chicks (Storch , Wegge et al.…”

“…This pattern was, most likely, due to the availability of rich canopy and understorey cover, and better food resources to broods in old coniferous mixed forests (Miettinen et al. , , Melin et al. ); especially, the bilberry plays an important role in the ecology of forest grouse broods (Storch , Baines et al.…”

From the experience of LIFE+ ManFor C.BD to the Manual of Best Practices in Sustainable Forest Management

“…The species is mainly occurring in conifer forests with open canopy cover with bilberry (Moss and Picozzi, 1994). In Finland, the most frequently occurring DBH classes are between 10.5 to 14.5 cm in summer habitats while the winter habitats contained trees with DBH classes between 14.5 and 18.5 cm (Miettinen et al, 2010). The suitable age of the forest for the Capercaillie is highly debated.…”

“…Some studies mention more than 90 years (Aberg et al, 2003), while others report that age classes of 30-40 years and more are already suitable for Capercaillie (Miettinen et al, 2010). It is suggested that thinning is a suitable way to maintain the habitat of the Capercaillie (Miettinen et al, 2009), but also understory management, longer rotations and multicohort forest management are considered as suitable tools (Miettinen et al, 2010). Setting fences should be avoided because they can injure females while flying (Baines and Summers, 1997).…”