Tamm review: Terrestrial vertebrate biodiversity and intensive forest management in the U.S.

Abstract

In the United States, intensively managed forests (IFM) comprise approximately 9% (27.9 million ha) of total forest area. These forests are primarily in highly productive areas and are managed primarily for wood and fiber production. Intensively managed forests provide both opportunities and constraints for conservation of vertebrate biodiversity. However, because a comprehensive review of these opportunities and limitations within the U.S. is lacking, we reviewed effects of typical silvicultural management regimes within IFM on terrestrial vertebrate species. The typical silvicultural regime in IFM includes practices associated with establishing forest management units (stands), weed control, intermediate thinning, and final harvest. Effects of IFM on vertebrate diversity are indirect through habitat modification. Terrestrial vertebrate responses to IFM are species-specific and directly linked to intensity and extent of habitat modification. Shorter crop tree rotations compress successional stages and limit development and recruitment of mature forest structures (e.g., snags, den/roost trees, coarse woody debris). During stand establishment, increased intensification of site preparation and weed control tends to result in lower vertebrate diversity. Generally, vertebrate

Differential responses of amphibian and reptile assemblages to size of riparian buffers within managed forests

“…These results are particularly significant given that protected areas are likely to become increasingly limited and underscore the value of managed forests in conserving biodiversity (Demarais et al. ).…”

“…Taken together, our results indicate that SMZs surrounding small first-order streams within our sample of sites in intensively managed forests not only protect water quality (Aust and Blinn 2004), but also support diverse amphibian and reptile communities. These results are particularly significant given that protected areas are likely to become increasingly limited and underscore the value of managed forests in conserving biodiversity (Demarais et al 2017).…”

Herbicides and herbivory interact to drive plant community and crop‐tree establishment

“…, Demarais et al. ). In the Pacific Northwest, United States, intensively managed plantations are common (>2.5 million ha) throughout industrial forest lands of the Coast Range and Cascade Foothills Ecoregions, which constitute some of the most productive forest ecosystems in the world (Van Tuyl et al.…”

“…Intensive forest management practices (IFM) include clear-cutting of crop trees, followed by vegetation management (e.g., silvicultural herbicide treatments) and dense plantings of nursery stock tree seedlings (Wagner et al 2006, Maguire et al 2009, Demarais et al 2017). In the Pacific Northwest, United States, intensively managed plantations are common (>2.5 million ha) throughout industrial forest lands of the Coast Range and Cascade Foothills Ecoregions, which constitute some of the most productive forest ecosystems in the world (Van Tuyl et al 2005, Spies et al 2007, Donnegan et al 2008).…”

Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) Intercropping within Managed Loblolly Pine (Pinus taeda) Does Not Affect Wild Bee Communities

“…Alternatively, species diversity of birds was only slightly lower in managed pine forests in New Zealand [14] and invertebrate communities were fairly similar in managed forests compared to natural woodlands in Great Britain [15]. Overall, scientific literature shows conflicting evidence how overall biodiversity changes between managed forests and natural forests [13,16,17]. Although switchgrass and pine are wind-pollinated crops and these species would not contribute greatly to diets of foraging pollinators, managed forests can provide nesting habitat and other structure needed by native bees and beneficial insects [18].…”