Study

Effects of forest management on amphibians and reptiles in Missouri Ozark forests

  • Published source details Renken R.B., Gram W.K., Fantz D.K., Richter S.C., Miller T.J., Ricke K.B., Russell B. & Wang X. (2004) Effects of forest management on amphibians and reptiles in Missouri Ozark forests. Conservation Biology, 18, 174-188.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use selective logging

Action Link
Reptile Conservation

Harvest groups of trees instead of clearcutting

Action Link
Amphibian Conservation
  1. Use selective logging

    A replicated, randomized, controlled, before-and-after study in 1992–2000 in oak-pine and oak-hickory forest in Missouri, USA (Renken et al. 2004) found that there was no difference in reptile abundance between sites with small group or single tree selection harvesting and those with combined clearcutting and thinning, although four of six species of reptiles increased in abundance in clearcut and thinned sites after management began. Overall, abundances of six reptile species were similar between small group or single tree selection harvesting and clearcutting with thinning and unmanaged sites (results reported as statistical model outputs). Abundances of four of six species increased after clearcutting and thinning took place compared to before management (see original paper for details). Nine sites (312–514 ha) were randomly assigned to treatments: small group or single tree selection harvesting (5% area; uneven-aged management), clearcutting in 3–13 ha blocks (10–15% total area) with forest thinning (even-aged), or no management (3 sites/treatment). Harvesting was in May 1996 and 1997. Twelve drift-fence arrays with pitfall and funnel traps were established/site. Traps were checked every 3–5 days in spring and autumn 1992–1995 (before management) and 1997–2000 (after management).

    (Summarised by: Maggie Watson, Katie Sainsbury)

  2. Harvest groups of trees instead of clearcutting

    A randomized, replicated, controlled, before-and-after study in 1992–2000 of oak-pine and oak-hickory forest in Missouri, USA (Renken et al. 2004) found that there was no significant difference in amphibian abundance between sites with small group or single tree selection harvesting and those with clearcutting. Abundance of species declined after harvest but also declined on unharvested sites. Nine sites (312–514 ha) were randomly assigned to treatments: small group or single tree selection harvesting (5% area; uneven-aged management), clearcutting in 3–13 ha blocks (10–15% total area) with forest thinning (even-aged), or unharvested controls. Harvesting was in May 1996 and 1997. Twelve drift-fence arrays with pitfall and funnel traps were established/plot. Traps were checked every 3–5 days in spring and autumn 1992–1995 and 1997–2000.

     

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