Action Synopsis: Bird Conservation About Actions

Clearcut and re-seed forests

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
  • Certainty
  • Harms

Study locations

Key messages

  • One of two replicated studies from the USA found similar bird densities in clearcut and re-seeded sites as in sites under other managements.
  • A replicated study from the USA found that pine stands replanted with native pines held more scrub-sucessional species than stands managed with tree thinning, midstory tree removal and burning.


About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A replicated study in 1991 in Ocala National Forest, an area of sand pine Pinus clausa scrub in Florida, USA (Greenberg et al. 1995), found similar densities and species richness of birds in areas that were clearcut and ‘brake-seeded’ (i.e. direct seeding on to small, machine-made mounds), compared with areas that were burned, or were clearcut with the understorey also mown.  Results were similar for the breeding season (389 birds/km2 and five species for clearcut and re seeded areas vs. 581 birds/km², six species for clearcut and mown; 389 birds/km², five species for burned) and winter (894 birds/km2 and 11 species for clearcut and re seeded areas vs. 594 birds/km², ten species for clearcut and mown; 531 birds/km², 12 species for burned). Shrub-nesting species were most abundant in mown plots. In summer, the threatened Florida scrub-jay Aphelocoma coerulescens was evenly distributed across plots, in winter it was found only in re-seeded plots. All management occurred 5-7 years before the study in 1991.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A replicated study in 1995-1996 in pine Pinus spp. savanna in South Carolina, USA (Krementz & Christie 1999), found that stands managed for red-cockaded woodpeckers Picoides borealis held fewer scrub-successional species than stands where non-native pines were removed and replanted with longleaf pines Pinus palustris (31-36 species in managed stands vs. 54-55 in replanted stands). However, no differences in survival rates were apparent for Bachman\'s sparrow Aimophila aestivalis (a near-threatened species), indigo bunting Passerina cyanea, and combined scrub-successional birds between stand types. Management for woodpeckers involved tree thinning, midstory tree removal and burning.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Williams, D.R., Child, M.F., Dicks, L.V., Ockendon, N., Pople, R.G., Showler, D.A., Walsh, J.C., zu Ermgassen, E.K.H.J. & Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Bird Conservation. Pages 137-281 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.


Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Bird Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Bird Conservation
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust