Small Forest Openings Support Shrubland Birds and Native Bees In
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Small Forest Openings Support Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) CEAP-Wildlife Conservation Insight Shrubland Birds and Native Bees in December 2017 the Northeast Summary of Findings ings than in mature forest. Individ- Background ual opening size did not affect bee • Once prevalent on the landscape, abundance or diversity; however, bees Wildlife species that depend on early early successional habitats are now were more abundant and diverse in successional shrubland habitats have rare in the northeastern United openings and adjacent mature forest experienced severe population de- States. As a result, populations of when there was more early succes- clines in eastern North America due many wildlife species that rely on sional habitat in the surrounding land- to the loss of disturbance-dependent these habitats (dominated by shrubs, scape. Bee abundance and diversity young forest habitats. Disturbances young trees, grasses, and forbs) in forest openings tended to decrease such as wind-throw, wildfire, beaver have declined. with vegetation height and increase activity, and flooding, which once • Group selection timber harvest with a metric representing floral naturally sustained these ephemeral can be used to create small forest richness and abundance. In adjacent habitats, have largely been suppressed openings (typically <1 ha) and has mature forests, eusocial, soft-wood- by humans. As a result, maintaining the potential to provide needed nesting, and small bees exhibited the disturbance-dependent early succes- shrubland habitats within the opposite pattern, increasing with the sional habitats is now considered a parcelled forest ownerships of succession of openings and decreasing conservation priority in the northeast. New England. with greater floral richness abundance Mechanically treated wildlife openings • Use of small forest openings by within openings. can provide suitable habitat for high shrubland bird and bee communities • Results suggest that the creation priority shrubland species, including of small forest openings may help to was assessed across a range of for- birds (Chandler et al. 2009, King et promote bees both in openings and est opening sizes and configurations al. 2009) and wild bees (Winfree et adjacent mature forest, with certain in southern New England to develop al. 2009). Silvicultural practices have guilds benefitting more than others. guidelines for optimizing the value been advocated for creating early of small forest openings to these high-priority wildlife resources. • Minimum-area requirements for black-and-white warbler, common yellowthroat, chestnut-sided warbler, eastern towhee, and gray catbird were at most 0.23 ha, while indigo buntings and prairie warblers required larger openings (minimum- area requirements of 0.56 and 1.11 ha, respectively). Prairie warblers were more likely to be found in openings closer to large patches of habitat such as powerline corridors (>50 m wide) even if those openings were relatively small in size. • Despite their inability to support all shrubland bird species in the region, small forest openings can provide habitat for several species of conservation concern if proper attention is given to promoting suitable microhabitat, patch, and landscape characteristics. • Bee abundance and diversity were A forest gap of about 0.6 ha created by implementing silviculture. Gaps of this size are sufficient to significantly higher in forest open- support several shrubland bird species capable of using small forest openings. successional habitat not only because ability to conserve and manage sitional hardwoods-white pine, con- they are effective in promoting many these key pollinators. sisting primarily of red maple, red oak, shrubland species, but also because black birch, American beech, eastern management costs can be offset by Assessment Partnership hemlock, and white pine. timber revenue. Due to small wood- land parcel ownership patterns and In 2013, a Conservation Effects Most forest openings studied were negative perceptions of clearcutting, Assessment Project (CEAP) created with group selection timber a practice known as “group selection Wildlife Partnership was formed harvests, and openings contained timber harvest,” where groups of adja- between NRCS and the Univer- seedlings and saplings of all adjacent cent trees are removed from a mature sity of Massachusetts to investi- tree species, as well as Rubus spp., forest matrix, may be an effective gate the potential for small forest mountain laurel, and numerous fern means of creating young forest habitat openings to support shrubland species. Residual debris from harvests in New England. While forest open- birds and native bees. Objectives was prevalent in all openings. ings created by group selection cuts were to (1) identify species-spe- provide habitat structure for shrubland cific minimum-area requirements Study sites (90 openings in 2014 and birds, they are generally too small (< for shrubland birds capable of 104 in 2015 for birds; 30 openings 1 ha) to support more area-sensitive occupying small openings, (2) for bees in both years) were random- shrubland bird species (Costello et al. identify microhabitat-, patch-, and ly selected from a list of 146 forest 2000, Alterman et al. 2005). landscape-level factors that can openings present in the study area. promote shrubland bird occu- Openings ranged from 0.02–1.29 ha Nevertheless, small forest openings pancy of small forest openings, from timber harvests made between still provide potential breeding habitat (3) compare the bee community 2006 and 2010. To ensure openings for species of regional concern that are within forest openings to that of represented the entire range of opening less sensitive to patch size. Therefore, adjacent mature forest to directly sizes, openings were chosen randomly group selection can contribute to con- illustrate the impact of silviculture from four bins representing different servation on sites where the creation of on bee communities relative to size ranges. patches large enough to support more reference forest conditions, (4) area-sensitive species is not practical. identify stand-, patch-, and land- Bird surveys Precise area thresholds for various scape-level factors influencing Each year birds were surveyed three shrubland nesting bird species need to bee abundance and diversity in times from late May to early July with be established to enable managers to both openings and adjacent forest, 10-minute, 50-m radius point counts understand the benefits of small forest (5) quantify bee abundance and at the center of each opening (Ralph openings to bird communities. Like- diversity at a range of distances et al. 1995). Surveys were conducted wise, group selection has been shown from forest openings to gauge the on calm days with no precipitation to support more bees than mature potential for openings to aug- between 15 minutes after sunrise and forest or single-tree selection timber ment bee populations in adjacent 1100 hours. The location of all birds harvest methods (Proctor et al. 2012). mature forest, and (6) examine the detected was recorded on scaled ortho- habitat associations of individual imagery. Survey points were visited by Landscape composition is considered bee species. at least two different technicians during a potentially important factor for each year in order to reduce observer shrubland birds (Schlossberg and King This CEAP conservation insight bias (Ralph et al. 1995). Fly-overs and 2007), but studies have reported con- provides a summary of the assess- birds detected outside of the 50-m radi- flicting results. In general, studies have ment approach and findings. Ad- us were not included in the analysis. shown that landscape conditions may ditional details are available in the influence patch suitability for many final report submitted to NRCS Bee surveys shrubland-obligate bird species (e.g., (Roberts and King 2016) as well Bee sampling took place during Buffum and McKinney 2014), but also as published journal articles on three periods: spring (April 26–May reveal the need for more detailed in- native bees (Roberts et al. 2017) 14), summer (July 1–July 17), and formation to support the development and songbirds (Roberts and King late summer (August 23–September of management guidelines. 2017). 8). Bees were collected using bowl traps (see photo on next page), which Given the fact that silviculture is consisted of 96-milliliter plastic cups the dominant disturbance agent over Assessment Approach filled with water mixed with soap. To much of the northeast and that there sample bees within openings, a tran- is reason to believe it will positively Study sites sect of five sampling points 5 m apart influence bee populations, a better This study was conducted in a was established in each opening 15 understanding of how bees respond to heavily forested area of western m from the forest and parallel to the a range of uneven-aged silvicultural Massachusetts during 2014 and opening edge. To sample bees in the practices, both in post-logging and 2015. The dominant forest type of forest, a second transect of 5 sample adjacent habitats, will improve our this region is second-growth tran- points 10 m apart was established 2 starting 10 m from the open- etation height, coefficient of ing and running perpendicular variation (CV) of vegetation to the opening edge into the height, area, SHAPE, distance forest along east-west bearings