Study

Effects of experimental forest management on density and nesting success of bird species in Missouri Ozark forests

  • Published source details Gram W.K., Porneluzi P.A., Clawson R.L. & Richter S.C. (2003) Effects of experimental forest management on density and nesting success of bird species in Missouri Ozark forests. Conservation Biology, 17, 1324-1337.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use selective harvesting/logging instead of clearcutting

Action Link
Bird Conservation

Clear or open patches in forests

Action Link
Bird Conservation
  1. Use selective harvesting/logging instead of clearcutting

    In oak-hickory forest in the Missouri Ozarks, USA, in 1991-2000, a replicated, randomised, controlled study (Gram et al. 2003) found no consistent differences in bird community responses to even- (i.e. clearcutting) and uneven-aged (i.e. selection cutting) management. However, some mature-forest species, such as overbirds Seiurus aurocapillus were less common on even-aged sites, whilst some early-successional species were more common on these sites. This study is discussed in more detail in ‘Clear or open patches in forests’.

     

  2. Clear or open patches in forests

    In oak-hickory forest in the Missouri Ozarks, USA, in 1991-2000, a replicated, randomised, controlled study (Gram et al. 2003) found that early successional species increased in response to even- (i.e. clearcutting) and uneven-aged (i.e. selection cutting) management, whereas mature forest species declined. Mature forest bird abundance declined as trees were removed, with harvest disturbance affecting densities of some species in adjacent forest for three years or more. Nest success (average of 29% for all species) did not change after treatment. Each of nine sites was randomly assigned even- or uneven-aged treatment (undertaken May 1996 to May 1997) with a patch of about 10% of each site left uncut. The two treatments are compared in ‘Use selective harvesting/logging instead of clearcutting’.

     

Output references
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