Nutritional deposition by nesting Loggerhead sea turtles enhances dune resili...
snag presentation August 2012 ESA
1. Experimental effects of structural
enrichment on avian nest survival in a
managed forest landscape
Matt Hane1, AJ Kroll1, Josh Johnson1, Mike Rochelle1 and
Ed Arnett2
1Weyerhaeuser Timberlands Research
2Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership
2. 2
CREATION OF SNAG HABITAT FROM EXISTING
LIVE TREES CAN BE DONE
• Background
• Study Design
• Results
• Final Thoughts
3. 3
BACKGROUND
• Transition from old forests
to intensively-managed
stands
• Deficiencies in snag
numbers and types
• How will adequate types
and numbers of snags be
maintained in upland
areas?
We emphasize that the complete
ecological role of snags in the
forest is still unknown; therefore,
management strategies involving
the snag resource must be flexible.
--Cline et al. (1980: 785)
5. 5
BACKGROUND
• Harvest units
o Naturally regenerated 2nd growth Douglas fir stands
o All units were harvested with ground-based
systems
o Harvester cut off tree at the highest point it could
reach
• Treatments
o Density: 0.5, 1.2, and 2.5 snags/ha
o Clustered (5-6 trees) vs. uniformly distributed
7. 7
STUDY DESIGN
• 2008 through 2010
• Determine rate of avian
nest survival in snags
created from
merchantable 2nd growth
8. 8
STUDY DESIGN
• Two stage modeling process
o1st temporal variation
date, date^2, stage, date*stage, constant, global
o2ndexperimental design
year, treatment, density, dispersion, density*dispersion,
• Logistic exposure method
Shaffer, Terry L. (2004) A unified approach to analyzing
nest success. Auk, 121, 526-540.
9. 9
RESULTS – Expected
"Industrial tree farms are sterile and lifeless, this
particular method is incredibly ecologically
destructive."
Juliette Beck, coordinator of the Sierra Club's Stop Clearcutting Campaign,
as quoted in the San Francisco Bay Guardian Online November 9, 2011
10. 10
RESULTS – Expected
Primary cavity excavators
Chestnut-back chickadee
Downy woodpecker
Hairy woodpecker
Northern flicker
Pileated woodpecker
Red-breasted nuthatch
Red- breasted sapsucker
Walter & Maguire (2005) Snags, cavity nesting birds, and silvicultural
treatments in western Oregon. Journal of Wildlife Management, 69,
1578-1591
Secondary cavity excavators
Brown creeper
European starling
House wren
Violet-green swallow
13. 13
RESULTS Chestnut-backed chickadee
• Our Study
o Apparent nest success 65%
o Average daily survival 0.989
95%CL: 0.965-0.996
• Other Studies
o Mahon & Martin (2006) 49%
o Sperry et. al. (2008) 0.976 & 0.984
95%CL: 0.925-0.996
14. 14
RESULTS Chestnut-backed chickadee
Low density
Medium density
High density
L
M
H
L
M
H
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
2008 2009 2010
Year
Period Survival Rates
15. 15
RESULTS House wren
• Our Study
o Apparent nest success 78%
o Period survival rate 0.72 95%CL: 0.52, 0.85
• Other studies
o Period survival rate
• Cavities 0.63 – 0.75
• Boxes 0.83
16. 16
RESULTS Northern flicker
• Our Study
o Apparent nest success 63.5%
o Period survival rate 0.60 95%CL: 0.46, 0.71
• Other studies
o Apparent nest success
cavities and boxes 41% -100 %
o Period survival rate 0.41 – 0.80
17. 17
RESULTS Purple martin
• Our Study
o Apparent nest success 65%
o Period survival rate 0.70 95%CL: 0.48, 0.84
• Other studies
o Nest box success 38.5% - 84.3%
18. 18
• Leaving created snags at a density
of 0.5/ha retains some cavity-
nesting bird species
o Up to years 12-15…
• Benefits restricted by rotation age
o Snags must be created from
trees growing in unit
o Suitability is also dependent on
stand conditions (e.g., site index)
and landscape context
• Different strategies are required to
provide tall snags
• Other taxa besides birds?
FINAL THOUGHTS
19. 19
FINAL THOUGHTS
• Ed Arnett
• Weyerhaeuser
o South Valley Operations
for creating units and
snags
o Supporting research
• Oregon Forest Industries
Council (OFIC)
• Field crews 2008-2010
Acknowledgements
Think we should include sales expense as % revenue and G&A also as % revenue for each year. - DONE
For timberlands…believe we want to show total revenue including interco – otherwise rest of #s will be odd. Agree. Is that not correct on how the description is included above?
And what is the right answer for Distrib and ELP? Same – sales including interco? - I would expect iLevel will want to show this info for 4 businesses within iLevel as per the change Larry implemented this year. Intercompany sales between ELP and distribution will be included.
What’s your logic for 2014 v. 2012 % change for cost of sales numbers – what would that show? I am not sure we want that number, rather see GM only. – Based on our discussion this was the CAGR calculation. I thought you were interested in seeing that. It highlights the change in each area. It is easy to drop if not needed.
