Short-term effects of fuel reduction on pileated woodpeckers in northeastern Oregon—a pilot study.

Abstract

Agriculture is dedicated to the principle of multiple use management of the Nation's forest resources for sustained yields of wood, water, forage, wildlife, and recreation. Through forestry research, cooperation with the States and private forest owners, and management of the National Forests and National Grasslands, it strives-as directed by Congress-to provide increasingly greater service to a growing Nation. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. USDA is committed to making its information materials accessible to all USDA customers and employees.

The influence of disturbance events on pileated woodpeckers in Northeastern Oregon

“…Snag and log loss has been documented in prescribed burns in southwestern ponderosa pine forests (reviewed in Finch et al, 1997;Randall-Parker and Miller, 2002). Stands with fuel reduction treatments at Starkey had significantly fewer logs, fewer logs with ants, and less pileated woodpecker foraging in the burned treatments compared to the controls and mechanical fuel reductions (Bull et al, 2005); nest trees were also consumed by prescribed fire in several units. The long-term effects of fuel reductions on pileated woodpeckers are unknown, although with less log cover and fewer trees and snags to replace logs when they deteriorate, it is likely that foraging strata will not be replaced for decades or longer.…”

“…By period 3, the stands that were used for nesting by goshawks in the 1970s and 1980s no longer contained forests with live, large-diameter trees and dense canopy closure which has been described as suitable nesting habitat for goshawks (Squires and Reynolds, 1997). Although the mature and oldgrowth stands with extensive mortality provided nest and roost trees and foraging substrate for pileated woodpeckers (Bull et al, 2005;Nielsen-Pincus, 2005), few accipiters (0-2) were detected during surveys in the study areas with extensive tree mortality, and density of pileated pairs was not substantially less than in previous periods.…”

“…The grand fir and Douglas-fir trees used for nesting in 2003-05 (Nielsen-Pincus, 2005 likely were killed by the spruce budworm or Douglas-fir bark beetle outbreaks during the 1980s and early 1990s. Additionally, many of these resulting predominantly dead stands with large snags and logs were then used extensively for foraging by pileated woodpeckers (Bull et al, 2005). Short (1982) reported that some woodpeckers, notably the ''three-toed'' woodpeckers (Picoides tricactylus), may concentrate their numbers owing to an abundance of prey when insect populations reach epidemic proportions as occurs after stand-replacement fire.…”

“…The amount of unharvested area was significantly greater (t = À2.28, P = 0.05) and the amount of area that was harvested was significantly less (any type of harvest activity; t = 3.86, P < 0.01) in home ranges occupied by pairs that successfully raised young compared to pairs that failed to raise young ( Table 5). One of the most prevalent harvest activities on Starkey in 2001-03 included fuel reductions which resulted in a decrease in snags, logs, and foraging material for pileated woodpeckers (Bull et al, 2005). Forest type, structural stage, and canopy closure class did not differ significantly between these eight successful and three unsuccessful pairs.…”

“…Generally, the density of snags and logs increased after 1990 in the study areas with extensive mortality and without harvesting (Bear and Spring) ( Table 3). Areas with extensive regeneration harvests (Syrup and McIntrye) resulted in a loss of both logs and large-diameter snags (Bull et al, 2005); mean density of logs across all seven study areas in 1989 was 219 ha À1 (Table 3).…”