Silvicultural options for open forest management in eastern North America

Bragg, Don C.; Hanberry, Brice B.; Hutchinson, Todd F.; Jack, Steven B.; Kabrick, John M.

doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118383

Cited by 23 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 138 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lower hardwood basal area is typical of pine and pine‐oak woodlands because these ecosystems typically have lower tree density and basal area than closed canopy pine and oak forest. Management to restore woodlands typically uses tree thinning to remove mid‐story trees and some overstory trees to create basal areas in the range of 2.8–7.4 m 2 /ha and 30–80% stocking (Dey et al 2017, Bragg et al 2020) and pine‐woodland restoration specifically targets hardwoods for removals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Chuck‐will's‐widow abundance was greatest at intermediate levels of percent forest burned and eastern whip‐poor‐will abundance increased as area burned increased from 0% to 100%. Periodic burning is used in woodland management to kill small trees and shrubs and prevent the redevelopment of an understory and midstory (Dey et al 2017, Bragg et al 2020). In the interval between fires, the understory rapidly redevelops by sprouting and can be dense until the next fire sets it back again, typically before it gets taller than 1–2 m. Spiller and King (2021) did not examine burning as a management practice but did report the occurrence of eastern whip‐poor‐will was negatively related to understory height, which is consistent with effects of fire in our study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Woodland restoration and forest structure affect nightjar abundance in the Ozark Highlands

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chuck‐will's‐widow (Antrostomus carolinensis) and eastern whip‐poor‐will (Antrostomus vociferus) are nightjars in eastern North America that have declined 69% and 67%, respectively, in abundance since 1966, resulting in conservation concerns for these species. We investigated relationships between nightjar abundance and landscape composition, forest structure, and application of tree thinning and prescribed fire because of regional interest in woodland restoration and nightjar conservation. We conducted nocturnal nightjar surveys at 385 points in southern Missouri, USA, in 2014 and 2015 and related counts to pine (Pinus spp.) and hardwood basal area, canopy closure, percent forest cover, and percent of area thinned or burned within 500 m of survey points. We modeled abundance of chuck‐will's‐widow and eastern whip‐poor‐will using time‐removal models that included a detection process and an abundance process within a hierarchical Bayesian framework. We detected 534 eastern whip‐poor‐will and 186 chuck‐will's‐widow during surveys. Our data supported global models that included all 6 vegetation and management variables for both species. Chuck‐will's‐widow abundance was negatively related to hardwood basal area and peaked at intermediate values of percent area burned and percent forest cover. Eastern whip‐poor‐will abundance was negatively related to hardwood basal area and canopy cover, positively related to percent forest cover and percent of area burned, and peaked at low to moderate levels of percent of area thinned. Relationships to forest structure and management activities generally supported the conclusion that woodland restoration benefits nightjars and that chuck‐will's‐widow select landscapes with less forest cover than eastern whip‐poor‐will.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Woodland restoration and forest structure affect nightjar abundance in the Ozark Highlands

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, an open midstory is important for wildlife maneuverability (i.e., reduced forest “clutter”), in particular, foraging space for some bat species. Open forest management focuses on control of small diameter trees to allow coexistence of a diverse herbaceous ground layer that, in addition to maintaining herbaceous plants, provides resources to associated biodiversity (Bragg et al., 2020 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Addressing regional relationships between white‐tailed deer densities and land classes

Hanberry

2021

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations have recovered to about 30 million animals in the United States, but land cover has changed during the interval of recovery. To address the relationship between deer densities and current land cover at regional scales, I applied random forests and extreme gradient boosting classifiers to model low and high deer density classes, at two different thresholds (5.8 and 11.6 deer/km 2 ), and land classes in three regions during approximately 2003. For low and high deer density classes divided at 5.8 deer/km 2 , deciduous broadleaf forest overall was the most influential and positive variable in the central east and central regions and crop and pasture were the most influential and negative variables in the southeast region. Deer density increased with area of deciduous and mixed forests, woody wetlands, and shrub in all regions. Deer density decreased with area of crop, developed open space, and developed low and medium residential density in all regions. For density classes divided at 11.6 deer/km 2 , deer density had the strongest relationship with woody wetlands in the central east region, mixed and deciduous forest in the southeast region, and woody wetlands and herbaceous vegetation in the central region. Deer density increased with deciduous and mixed forests, woody wetlands, and shrub in all regions. Conversely, deer density decreased with herbaceous vegetation, crop, and developed low residential densities in all regions. Therefore, at regional scales, deer overall occurred at greater densities in forests and woody wetlands and lower densities in agricultural and residential development, which did not appear to support more deer. Deer preference for forests does result in damage to forest products, but alternatively, some may consider that deer provide important socioeconomic and ecological services by reducing number of small trees, particularly in the absence of other disturbances that historically controlled tree biomass.

show abstract

“…Prescribed fire is applied for restoring and maintaining the maximum biodiversity, but other silvicultural practices such as tree thinning and variable retention harvesting, in combination with browsing or mechanical or chemical application to control understory trees, are potential alternatives to fire for achieving open conditions [5]. Although prescribed burns are more common in the Southeast than other regions, restoration through prescribed burns typically occur at small scales because fire frequently has socioeconomic constraints, but the cumulative benefits are large.…”

Section: Implications For Management and Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fire-dependent open forests of savannas and woodlands, and their fire-tolerant tree species component, are historically abundant global ecosystems that have been affected by land use change. Low-severity surface fire was an integral disturbance for some ecosystems and surface fire was a widespread land management tool that helped maintain open forests of savannas and woodlands [4,5]. Conversely, the alternative state of closed forests occurs in the absence of fire [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transition from Fire-Dependent Open Forests: Alternative Ecosystem States in the Southeastern United States

Hanberry

2021

Diversity

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Land use and fire exclusion have influenced ecosystems worldwide, resulting in alternative ecosystem states. Here, I provide two examples from the southeastern United States of fire-dependent open pine and pine-oak forest loss and examine dynamics of the replacement forests, given continued long-term declines in foundation longleaf (Pinus palustris) and shortleaf (Pinus echinata) pines and recent increases in commercial loblolly (Pinus taeda) and slash (Pinus elliottii var. elliottii) pines. Shortleaf pine-oak forest historically may have been dominant on about 32 to 38 million ha, a provisional estimate based on historical composition of 75% of all trees, and has decreased to about 2.5 million ha currently; shortleaf pine now is 3% of all trees in the northern province. Longleaf pine forest decreased from about 30 million ha, totaling 75% of all trees, to 1.3 million ha and 3% of all trees in contemporary forests of the southern province. The initial transition from open pine ecosystems to closed forests, primarily comprised of broadleaf species, was countered by conversion to loblolly and slash pine plantations. Loblolly pine now accounts for 37% of all trees. Loss of fire-dependent ecosystems and their foundation tree species affect associated biodiversity, or the species that succeed under fire disturbance.

show abstract

Silvicultural options for open forest management in eastern North America

Cited by 23 publications

References 138 publications

Woodland restoration and forest structure affect nightjar abundance in the Ozark Highlands

Woodland restoration and forest structure affect nightjar abundance in the Ozark Highlands

Addressing regional relationships between white‐tailed deer densities and land classes

Transition from Fire-Dependent Open Forests: Alternative Ecosystem States in the Southeastern United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About