Study

Long-term responses of mammalian herbivores to stand thinning and fertilization in young lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) forest

  • Published source details Sullivan T.P., Sullivan D.S., Lindgren P.M.F. & Ransome D.B. (2010) Long-term responses of mammalian herbivores to stand thinning and fertilization in young lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta var. latifolia) forest. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 40, 2302-2312.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Apply fertilizer to trees

Action Link
Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

Thin trees within forest

Action Link
Terrestrial Mammal Conservation
  1. Apply fertilizer to trees

    A replicated, site comparison study in 2003–2008 of two lodgepole pine Pinus contorta forests in British Colombia, Canada (Sullivan et al. 2010; same experimental set-up as Sulliavn et al. 2006 and Sulliavn et al. 2006) found that repeated fertilization of thinned forest stands did not increase their use by snowshoe hares Lepus americanus, mule deer Odocoileus hemionus or moose Alces alces. Hare faecal pellet density and mule deer and moose pellet-group density did not differ between fertilized and unfertilized stands (data not presented). Naturally regenerated young lodgepole pine stands were studied at two sites. At each site, two stands were thinned, in 1993, to each of 2,000, 1,000, 500 and 250 stems/ha. Treatment stands were fertilized five times, in 1994–2003, using fertilizer blends which included 100–200 kg nitrogen/ha. Control stands were not fertilized. Mammal faecal pellets and pellet-groups were surveyed in 5-m2 plots (55–145 plots/stand). Plots were cleared of pellets in autumn 2003. New pellets and pellet-groups were counted in spring 2008.

    (Summarised by: Nick Littlewood)

  2. Thin trees within forest

    A replicated, controlled study in 2003–2008 of four lodgepole pine Pinus contorta forests in British Colombia, Canada (Sullivan et al. 2010) found that thinning did not increase forest stand use by snowshoe hares Lepus americanus, mule deer Odocoileus hemionus or moose Alces alces, relative to unthinned stands, 15–20 years after thinning. Hare faecal pellet density did not differ significantly between low (26,000 pellets/ha), medium (25,000 pellets/ha) or high (49,000 pellets/ha) density thinning or unthinned forest (106,000 pellets/ha). Similarly, there were no significant differences between treatments for mule deer (low: 495 pellet-groups/ha; medium: 500; high: 447; unthinned: 195) or moose (low: 190 pellet-groups/ha; medium: 88; high: 131; unthinned: 71). Naturally regenerated young lodgepole pine stands were studied at four sites. Stands were thinned, in 1988–1993, to target densities of 500 (low), 1,000 (medium) and 2,000 (high) stems/ha. Unthinned stands had >3,000 stems/ha. Mammal faecal pellets and pellet-groups were surveyed in 5-m2 plots (55–145 plots/stand). Plots were cleared of pellets in autumn 2003. New pellets and pellet-groups were counted in spring 2008.

    (Summarised by: Nick Littlewood)

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