Conservation Evidence strives to be as useful to conservationists as possible. Please take our survey to help the team improve our resource.

Providing evidence to improve practice

Individual study: Use of artificially created snags by cavity-nesting birds in Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii forest in the Coast Range, Oregon, USA

Published source details

Walter S.T. & Maguire C.C. (2005) Snags, cavity-nesting birds, and silvicultural treatments in western Oregon. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 69, 1578-1591


This study is summarised as evidence for the intervention(s) shown on the right. The icon shows which synopsis it is relevant to.

Use ring-barking (girdling), cutting or silvicides to produce snags Bird Conservation

A replicated study in 30 Douglas-fir stands in the Coast Range of Oregon, USA (Walter & Maguire 2005), found that 11 cavity-nesting species of bird used artificially-created snags for nesting or foraging, with 20% of 839 snags being used for nesting and 88% containing cavities. Significantly more snags were used in clearcut stands (with some trees retained) compared to stands managed with group selection cuts. Clearcut stands had significantly higher species richness and abundance of cavity-nesting species. Nest numbers were similar between snags clustered close together and those more widely spaced.

 

Use selective harvesting/logging instead of clearcutting Bird Conservation

A replicated study in 2001 in 30 Douglas-fir Pseudotsuga menziesii stands in the Coast Range of Oregon, USA (Walter & Maguire 2005), found that stands managed with group selection cuts had lower species richness of cavity-nesting birds using artificially-created snags and fewer nesting birds than clearcut stands with trees retained. This study is discussed in detail in ‘Provide deadwood/snags in forests’.