Small mammals and forest fuel reduction: national-scale responses to fire and fire surrogates.

Forest fuel reduction treatments are increasingly used by managers to reduce the risk of high-severity wildfire and to manage changes in the ecological function of forests. However, comparative ecological effects of the various types of treatments are poorly understood. We examined short-term patterns in small-mammal responses to mechanical thinning, prescribed-fire, and mechanical thinning/prescribed-fire combination treatments at eight different study areas across the United States as a part of the National Fire and Fire Surrogate (FFS) Project. Research questions included: (1) do treatments differ in their effect on small mammal densities and biomass? and (2) are effects of treatments consistent across study areas? We modeled taxa-specific densities and total small-mammal biomass as functions of treatment types and study area effects and ranked models based on an information-theoretic model selection criterion. Small-mammal taxa examined, including deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), yellow-pine chipmunks (Tamias amoenus), and golden-mantled ground squirrels (Spermophilus lateralis), as well as all Peromyscus and Tamias species, had top-ranked models with responses varying both by treatment type and study area. In each of these cases, the top-ranked model carried between 69% and 99% of the total weight in the model set, indicating strong support for the top-ranked models. However, the top-ranked model of total small-mammal biomass was a model with biomass varying only with treatment (i.e., treated vs. untreated), not by treatment type or study area; again, this model had strong support, with 75% of the total model weight. Individual species and taxa appear to have variable responses to fuel reduction treatment types in different areas; however, total small-mammal biomass appears generally to increase after any type of fuel reduction. These results suggest that there is substantial variability in taxa-specific responses to treatments and indicate that adaptive management policies may be necessary when applying fuel reduction treatments in areas where management of small-mammal populations is of interest. Adaptive management can be used by managers who are conducting fuel reduction treatments to reduce uncertainty as to which treatments are locally optimal for meeting objectives for the management of small-mammal populations.

[1]  M. V. Price,et al.  CHAPTER 5 – Rodents as Seed Consumers and Dispersers , 1986 .

[2]  W. Covington,et al.  The effect of a prescribed fire on nutrient concentration and standing crop of understory vegetation in ponderosa pine , 1983 .

[3]  GARY C. WHITE,et al.  Small Mammal Responses to Thinning and Wildfire in Ponderosa Pine–Dominated Forests of the Southwestern United States , 2006 .

[4]  S. Arno,et al.  Restoring Fire-Dependent Ponderosa Pine Forests in Western Montana , 1995, Restoration & Management Notes.

[5]  J. Maldonado,et al.  Use of ground and arboreal microhabitats by Peromyscus leucopus and Peromyscus maniculatus , 1988 .

[6]  W. Hamilton,et al.  Mammals of the Eastern United States , 1943 .

[7]  Gary C. White,et al.  Discussion comments on: The use of auxiliary variables in capture-recapture modelling. An overview , 2002 .

[8]  J. H. Bock,et al.  Responses of Birds and Deer Mice to Prescribed Burning in Ponderosa Pine , 1983 .

[9]  A. B. Carey.  Experimental manipulation of spatial heterogeneity in Douglas-fir forests : effects on squirrels , 2001 .

[10]  J. Tester.  Effects of a Controlled Burn on Small Mammals in a Minnesota Oak-Savanna , 1965 .

[11]  James D. Nichols,et al.  Capture-recapture models. , 1992 .

[12]  M. Efford.  Density estimation in live‐trapping studies , 2004 .

[13]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Model selection and multimodel inference : a practical information-theoretic approach , 2003 .

[14]  Rocky Mountain Forest,et al.  Range management and its ecological basis in the ponderosa pine type of Arizona , 1975 .

[15]  M. Bogan,et al.  Fitzgerald, J. P., C. A. Meaney, and D. M. Armstrong. 1994 [1995]. Mammals of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History and University Press of Colorado, Niwot, Colorado, xiii + 467 pp. ISBN 0-87081-333-1, price (cloth), $49.95 , 1996 .

[16]  B. Oswald,et al.  Effect of a prescribed fire on herbage production in southwestern ponderosa pine on sedimentary soils , 1984 .

[17]  R. Huggins.  Some practical aspects of a conditional likelihood approach to capture experiments , 1991 .

[18]  K. R. Wilson,et al.  Patterns of Small Mammal Density and Survival Following Ski-Run Development , 2004 .

[19]  H. Akaike,et al.  Information Theory and an Extension of the Maximum Likelihood Principle , 1973 .

[20]  C. Ahlgren.  Small Mammals and Reforestation Following Prescribed Burning , 1966 .

[21]  J. P. Ward.  Ecological responses by Mexican spotted owls to environmental variation in the Sacramento Mountains, New Mexico , 2001 .

[22]  L. W. Krefting,et al.  Small Mammals and Vegetation Changes After Fire in a Mixed Conifer‐Hardwood Forest , 1974, Ecology.

[23]  B. Geils,et al.  Restoration ecology: a new forest management paradigm, or another merit badge for foresters? , 2000 .

[24]  Clifford M. Hurvich,et al.  Regression and time series model selection in small samples , 1989 .

[25]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Evaluation of Two Density Estimators of Small Mammal Population Size , 1985 .

[26]  Dan Taylor,et al.  FIRE HISTORY OF A SEQUOIA-MIXED CONIFER FOREST' , 1979 .

[27]  J. Borden,et al.  Cortical resin monoterpenes in Sitka spruce and resistance to the white pine weevil, Pissodesstrobi (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) , 1983 .

[28]  William M. Block,et al.  Design and Implementation of Monitoring Studies to Evaluate the Success of Ecological Restoration on Wildlife , 2001 .

[29]  T. M. Bonnicksen,et al.  Reconstrution of a Presettlement Giant Sequoia‐Mixed Conifer Forest Community Using the Aggregation Approach , 1982 .

[30]  Nobuya Suzuki,et al.  Effects of thinning on small mammals in oregon coastal forests , 2003 .

[31]  C. Allen,et al.  ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION OF SOUTHWESTERN PONDEROSA PINE ECOSYSTEMS: A BROAD PERSPECTIVE , 2002 .

[32]  G. Koehler.  Fire effects on marten habitat in the Selway , 1977 .

[33]  Scott L. Stephens,et al.  Evaluation of the effects of silvicultural and fuels treatments on potential fire behaviour in Sierra Nevada mixed-conifer forests , 1998 .

[34]  A. B. Carey,et al.  Small mammals in managed, naturally young, and old-growth forests. , 1995 .

[35]  Richard F. Gunst,et al.  Applied Regression Analysis , 1999, Technometrics.

[36]  J. Trappe,et al.  FUNGAL-SMALL MAMMAL INTERRELATIONSHIPS WITH EMPHASIS ON OREGON CONIFEROUS FORESTS" , 1978 .

[37]  Carol Nehring,et al.  National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mammals , 1980 .

[38]  K. Burnham,et al.  Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals , 1999 .

[39]  F. Smith,et al.  Restructuring the forest: goshawks and the restoration of southwestern ponderosa pine. , 2000 .

[40]  Charles W. McHugh,et al.  Potential fire behavior is reduced following forest restoration treatments , 2001 .

[41]  J. Bowman,et al.  The association of small mammals with coarse woody debris at log and stand scales , 2000 .

[42]  Andrew B. Carey,et al.  Induced spatial heterogeneity in forest canopies : Responses of small mammals , 2001 .

[43]  R. Huggins.  On the statistical analysis of capture experiments , 1989 .

[44]  T. P. Sullivan,et al.  STAND STRUCTURE AND SMALL MAMMALS IN YOUNG LODGEPOLE PINE FOREST: 10‐YEAR RESULTS AFTER THINNING , 2001 .

[45]  C. Harrington,et al.  Small mammals in young forests: implications for management for sustainability , 2001 .

[46]  B. Oswald,et al.  Changes in Understory Production Follow- ing a Wildfire in Southwestern Ponderosa Pine , 1983 .

[47]  G. White,et al.  Small mammal population and habitat responses to forest thinning and prescribed fire , 2006 .

[48]  W. Covington,et al.  The Effect of a Prescribed Burn in Southwestern Ponderosa Pine on Organic Matter and Nutrients in Woody Debris and Forest Floor , 1984 .

[49]  D. Peterson,et al.  Mixed Conifer Forests of the Sierra Nevada , 1992 .

[50]  David R. Anderson,et al.  Multimodel Inference , 2004 .

[51]  S. Loeb.  Responses of small mammals to coarse woody debris in a southeastern pine forest , 1999 .

[52]  Peter Z. Fulé,et al.  Measuring forest restoration effectiveness in reducing hazardous fuels , 2001 .

[53]  Margaret M. Moore,et al.  Southwestern Ponderosa Forest Structure: Changes Since Euro-American Settlement , 1994, Journal of Forestry.

[54]  Philip N. Omi,et al.  Performance of Fuel Treatments Subjected to Wildfires , 2003 .

[55]  Suzanne M. Wilson,et al.  Legacy retention versus thinning: Influences on small mammals , 2000 .

[56]  G. Seber.  The estimation of animal abundance and related parameters , 1974 .

[57]  C. M. Cowell.  Historical Change in Vegetation and Disturbance on the Georgia Piedmont , 1998 .

[58]  Peter Z. Fulé,et al.  Restoring Ecosystem Health in Ponderosa Pine Forests of the Southwest , 1997, Journal of Forestry.

[59]  M Dodge,et al.  Forest fuel accumulation--a growing problem. , 1972, Science.

[60]  J. S. Gashwiler.  Further Study of Conifer Seed Survival in a Western Oregon Clearcut , 1970 .

[61]  L. Tevis.  Effect of a Slash Burn on Forest Mice , 1956 .

[62]  Carl J. Walters,et al.  Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources , 1986 .

[63]  Philip N. Omi,et al.  Effect of thinning and prescribed burning on crown fire severity in ponderosa pine forests , 2002 .