Study

Invertebrate response to snow goose herbivory on moist-soil vegetation

  • Published source details Sherfy M.H. & Kirkpatrick R.L. (2003) Invertebrate response to snow goose herbivory on moist-soil vegetation. Wetlands, 23, 236-249.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Exclude wild vertebrates: freshwater marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation

Exclude wild vertebrates: brackish/salt marshes

Action Link
Marsh and Swamp Conservation
  1. Exclude wild vertebrates: freshwater marshes

    A replicated, paired, controlled study in 1996–1997 in four freshwater and brackish marshes in Delaware, USA (Sherfy & Kirkpatrick 2003) reported that plots fenced to exclude snow geese Chen caerulescens had greater vegetation cover (15–57%) than plots grazed by geese (<1–11%). Statistical significance was not assessed. Methods: In September–October 1996, sixteen goose exclosures were established across four impounded marshes with fresh or “slightly” brackish water. The study does not separate results for each marsh type. There were four exclosures/marsh. Exclosures were 1.2 x 1.2 m, fenced with 1.5 x 1.5 cm plastic mesh and topped with bright plastic strips to prevent snow geese from landing. Over winter 1996/1997, total vegetation cover was estimated in the 16 exclosures and 16 adjacent plots open to, and grazed by, snow geese.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

  2. Exclude wild vertebrates: brackish/salt marshes

    A replicated, paired, controlled study in 1996–1997 in four brackish and freshwater marshes in Delaware, USA (Sherfy & Kirkpatrick 2003) reported that plots fenced to exclude snow geese Chen caerulescens had greater vegetation cover (15–57%) than plots grazed by geese (<1–11%). Statistical significance was not assessed. Methods: In September–October 1996, sixteen goose exclosures were established across four impounded marshes with “slightly” brackish or fresh water. The study does not separate results for each marsh type. There were four exclosures/marsh. Exclosures were 1.2 x 1.2 m, fenced with 1.5 x 1.5 cm plastic mesh and topped with bright plastic strips to prevent snow geese from landing. Over winter 1996/1997, total vegetation cover was estimated in the 16 exclosures and 16 adjacent plots open to, and grazed by, snow geese.

    (Summarised by: Nigel Taylor)

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 19

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