Study

Effects of ungulate herbivory on aspen, cottonwood, and willow development under forest fuels treatment regimes

  • Published source details Endress B.A., Wisdom M.J., Vavra M., Parks C.G., Dick B.L., Naylor B.J. & Boyd J.M. (2012) Effects of ungulate herbivory on aspen, cottonwood, and willow development under forest fuels treatment regimes. Forest ecology and management, 276, 33-40

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Use thinning followed by prescribed fire

Action Link
Forest Conservation

Use wire fencing to exclude large native herbivores

Action Link
Forest Conservation
  1. Use thinning followed by prescribed fire

    A replicated, controlled study in 2000-2007 in temperate conifer forest in Oregon USA (Endress et al. 2012) found that mechanical thinning followed by prescribed burning increased the density of deciduous tree species. The density of deciduous species (trees/ha) was higher in thinned and burned (84) than untreated plots (20). Two 1 ha plots were established in each of three thinned and burned sites (mechanical thinning followed by prescribed burning between 2000 and 2003) and three untreated sites. Data were collected from 2005 to 2007.

     

  2. Use wire fencing to exclude large native herbivores

    A replicated, controlled study in 2000-2007 in temperate conifer forest in Oregon, USA (Endress et al. 2012) found that excluding grazing herbivores increased the density of tree species. The combined density of Populus spp. and willows Salix spp. was higher in herbivore exclusion (212 trees/ha) than in unfenced plots (66). The density of the most common species, cottonwood P. trichocarpa was 122 trees/ha in herbivore exclusion and 24 trees/ha in unfenced plots. Two 1 ha plots, one in an area with grazing by cattle Bos taurus, elk Cervus elaphus, and mule deer Odocoileus hemionus and one fenced herbivore -exclusion area were established in each of six sites. Data were collected from 2005 to 2007.

     

Output references

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, terrestrial 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 18

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 Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust