Response of breeding bird communities to forest harvest around seasonal ponds in northern forests, USA

We examined response of breeding bird communities to varying levels of timber harvest in and around 16-forested seasonal ponds in northern Minnesota, USA. This experimental study employed a before-after-control-impact design with three different harvest treatments. Treatments were assigned randomly (n = 4 ponds/treatment) and were applied within 17 m wide buffers outward from the ponds’ edge: clear-cut harvest (reduction of basal area to 0.05) in bird community composition around seasonal ponds versus nearby forest habitat, suggesting that seasonal ponds do not affect bird community structure in a mature forest setting at this scale. Overall bird numbers and species richness increased (P < 0.05) in all pond buffers compared to controls over the 4 years after harvest. Increases in bird numbers on treated versus control pond buffers were found across all migration and nesting guilds, and among the forest edge guild. Bird community species composition also changed within the treated versus control pond buffers after harvest. Differences in bird communities among treatments were small the first year after harvest, but continued to diverge from controls over the 4 years after harvest. Bird communities of the clear-cut treatment were most dissimilar to controls. Both the partial and no cut buffer bird communities were more similar to the control than the clear-cut treatment. Treated pond buffers had more birds associated with early successional habitat. In contrast, many interior forest-associated bird species did not occur in any of the buffers after harvest. We found no difference in breeding bird community composition between pond buffers and other residual patches left on harvested sites, but there was a significant difference between harvest treatments when we combined pond buffer and residual patch birds on each site. Early successional habitat-associated bird species were more abundant in residual patches on sites that had a clear-cut pond buffer and forest-associated species were more abundant in residual patches on sites with no cut pond buffers. Habitat for mature forest-associated bird species can be maintained on harvest sites by leaving no cut or partial cut buffers around seasonal ponds or in similar sized residual patches in other areas of the harvest. # 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

[1]  G. Aplet,et al.  Defining sustainable forestry , 1993 .

[2]  G. Oehlert,et al.  Residual Patches and their Contribution to Forest‐Bird Diversity on Northern Minnesota Aspen Clearcuts , 1998 .

[3]  C.J.F. ter Braak,et al.  CANOCO Reference Manual and User's Guide to Canoco for Windows: Software for Canonical Community Ordination (Version 4) , 1998 .

[4]  Aram J. K. Calhoun,et al.  An Evaluation of Vernal Pool Creation Projects in New England: Project Documentation from 1991–2000 , 2003, Environmental management.

[5]  D. W. Johnston,et al.  Ecology and conservation of neotropical migrant landbirds , 1992 .

[6]  M. Hunter,et al.  Reproduction of Amphibians in Natural and Anthropogenic Temporary Pools in Managed Forests , 2002, Forest Science.

[7]  D. Otis,et al.  Avian Communities and Habitat Relationships in South Carolina Piedmont Beaver Ponds , 1999 .

[8]  Jan Lepš,et al.  Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data , 2006 .

[9]  R. Baldwin.  Vernal Pools: Critical Habitat , 2005 .

[10]  Allan Stewart-Oaten,et al.  ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT: "PSEUDOREPLICATION" IN TIME?' , 1986 .

[11]  K. Solomon,et al.  Response of zooplankton communities to liquid creosote in freshwater microcosms , 2001, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[12]  Seth J. Wenger,et al.  A review of the scientific literature on riparian buffer width, extent and vegetation , 1999 .

[13]  S. Baird,et al.  The birds of North America , 1974 .

[14]  Southeastern Forest Experiment Station.  General technical report , 1985 .

[15]  Wallace P. Erickson,et al.  Analysis of count data from before-after control-impact studies , 2000 .

[16]  P. Chapman,et al.  Community level analysis of ecotoxicological field studies: I. Biological monitoring , 1999 .

[17]  A. Farmer,et al.  Habitat Suitability Index Models: Wood duck , 1983 .

[18]  P. Chapman,et al.  Community level analysis of ecotoxicological field studies: II. Replicated‐design studies , 1999 .

[19]  JoAnn M. Hanowski,et al.  Statistical Perspectives and Experimental Design When Counting Birds on Line Transects , 1990 .

[20]  Nicholas P. Danz,et al.  Breeding bird response to riparian forest harvest and harvest equipment , 2003 .

[21]  Paul J. Van den Brink,et al.  Principal response curves: Analysis of time‐dependent multivariate responses of biological community to stress , 1999 .

[22]  Nicholas P. Danz,et al.  BREEDING BIRD RESPONSE TO VARYING AMOUNTS OF BASAL AREA RETENTION IN RIPARIAN BUFFERS , 2005 .