Skip to main content

A review of management actions on insect pollinators on public lands in the United States

Abstract

Public lands face growing demands to provide ecosystem services, while protecting species of conservation concern, like insect pollinators. Insect pollinators are critical for the maintenance of biodiversity and ecosystem function, but it is unclear how management of public lands influence pollinator conservation. We found 63 studies investigating the effects of prescribed burning, logging, grazing, invasive species removal, revegetation with wildflower mixes, and hosting commercial pollinators, on native insect pollinators on natural and semi-natural ecosystems in the US and summarized the results across taxa and habitat types. Manual removal of invasive shrubs and revegetation with wildflower mixes had consistently positive effects on pollinators. Grazing had neutral effects on pollinators in the Great Plains, but negative effects elsewhere. Prescribed burning had neutral or positive effects for bees depending on the habitat type, with occasional negative effects on butterflies. Logging had neutral to positive effects that were more uniform across ecosystems and taxa than burning. Burning combined with logging benefited pollinators, even when burning or logging alone had no effects. Although poorly studied, hosting commercial pollinators may negatively affect wild bees through pathogen transmission and competition for floral resources. Despite the rapid accumulation of information on factors contributing to pollinator declines, the effects of management actions on pollinators remain understudied for many taxa and habitat types in the US. Improving our understanding of the effects of public land management on pollinators is essential to conserve ecosystem health and services required by society.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Data availability

Not applicable.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  • Adler LS, Barber NA, Biller OM, Irwin RE (2020) Flowering plant composition shapes pathogen infection intensity and reproduction in bumble bee colonies. Proc Natl Acad Sci 117:11559–11565

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson N, Harmon-Threatt A (2016) The effects of seed mix diversity on soil conditions and nesting of bees in prairie restorations. N Am Prairie Conf Proc 17:104–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Auerbach ES, Johnson WP, Smith JR, McIntyre NE (2019) Wildlife refuges support high bee diversity on the southern Great Plains. Environ Entomol 48:968–976

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartomeus I, Ascher JS, Gibbs J, Danforth BN, Wagner DL, Hedtke SM, Winfree R (2013) Historical changes in northeastern US bee pollinators related to shared ecological traits. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110:4656–4660

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barton LK, Menges ES (2018) Effects of fire and pollinator visitation on the reproductive success of Asimina reticulata (Annonaceae), the netted pawpaw. Castanea 83:323–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baskett CA, Emery SM, Rudgers JA (2011) Pollinator visits to threatened species are restored following invasive plant removal. Int J Plant Sci 172:411–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baxter-Gilbert JH, Riley JL, Neufeld CJ, Litzgus JD, Lesbarrères D (2015) Road mortality potentially responsible for billions of pollinating insect deaths annually. J Insect Conserv 19:1029–1035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bendel CR, Hovick TJ, Limb RF, Harmon JP (2018) Variation in grazing management practices supports diverse butterfly communities across grassland working landscapes. J Insect Conserv 22:99–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biella P, Akter A, Ollerton J, Tarrant S, Janeček Š, Jersáková J, Klecka J (2019) Experimental loss of generalist plants reveals alterations in plant-pollinator interactions and a constrained flexibility of foraging. Sci Rep 9:1–13

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaauw BR, Isaacs R (2014a) Flower plantings increase wild bee abundance and the pollination services provided to a pollination-dependent crop. J Appl Ecol 51:890–898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blaauw BR, Isaacs R (2014b) Larger patches of diverse floral resources increase insect pollinator density, diversity, and their pollination of native wildflowers. Basic Appl Ecol 15:701–711

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black SH, Shepherd M, Vaughan M (2011) Rangeland management for pollinators. Rangelands 33:9–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bommarco R, Biesmeijer JC, Meyer B, Potts SG, Pöyry J, Roberts SP, Steffan-Dewenter I, Öckinger E (2010) Dispersal capacity and diet breadth modify the response of wild bees to habitat loss. Proc R Soc B: Biol Sci 277:2075–2082

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breland S, Turley NE, Gibbs J, Isaacs R, Brudvig LA (2018) Restoration increases bee abundance and richness but not pollination in remnant and post-agricultural woodlands. Ecosphere 9:e02435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bried JT, Dillon AM (2012) Bee diversity in scrub oak patches two years after mow and herbicide treatment. Insect Conserv Divers 5:237–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckles BJ, Harmon-Threatt AN (2019) Bee diversity in tallgrass prairies affected by management and its effects on above-and below-ground resources. J Appl Ecol 56:2443–2453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkle LA, Runyon JB (2016) Drought and leaf herbivory influence floral volatiles and pollinator attraction. Glob Change Biol 22:1644–1654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkle LA, Marlin JC, Knight TM (2013) Plant-pollinator interactions over 120 years: loss of species, co-occurrence, and function. Science 339:1611–1615

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burkle LA, Delphia CM, O’Neill KM (2020) Redundancy in wildflower strip species helps support spatiotemporal variation in wild bee communities on diversified farms. Basic Appl Ecol 44:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron SA, Lim HC, Lozier JD, Duennes MA, Thorp R (2016) Test of the invasive pathogen hypothesis of bumble bee decline in North America. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 113:4386–4391

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell J, Hanula J, Waldrop T (2007) Effects of prescribed fire and fire surrogates on floral visiting insects of the blue ridge province in North Carolina. Biol Conserv 134:393–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell JW, Vigueira PA, Viguiera CC, Greenberg CH (2018) The effects of repeated prescribed fire and thinning on bees, wasps, and other flower visitors in the understory and midstory of a temperate forest in North Carolina. For Sci 64:299–306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cane JH, Love B (2016) Floral guilds of bees in sagebrush steppe: comparing bee usage of wildflowers available for postfire restoration. Nat Areas J 36:377–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carbone LM, Tavella J, Pausas JG, Aguilar R (2019) A global synthesis of fire effects on pollinators. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 28:1487–1498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cariveau DP, Norton AP (2014) Direct effects of a biocontrol agent are greater than indirect effects through flower visitors for the alien plant Dalmatian toadflax (Linaria dalmatica: Scrophulariaceae). Biol Invasions 16:1951–1960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charlebois JA, Sargent RD (2017) No consistent pollinator-mediated impacts of alien plants on natives. Ecol Lett 20:1479–1490

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung YA, Burkle LA, Knight TM (2014) Minimal effects of an invasive flowering shrub on the pollinator community of native forbs. PLoS ONE 9:e109088

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cole LJ, Brocklehurst S, Robertson D, Harrison W, McCracken DI (2015) Riparian buffer strips: their role in the conservation of insect pollinators in intensive grassland systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 211:207–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis SC, Burkle LA, Cross WF, Cutting KA (2014) The effects of timing of grazing on plant and arthropod communities in high-elevation grasslands. PLoS ONE 9:e110460

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davis TS, Rhoades PR, Mann AJ, Griswold T (2020) Bark beetle outbreak enhances biodiversity and foraging habitat of native bees in alpine landscapes of the southern Rocky Mountains. Sci Rep 10:1–14

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Debano SJ (2006) Effects of livestock grazing on aboveground insect communities in semi-arid grasslands of southeastern Arizona. Biodivers Conserv 15:2547–2564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeBano SJ, Roof SM, Rowland MM, Smith LA (2016) Diet overlap of mammalian herbivores and native bees: implications for managing co-occurring grazers and pollinators. Nat Areas J 36:458–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debinski DM (1994) Genetic diversity assessment in a metapopulation of the butterfly Euphydryas gillettii. Biol Conserv 70:25–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Debinski DM, Moranz RA, Delaney JT, Miller JR, Engle DM, Winkler LB, McGranahan DA, Barney RJ, Trager JC, Stephenson AL (2011) A cross-taxonomic comparison of insect responses to grassland management and land-use legacies. Ecosphere 2:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Decker BL, Harmon-Threatt AN (2019) Growing or dormant season burns: the effects of burn season on bee and plant communities. Biodivers Conserv 28:3621–3631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn L, Lequerica M, Reid CR, Latty T (2020) Dual ecosystem services of syrphid flies (Diptera: Syrphidae): pollinators and biological control agents. Pest Manag Sci 76:1973–1979

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elmer A, Lane J, Summerville KS, Lown L (2012) Does low-density grazing affect butterfly (Lepidoptera) colonization of a previously flooded tallgrass prairie reconstruction? Great Lakes Entomol 45:69–78

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler AK, Landis DA, Arduser M (2012) Rapid shift in pollinator communities following invasive species removal. Restor Ecol 20:593–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitch G, Vaidya C (2021) Roads pose a significant barrier to bee movement, mediated by road size, traffic and bee identity. J Appl Ecol 58:1177–1186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman E (2000) Monitoring the response of butterfly communities to prescribed fire. Environ Manag 26:685–695

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foote GG, Foote NE, Runyon JB, Ross DW, Fettig CJ (2020) Changes in the summer wild bee community following a bark beetle outbreak in a Douglas-fir forest. Environ Entomol 49:1437–1448

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith SM, Cane JH, Moldenke AR, Rivers JW (2019) Salvage logging reduces wild bee diversity, but not abundance, in severely burned mixed-conifer forest. For Ecol Manag 453:117622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galea MB, Wojcik V, Dunn C (2016) Using pollinator seed mixes in landscape restoration boosts bee visitation and reproduction in the rare local endemic Santa Susana tarweed, Deinandra minthornii. Nat Areas J 36:512–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gan J, Smith C (2006) Availability of logging residues and potential for electricity production and carbon displacement in the USA. Biomass Bioenergy 30:1011–1020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giacomini JJ, Leslie J, Tarpy DR, Palmer-Young EC, Irwin RE, Adler LS (2018) Medicinal value of sunflower pollen against bee pathogens. Sci Rep 8:1–10

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glenny W, Runyon J, Burkle L (2022) Assessing pollinator friendliness of plants and designing mixes to restore habitat for bees. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-429.US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, p 54. https://doi.org/10.2737/RMRS-GTR-429

  • Goodell K, Parker IM (2017) Invasion of a dominant floral resource: effects on the floral community and pollination of native plants. Ecology 98:57–69

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulson D, Nicholls E, Botías C, Rotheray EL (2015) Bee declines driven by combined stress from parasites, pesticides, and lack of flowers. Science 347: 1255957.

  • Graves TA, Janousek WM, Gaulke SM, Nicholas AC, Keinath DA, Bell CM, Cannings S, Hatfield RG, Heron JM, Koch JB (2020) Western bumble bee: declines in the continental United States and range-wide information gaps. Ecosphere 11:e03141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin SR, Bruninga-Socolar B, Gibbs J (2021) Bee communities in restored prairies are structured by landscape and management, not local floral resources. Basic Appl Ecol 50:144–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grozinger CM, Flenniken ML (2019) Bee viruses: ecology, pathogenicity, and impacts. Annu Rev Entomol 64:205–226

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grundel R, Jean RP, Frohnapple KJ, Glowacki GA, Scott PE, Pavlovic NB (2010) Floral and nesting resources, habitat structure, and fire influence bee distribution across an open-forest gradient. Ecol Appl 20:1678–1692

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallmann CA, Sorg M, Jongejans E, Siepel H, Hofland N, Schwan H, Stenmans W, Müller A, Sumser H, Hörren T (2017) More than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas. PLoS ONE 12:e0185809

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hanula JL, Horn S (2011) Removing an exotic shrub from riparian forests increases butterfly abundance and diversity. For Ecol Manag 262:674–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanula JL, Ulyshen MD, Horn S (2016) Conserving pollinators in North American forests: a review. Nat Areas J 36:427–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harmon-Threatt A (2020) Influence of nesting characteristics on health of wild bee communities. Annu Rev Entomol 65:39–56

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harmon-Threatt A, Chin K (2016) Common methods for tallgrass prairie restoration and their potential effects on bee diversity. Nat Areas J 36:400–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harmon-Threatt AN, Hendrix SD (2015) Prairie restorations and bees: the potential ability of seed mixes to foster native bee communities. Basic Appl Ecol 16:64–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatfield RG, LeBuhn G (2007) Patch and landscape factors shape community assemblage of bumble bees, Bombus spp. (Hymenoptera: Apidae), in montane meadows. Biol Conserv 139:150–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heil LJ, Burkle LA (2018) Recent post-wildfire salvage logging benefits local and landscape floral and bee communities. For Ecol Manag 424:267–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heil LJ, Burkle LA (2019) The effects of post-wildfire salvage logging on plant reproductive success and pollination in Symphoricarpos albus, a fire-tolerant shrub. For Ecol Manag 432:157–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herron-Sweet CR, Lehnhoff EA, Burkle LA, Littlefield JL, Mangold JM (2016) Temporal- and density-dependent impacts of an invasive plant on pollinators and pollination services to a native plant. Ecosphere 7:e01233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill KC, Bakker JD, Dunwiddie PW (2017) Prescribed fire in grassland butterfly habitat: targeting weather and fuel conditions to reduce soil temperatures and burn severity. Fire Ecol 13:24–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopfenmüller S, Steffan-Dewenter I, Holzschuh A (2014) Trait-specific responses of wild bee communities to landscape composition, configuration and local factors. PLoS ONE 9:e104439

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hopwood JL (2008) The contribution of roadside grassland restorations to native bee conservation. Biol Conserv 141:2632–2640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson JR, Hanula JL, Horn S (2013) Removing Chinese privet from riparian forests still benefits pollinators five years later. Biol Conserv 167:355–362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huntzinger M (2003) Effects of fire management practices on butterfly diversity in the forested western United States. Biol Conserv 113:1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson MM, Turner MG, Pearson SM (2014) Logging legacies affect insect pollinator communities in southern Appalachian forests. Southeast Nat 13:317–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keilsohn W, Narango DL, Tallamy DW (2018) Roadside habitat impacts insect traffic mortality. J Insect Conserv 22:183–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimoto C, DeBano SJ, Thorp RW, Taylor RV, Schmalz H, DelCurto T, Johnson T, Kennedy PL, Rao S (2012) Short-term responses of native bees to livestock and implications for managing ecosystem services in grasslands. Ecosphere 3:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleijn D, Winfree R, Bartomeus I, Carvalheiro LG, Henry M, Isaacs R, Klein AM, Kremen C, M’Gonigle LK, Rader R, Ricketts TH, Williams NM, Adamson NL, Ascher JS, Baldi A, Batary P, Benjamin F, Biesmeijer JC, Blitzer EJ, Bommarco R, Brand MR, Bretagnolle V, Button L, Cariveau DP, Chifflet R, Colville JF, Danforth BN, Elle E, Garratt MPD, Herzog F, Holzschuh A, Howlett BG, Jauker F, Jha S, Knop E, Krewenka KM, Le Feon V, Mandelik Y, May EA, Park MG, Pisanty G, Reemer M, Riedinger V, Rollin O, Rundlof M, Sardinas HS, Scheper J, Sciligo AR, Smith HG, Steffan-Dewenter I, Thorp R, Tscharntke T, Verhulst J, Viana BF, Vaissiere BE, Veldtman R, Westphal C, Potts SG (2015) Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation. Nat Commun 6:7414

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein AM, Vaissiere BE, Cane JH, Steffan-Dewenter I, Cunningham SA, Kremen C, Tscharntke T (2007) Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proc R Soc B-Biol Sci 274:303–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleintjes P, Jacobs B, Fettig S (2004) Initial response of butterflies to an overstory reduction and slash mulching treatment of a degraded pinon-juniper woodland. Restor Ecol 12:231–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight TM (2004) The effects of herbivory and pollen limitation on a declining population of Trillium grandiflorum. Ecol Appl 14:915–928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koh I, Lonsdorf EV, Williams NM, Brittain C, Isaacs R, Gibbs J, Ricketts TH (2016) Modeling the status, trends, and impacts of wild bee abundance in the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci 113:140–145

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korpela EL, Hyvönen T, Kuussaari M (2015) Logging in boreal field-forest ecotones promotes flower-visiting insect diversity and modifies insect community composition. Insect Conserv Divers 8:152–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazaro A, Tscheulin T, Devalez J, Nakas G, Petanidou T (2016) Effects of grazing intensity on pollinator abundance and diversity, and on pollination services. Ecol Entomol 41:400–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lettow MC, Brudvig LA, Bahlai CA, Gibbs J, Jean RP, Landis DA (2018) Bee community responses to a gradient of oak savanna restoration practices. Restor Ecol 26:882–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Franklin JF (2002) Conserving forest biodiversity: a comprehensive multiscaled approach. Island Press, Washinton DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer D, Noss R (2006) Salvage logging, ecosystem processes, and biodiversity conservation. Conserv Biol 20:949–958

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopezaraiza-Mikel ME, Hayes RB, Whalley MR, Memmott J (2007) The impact of an alien plant on a native plant–pollinator network: an experimental approach. Ecol Lett 10:539–550

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lucas A, Bull JC, De Vere N, Neyland PJ, Forman DW (2017) Flower resource and land management drives hoverfly communities and bee abundance in seminatural and agricultural grasslands. Ecol Evol 7:8073–8086

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallinger RE, Gaines-Day HR, Gratton C (2017) Do managed bees have negative effects on wild bees?: a systematic review of the literature. PLoS ONE 12:e0189268

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McCullough K, Albanese G, Haukos D, Ricketts A, Stratton S (2019) Management regime and habitat response influence abundance of regal fritillary (Speyeria idalia) in tallgrass prairie. Ecosphere 10:e02845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McIver J, Macke E (2014) Short-term butterfly response to sagebrush steppe restoration treatments. Rangel Ecol Manag 67:539–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinney AM, Goodell K (2010) Shading by invasive shrub reduces seed production and pollinator services in a native herb. Biol Invasions 12:2751–2763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michener CD (2007) The bees of the world, 2nd edn. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being. Island press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Minckley RL (2014) Maintenance of richness despite reduced abundance of desert bees (Hymenoptera: Apiformes) to persistent grazing. Insect Conserv Divers 7:263–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moranz RA, Debinski DM, McGranahan DA, Engle DM, Miller JR (2012) Untangling the effects of fire, grazing, and land-use legacies on grassland butterfly communities. Biodivers Conserv 21:2719–2746

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moranz RA, Fuhlendorf SD, Engle DM (2014) Making sense of a prairie butterfly paradox: the effects of grazing, time since fire, and sampling period on regal fritillary abundance. Biol Conserv 173:32–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moylett H, Youngsteadt E, Sorenson C (2020) The impact of prescribed burning on native bee communities (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila) in longleaf pine savannas in the North Carolina Sandhills. Environ Entomol 49:211–219

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mullally HL, Buckley DS, Fordyce JA, Collins B, Kwit C (2019) Bee communities across gap, edge, and closed-canopy microsites in forest stands with group selection openings. For Sci 65:751–757

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyoka SE (2010) Can restoration management improve habitat for insect pollinators in ponderosa pine forests of the American southwest? Ecol Restor 28:280–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Obama B (2014) Presidential memorandum–creating a federal strategy to promote the health of honey bees and other pollinators. Accessed 10 Mar 2017

  • Ogden S, Haukos DA, Olson K, Lemmon J, Alexander J, Gatson GA, Fick WH (2019) Grassland bird and butterfly responses to Sericea lespedeza control via late-season grazing pressure. Am Midl Nat 181:147–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ollerton J, Winfree R, Tarrant S (2011) How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals? Oikos 120:321–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otto CR, Zheng H, Gallant AL, Iovanna R, Carlson BL, Smart MD, Hyberg S (2018) Past role and future outlook of the Conservation Reserve Program for supporting honey bees in the Great Plains. Proc Natl Acad Sci 115:7629–7634

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panzer R, Schwartz M (2000) Effects of management burning on prairie insect species richness within a system of small, highly fragmented reserves. Biol Conserv 96:363–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson DE, Ortega YK, Runyon JB, Butler JL (2016) Secondary invasion: the bane of weed management. Biol Conserv 197:8–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollinator Health Task Force (2015) Pollinator research action plan

  • Potts SG, Vulliamy B, Dafni A, Ne’eman G, Willmer P (2003) Linking bees and flowers: how do floral communities structure pollinator communities? Ecology 84:2628–2642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potts SG, Biesmeijer JC, Kremen C, Neumann P, Schweiger O, Kunin WE (2010) Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol Evol 25:345–353

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powell AF, Busby WH, Kindscher K (2007) Status of the regal fritillary (Speyeria idalia) and effects of fire management on its abundance in northeastern Kansas, USA. J Insect Conserv 11:299–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Powney GD, Carvell C, Edwards M, Morris RK, Roy HE, Woodcock BA, Isaac NJ (2019) Widespread losses of pollinating insects in Britain. Nat Commun 10:1–6

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor E, Nol E, Burke D, Crins WJ (2012) Responses of insect pollinators and understory plants to silviculture in northern hardwood forests. Biodivers Conserv 21:1703–1740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson LL, Adler LS, Leonard AS, Andicoechea J, Regan KH, Anthony WE, Manson JS, Irwin RE (2015) Secondary metabolites in floral nectar reduce parasite infections in bumblebees. Proc R Soc B-Biol Sci 282:20142471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivers JW, Betts MG (2021) Postharvest bee diversity is high but declines rapidly with stand age in regenerating Douglas-Fir forest. For Sci 67:275–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivers JW, Galbraith SM, Cane JH, Schultz CB, Ulyshen MD, Kormann UG (2018a) A review of research needs for pollinators in managed conifer forests. J for 116:563–572

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivers JW, Mathis CL, Moldenke AR, Betts MG (2018b) Wild bee diversity is enhanced by experimental removal of timber harvest residue within intensively managed conifer forest. GCB Bioenergy 10:766–781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts HP, King DI, Milam J (2017) Factors affecting bee communities in forest openings and adjacent mature forest. For Ecol Manag 394:111–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romey W, Ascher J, Powell D, Yanek M (2007) Impacts of logging on midsummer diversity of native bees (Apoidea) in a northern hardwood forest. J Kansas Entomol Soc 80:327–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph DC, Ely CA, Schaefer RR, Williamson JH, Thill RE (2006) The Diana fritillary (Speyeria diana) and great spangled fritillary (S. cybele): dependence on fire in the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas. J Lepid Soc 60:218–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell KN, Russell GJ, Kaplan KL, Mian S, Kornbluth S (2018) Increasing the conservation value of powerline corridors for wild bees through vegetation management: an experimental approach. Biodivers Conserv 27:2541–2565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapira T, Henkin Z, Dag A, Mandelik Y (2020) Rangeland sharing by cattle and bees: moderate grazing does not impair bee communities and resource availability. Ecol Appl 30:e02066

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simanonok MP, Burkle LA (2019) Nesting success of wood-cavity-nesting bees declines with increasing time since wildfire. Ecol Evol 9:12436–12445

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smallidge PJ, Leopold DJ (1997) Vegetation management for the maintenance and conservation of butterfly habitats in temperate human-dominated landscapes. Landsc Urban Plan 38:259–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith GW, Debinski DM, Scavo NA, Lange CJ, Delaney JT, Moranz RA, Miller JR, Engle DM, Toth AL (2016) Bee abundance and nutritional status in relation to grassland management practices in an agricultural landscape. Environ Entomol 45:338–347

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein DS, Debinski DM, Pleasants JM, Toth AL (2020) Evaluating native bee communities and nutrition in managed grasslands. Environ Entomol 49:717–725

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinert M, Sydenham M, Eldegard K, Moe S (2020) Conservation of solitary bees in power-line clearings: sustained increase in habitat quality through woody debris removal. Glob Ecol Conserv 21:e00823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart KM, Bowyer RT, Kie JG, Cimon NJ, Johnson BK (2002) Temporospatial distributions of elk, mule deer, and cattle: resource partitioning and competitive displacement. J Mammal 83:229–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Straw EA, Carpentier EN, Brown MJ (2021) Roundup causes high levels of mortality following contact exposure in bumble bees. J Appl Ecol 58:1167–1176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swengel AB (1996) Effects of fire and hay management on abundance of prairie butterflies. Biol Conserv 76:73–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swengel AB (1998) Effects of management on butterfly abundance in tallgrass prairie and pine barrens. Biol Conserv 83:77–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swengel AB, Swengel SR (2001) Effects of prairie and barrens management on butterfly faunal composition. Biodivers Conserv 10:1757–1785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swengel AB, Swengel SR (2007) Benefit of permanent non-fire refugia for Lepidoptera conservation in fire-managed sites. J Insect Conserv 11:263–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swope SM, Parker IM (2012) Complex interactions among biocontrol agents, pollinators, and an invasive weed: a structural equation modeling approach. Ecol Appl 22:2122–2134

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • TaH R, Goodell K (2011) The role of resources and risks in regulating wild bee populations. Annu Rev Entomol 56:293–312

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tehel A, Brown MJ, Paxton RJ (2016) Impact of managed honey bee viruses on wild bees. Curr Opin Virol 19:16–22

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tepedino V, Nielson D (2017) Bee-rustling on the range: trap-nesting for pollinators on public lands. Nat Areas J 37:265–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorn S, Bässler C, Brandl R, Burton PJ, Cahall R, Campbell JL, Castro J, Choi CY, Cobb T, Donato DC (2018) Impacts of salvage logging on biodiversity: a meta-analysis. J Appl Ecol 55:279–289

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tonietto RK, Larkin DJ (2018) Habitat restoration benefits wild bees: a meta-analysis. J Appl Ecol 55:582–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Townsend PA, Levey DJ (2005) An experimental test of whether habitat corridors affect pollen transfer. Ecology 86:466–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Congressional Research Service (2020) Federal land ownership: overview and data

  • U.S. Government Accountability Office (2010) Federal Lands: adopting a formal risk-based approach could help land management agencies better manage their law enforcement resources. Publication No. GAO-11-144

  • Ulyshen MD, Horn S, Hanula JL (2020) Effects of Chinese Privet on bees and their vertical distribution in riparian forests. For Sci 66:416–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulyshen MD, Wilson AC, Ohlson GC, Pokswinksi SM, Hiers JK (2021) Frequent prescribed fires favour ground-nesting bees in southeastern US forests. Insect Conserv Divers 14:527–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Geert A, Van Rossum F, Triest L (2010) Do linear landscape elements in farmland act as biological corridors for pollen dispersal? J Ecol 98:178–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Nuland ME, Haag EN, Bryant JA, Read QD, Klein RN, Douglas MJ, Gorman CE, Greenwell TD, Busby MW, Collins J (2013) Fire promotes pollinator visitation: implications for ameliorating declines of pollination services. PLoS ONE 8:e79853

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vanbergen AJ, the Insect Pollinators Initiative (2013) Threats to an ecosystem service: pressures on pollinators. Front Ecol Environ 11:251–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vila M, Bartomeus I, Dietzsch AC, Petanidou T, Steffan-Dewenter I, Stout JC, Tscheulin T (2009) Invasive plant integration into native plant–pollinator networks across Europe. Proc R Soc B: Biol Sci 276:3887–3893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel JA, Debinski DM, Koford RR, Miller JR (2007) Butterfly responses to prairie restoration through fire and grazing. Biol Conserv 140:78–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel JA, Koford RR, Debinski DM (2010) Direct and indirect responses of tallgrass prairie butterflies to prescribed burning. J Insect Conserv 14:663–677

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vulliamy B, Potts SG, Willmer P (2006) The effects of cattle grazing on plant-pollinator communities in a fragmented Mediterranean landscape. Oikos 114:529–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner DL, Metzler KJ, Frye H (2019) Importance of transmission line corridors for conservation of native bees and other wildlife. Biol Conserv 235:147–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waltz AE, Wallace Covington W (2004) Ecological restoration treatments increase butterfly richness and abundance: mechanisms of response. Restor Ecol 12:85–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warchola N, Crone EE, Schultz CB (2018) Balancing ecological costs and benefits of fire for population viability of disturbance-dependent butterflies. J Appl Ecol 55:800–809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickham J, Homer C, Vogelmann J, McKerrow A, Mueller R, Herold N, Coulston J (2014) The multi-resolution land characteristics (MRLC) consortium: 20 years of development and integration of USA national land cover data. Remote Sens 6:7424–7441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams NM, Lonsdorf EV (2018) Selecting cost-effective plant mixes to support pollinators. Biol Conserv 217:195–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JS, Kelly M, Carril OM (2018) Reducing protected lands in a hotspot of bee biodiversity: bees of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. PeerJ 6:e6057

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winfree R, Gross BJ, Kremen C (2011) Valuing pollination services to agriculture. Ecol Econ 71:80–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodard SH, Federman S, James RR, Danforth BN, Griswold TL, Inouye D, McFrederick QS, Morandin L, Paul DL, Sellers E (2020) Towards a US national program for monitoring native bees. Biol Conserv 252:108821

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zavaleta ES, Hobbs RJ, Mooney HA (2001) Viewing invasive species removal in a whole-ecosystem context. Trends Ecol Evol 16:454–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Travis Belote for insightful conversations, and Maureen Kessler, Ben Tumolo, Diane Debinski and Chelcy Miniat for constructive feedback on previous drafts of this review. This research was supported in part by the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. The findings and conclusions in this publication are those of the authors and should not be construed to represent any official USDA or U.S. Government determination or policy.

Funding

This work was funded by the Western Center for Native Plant Conservation and Restoration Science of the United States Forest Service.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Will Glenny.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publications

All authors agreed with the content and gave consent to submit this manuscript.

Additional information

Communicated by Akihiro Nakamura.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Glenny, W., Runyon, J.B. & Burkle, L.A. A review of management actions on insect pollinators on public lands in the United States. Biodivers Conserv 31, 1995–2016 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-022-02399-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-022-02399-5

Keywords

  • Conservation
  • Insect
  • Management
  • Pollinator