Demonstration of a multi‐species, multi‐response state‐and‐transition model approach for wildlife management

Abstract

Land management agencies have collaborated to standardize assessments of rangeland health.These assessments incorporate state-and-transition concepts of ecosystem function using ecological site descriptions (ESDs) initially developed to provide information on the soil, topography, climate, and vegetation at areas of interest. Combined, ESDs and state-and-transition models (STMs) describe existing and potential plant community dynamics. Unlike previous methods used to assess rangeland health, STMs take into account that multiple states exist in space and time across sites and that reversible and directional changes in vegetation can occur in response to factors such as fire, erosion, weather, and management activities. Wildlife responses are seldom incorporated into this framework. However, combining STMs, ESDs, and species-specific habitat use and demographic data could provide land managers with tools that classify current ecosystem conditions, predict vegetative change, and inform management for maintaining or improving key habitat features for species of interest. To demonstrate a multi-species, multi-response STM approach for wildlife management, we quantified vegetation structure and composition as a function of time since prescribed burning and wildfire in four geographically distinct study areas. We found no significant differences in the topographic or vegetative characteristics of ecological sites within our study areas. Thus, we visualized habitat use and demographic data for our two avian study species, the golden-cheeked warbler (Setophaga chrysoparia) and the black-capped vireo (Vireo atricapilla), along with plant community transformations, in a single STM per study area. Our research demonstrates how STMs could be operationalized for wildlife management in such a way that accounts for co-occurring species with contrasting habitat requirements. In addition, our approach further illustrates how STMs could provide land managers with guidance to minimize the negative effects or enhance the positive effects of disturbance and management activities on wildlife.

Can fire‐age mosaics really deal with conflicting needs of species? A study using population hotspots of multiple threatened birds

“…in the eastern part of the study area) could generate population hotspots for the red‐lored whistler and Mallee striated grasswren after 5 years but could remove existing hotspots for the Mallee emu‐wren for up to 30 years. This creates conflicting fire‐management priorities for managers aiming to promote population hotspots of all three study species (Long et al, 2021). Deciding between alternative options is further complicated by the fact that our models assume a predictable recovery of vegetation and bird populations after fire (Bradstock et al, 2005; Tingley et al, 2016).…”

“…To deliver the desired mix of post‐fire successional states, managers may burn vegetation to create habitat for early‐ and mid‐successional species (e.g. Florida Scrub‐jay—Suazo et al, 2009, Black‐capped Vireo—Long et al, 2021) and/or undertake fire suppression activities (e.g. direct attack, strategic breaks) to promote habitat for mid‐ and late‐successional species (e.g.…”

“…In landscapes that are managed for multiple species, the desired mix of post‐fire successional states is often guided by the needs of fire‐sensitive and threatened species because these species are likely to suffer the most from inappropriate fire regimes (Kelly et al, 2017; Suazo et al, 2009). However, it is often the case that multiple fire‐sensitive and threatened species have differing post‐fire requirements in the same region, reserve and type of vegetation (Long et al, 2021). This creates a challenge for fire managers aiming to promote populations of multiple species with contrasting responses to fire.…”

“…This challenge is illustrated by the Golden‐cheeked Warbler and the Black‐capped Vireo in their shared breeding range in south‐central United States (Sarkar, 2011). Fire‐management in reserves established for the benefit of these species remains complex due to differences in the post‐fire needs of these two species (Long et al, 2021; Sarkar, 2011).…”

“…direct attack, strategic breaks) to promote habitat for mid‐ and late‐successional species (e.g. Northen Spotted Owl—Stephens et al, 2019, Golden‐cheeked Warbler—Long et al, 2021).…”