Snowshoe Hare Cover Relationships in Northern Utah

Wolfe, Michael L.; DeByle, Norbert V.; Winchell, Clark S.; McCabe, Thomas R.

doi:10.2307/3808557

Cited by 44 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The finding that tree stem density was not an important Snowshoe Hare habitat variable in the studied vegetation chronosequence is contrary to other studies (Wolfe et al 1982;Pietz and Tester 1983;de Bellefeuille et al 2001;Jacqmain et al 2007). This result occurred with or without regression variables normalized and/or standardized.…”

contrasting

confidence: 99%

“…Stand characteristics, such as shrub cover and tree stem density, have been traditionally recognized as important habitat variables for the Snowshoe Hare (e.g., Wolfe et al 1982;Pietz and Tester 1983;Litvatis et al 1985;Ferron and Ouellet 1992;de Bellefeuille et al 2001;Jacqmain et al 2007), but the depth of deadfall less so. Deadfall above the forest floor likely serves as hiding cover (Hodges 1998;Andruskiw 2003;Berg et al 2012), possibly as thermal cover in winter (Conroy et al 1979;Roy et al 1995), and likely facilitates safer movement by Snowshoe Hares through the local vegetation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From these studies, it is clear that Snowshoe Hare prefer tall dense shrubby vegetation, with or without a tree overstory (e.g., Litvatis et al 1985;St-Georges et al 1995;Hodges 2000). Greater site use occurs when the shrub stratum is 1-4 m tall with >4000 stems/ha (Wolfe et al 1982;Pietz and Tester 1983;de Bellefeuille et al 2001;Jacqmain et al 2007) and forage is within 3 m of the ground surface, when overhead and lateral vegetation cover ≤2.5 m tall exceeds 60-70% in summer (Litvatis et al 1985;Ferron and Ouellet 1992;de Bellefeuille et al 2001), and when overhead cover is >40% in winter (Wolfe et al 1982). Stand structure and adequate cover are often more important than either the species composition or an immediately available food supply (Litvatis et al 1985;Ferron and Ouellet 1992).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Stand-level Attributes of Snowshoe Hare (Lepus americanus) Habitat in a Post-Fire Trembling Aspen (Populus tremuloides) Chronosequence in Central Yukon

Strong¹,

Jung

2013

Can Field Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. Forty stand-level compositional and structural variables were assessed as possible predictors of Snowshoe Hare pellet densities. Multidimensional scaling was used to identify variables (n = 10) that were most strongly related to pellet densities and was followed by multiple regression. Canopy cover of Trembling Aspen <50 cm tall and Western White Spruce ≤1 m tall, and deadfall depth, in combination, were the best estimators of Snowshoe Hare pellet densities among stands in the chronosequence (P <0.001, 64.5% variance explained). Although Trembling Aspen <50 cm tall explained the most variance, its canopy cover did not exceed 10%. More Trembling Aspen cover <50 cm tall and greater deadfall depths within the chronosequence were associated with stands ≤20 years old. Peak Snowshoe Hare use occurred in early (≤20 years old) rather than mid-successional (21-120 years old) stands, contrary to use patterns reported elsewhere. The lack of tall understory shrubs likely limited the use of mid-successional stands.

show abstract

contrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stand-level Attributes of Snowshoe Hare (Lepus americanus) Habitat in a Post-Fire Trembling Aspen (Populus tremuloides) Chronosequence in Central Yukon

Strong¹,

Jung

2013

Can Field Nat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the Rocky Mountains, winter hare habitat is lacking in most pure aspen stands because of deep snowpacks. In northern Utah, Wolfe et al (1982) found 85% of winter use by hares was in vegetation types that had cover densities immediately above the snowpack of at least 40•‹/o. Sometimes aspen with a very dense understory of tall shrubs fits this criterion; but usually only conifers have this much cover in winter.…”

Section: Snowshoe Haresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Marginal habitat is provided with aspen and a dense understory of tall shrubs, if this understory is not covered with deep winter snowpacks. It is doubtful if even the peak density of aspen suckers and shrubs on most aspen clearcuts in the West provide adequate snowshoe hare habitat in winter (Wolfe et al 1982).…”

Section: Snowshoe Haresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aspen: Ecology and management in the western United States

DeByle¹,

Winokur²

1985

Self Cite

223

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Information about the biology, ecology, and management of quaking aspen on the mountains and plateaus of the interior western United States, and to a lesser extent, Canada, is summarized and discussed. The biology of aspen as a tree species, community relationships in the aspen ecosystem, environments, and factors affecting aspen forests are reviewed. The resources available within and from the aspen forest type, and their past and potential uses are examined. Silvicultural methods and other approaches to managing aspen for various resources and uses are presented.

show abstract

Can retention harvests help conserve wildlife? Evidence for vertebrates in the boreal forest

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Retention harvesting, or the approach of leaving live mature trees behind during forest harvest, is used in natural disturbance‐based management to mitigate the effects of logging on biodiversity. However, responses of many boreal vertebrates to variable retention harvesting are unknown. We investigated the influence of different retention levels in forest harvests on stand use by wildlife 15–18 yr post‐harvest using a combination of surveys of wildlife signs (scats, middens) and camera trapping. Site‐level measures of forest structure, including canopy cover, horizontal cover, tree height, tree diameter, basal area, cover of downed coarse woody material, and understory plant cover, were used to describe post‐harvest differences in habitats used by common wildlife species in northwest Alberta's boreal forest. Stand use of six species (black bear, coyote, fisher, red squirrel, wolverine, woodland caribou) increased with level of retention, while stand use of two species (grouse, snowshoe hare) declined with retention level. Retention level did not significantly affect stand use of five species (American marten, Canada lynx, deer, gray wolf, moose). Higher levels of retention characterized by greater canopy cover, basal area, and abundance of deadwood were associated with use of forest habitats by late‐seral species. Woodland caribou, a species of conservation concern, was detected only in harvested stands with at least 20% retention. Greater understory and horizontal cover characterized lower levels of retention being attractive for early‐seral species. These findings demonstrate the value of retention harvesting for conservation of wildlife species in boreal forest, while highlighting the challenge of managing forests for multiple species with different habitat preferences.

show abstract

Snowshoe Hare Cover Relationships in Northern Utah

Cited by 44 publications

References 10 publications

Stand-level Attributes of Snowshoe Hare (<em>Lepus americanus</em>) Habitat in a Post-Fire Trembling Aspen (<em>Populus tremuloides</em>) Chronosequence in Central Yukon

Stand-level Attributes of Snowshoe Hare (<em>Lepus americanus</em>) Habitat in a Post-Fire Trembling Aspen (<em>Populus tremuloides</em>) Chronosequence in Central Yukon

Aspen: Ecology and management in the western United States

Can retention harvests help conserve wildlife? Evidence for vertebrates in the boreal forest

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About