Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Width of riparian buffer and structure of adjacent plantations influence occupancy of conservation priority birds

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Conservation of biodiversity on forest landscapes dominated by plantations has become an increasingly important topic, and opportunities to maintain or enhance biodiversity within these forests need to be recognized and applied. Riparian buffers of mature forest retained along streams in managed forest landscapes offer an opportunity to enhance biodiversity across these landscapes. However, influence of buffer width and structure of adjacent plantations on habitat use by birds is not well understood. We modeled probability of occupancy, while accounting for variable detection probabilities, for 16 bird species of regional conservation importance in the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas, USA. We examined occurrence of breeding birds in streamside management zone (SMZ) buffers embedded in three structural classes of pine plantation: young open-canopy, closed-canopy, and older thinned plantations. Our occupancy models included a positive association with SMZ width for nine bird species associated with mature forests. Models for three early successional species (prairie warbler [Dendroica discolor], white-eyed vireo [Vireo griseus], and northern bobwhite [Colinus virginianus]) included a negative association with SMZ width. Occupancy models for Acadian flycatcher (Empidonax virescens), summer tanager (Piranga rubra), pine warbler (Dendroica pinus), prairie warbler, and northern bobwhite also included structural condition of adjacent plantations, but most species did not appear affected by condition of surrounding plantations. We found diverse responses among species to width of retained SMZs and structure of adjacent plantations; some species apparently benefitted from SMZs >100 m wide, while others benefitted from narrow buffers. Furthermore, most species traditionally associated with mature forests were common in narrow SMZs, regardless of width. Thus, optimal width of SMZs relative to avian conservation depends on the species of greatest conservation interest.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Annand EM, Thompson FR III (1997) Forest bird response to regeneration practices in central hardwood forests. J Wildl Manag 61:159–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ash AN (1997) Disappearance and return of plethodontid salamanders to clearcut plots in the southern Blue Ridge Mountains. Conserv Biol 11:983–989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker JB, Langdon OG (1990) Loblolly pine. In: Burns RM, Honkala BH (tech. cords). Silvics of North America: 2. Conifers. Agriculture handbook 654, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington, DC

  • Brockerhoff EG, Berndt LA, Jactel H (2005) Role of exotic pine forests in the conservation of the critically endangered ground beetle Holcaspis brevicula (Coleoptera: Carabidae). N Z J Ecol 29:37–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Brockerhoff EG, Jactel H, Parrotta J, Quine C, Sayer J (2008) Plantation forests and biodiversity: oxymoron or opportunity? Biodivers Conserv 17:925–951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brotons L, Wolff A, Paulus G, Martin JL (2005) Effects of adjacent agricultural habitat on the distribution of passerines in natural grasslands. Biol Conserv 124:407–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Carle J, Holmgren P (2008) Wood from planted forests: a global outlook 2005–2030. For Prod J 58:6–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnus J, Parrotta J, Brockerhoff E, Arbez M, Jactel H, Kremer A, Lamb D, O’Hara K, Walters B (2006) Planted forests and biodiversity. J For 104:65–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Chalfoun AD, Thompson FR III, Ratnaswamy MJ (2002) Nest predators and fragmentation: a review and metaanalysis. Conserv Biol 16:306–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapa-Vargas L, Robinson SK (2007) Nesting success of Acadian flycatchers (Empidonax virescens) in floodplain forest corridors. Auk 124:1267–1280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clout MN, Gaze PD (1984) Effects of plantation forestry on birds in New Zealand. J Appl Ecol 21:795–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conner RN, Dickson JG (1980) Strip transect sampling and analysis for avian habitat studies. Wildl Soc Bull 8:4–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Conner RN, Via JW, Prather ID (1979) Effects of pine-oak clearcutting on winter and breeding birds in southwestern Virginia. Wilson Bull 91:301–316

    Google Scholar 

  • Conner RN, Dickson JG, Williamson JH, Ortego B (2004) Width of streamside management zones and breeding bird abundance in eastern Texas. Southeast Nat 3:669–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darveau M, Beauchesne P, Belanger L, Hout J, Larue P (1995) Riparian forest strips as habitat for breeding birds in boreal forest. J Wildl Manag 59:67–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies KF, Margules CR (1998) Effects of habitat fragmentation on carabid beetles: experimental evidence. J Anim Ecol 67:460–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeGraaf RM, Rappole JH (1995) Neotropical migratory birds: natural history, distribution, and population change. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickson JG, Williamson JH, Conner RN, Ortego B (1995) Streamside management zones and breeding birds in eastern Texas. Wildl Soc Bull 23:50–755

    Google Scholar 

  • Donovan TM, Thompson FR III, Faaborg JR (2000) Cowbird distribution at different scales of fragmentation: trade-offs between breeding and feeding opportunities. In: Cooke T, Robinson SK, Rothstein SI, Sealy SG, Smith JNM (eds) Ecology and management of cowbirds and their hosts. University of Texas Press, Austin, Texas

    Google Scholar 

  • Driscoll PV (1977) Comparison of bird counts from pine forests and indigenous vegetation. Aust Wildl Res 4:281–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enoksson B, Angelstam P, Larsson K (1995) Deciduous forest and resident birds: the problem of fragmentation within a coniferous forest landscape. Landscape Ecol 10:267–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Estades CF, Temple SA (1999) Deciduous-forest bird communities in fragmented landscapes dominated by exotic pine plantations. Ecol Appl 9:573–585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB (2006) Beyond fragmentation: the continuum model for faunal research and conservation in human-modified landscapes. Oikos 112:473–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB, Manning AD (2006) Biodiversity, ecosystem function, and resilience: ten guiding principles for commodity production landscapes. Frontiers Ecol Environ 4:80–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2006) Global forest resources assessment 2005—progress towards sustainable forest management. FAO of the United Nations, Forestry paper 147, Rome

  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2010) Global forest resources assessment 2010—key findings. FAO of the United Nations (brochure), Rome

  • Friend GR (1982) Bird populations in exotic pine plantations and indigenous eucalypt forests in Gippsland, Victoria. Emu 45:80–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gjerde I, Saetersdal M (1997) Effects on avian diversity of introduced spruce Picea spp. plantations in the native pine Pinus sylvestris forests of western Norway. Biol Conserv 79:241–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutzwiller KJ, Barrow WC Jr (2001) Bird-landscape relations in the Chihuahuan Desert: coping with uncertainties about predictive models. Ecol Appl 11:517–1532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagar JC (1999) Influence of riparian buffer width on bird assemblages in western Oregon. J Wildl Manag 63:484–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamel PB (1992) The land manager’s guide to the birds of the South. The nature conservancy, southeastern region. Chapel Hill, North Carolina

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannon SJ, Paszkowski CA, Boutin S, DeGroot J, Macdonald SE, Wheatley M, Eaton BR (2002) Abundance and species composition of amphibians, small mammals, and songbirds in riparian forest buffer strips of varying widths in the boreal mixedwood of Alberta. Can J For Res 32:1784–1800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris LD (1984) The fragmented forest. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodges MF, Krementz DG (1996) Neotropical migratory breeding bird communities in riparian forests of different widths along the Altamaha River, Georgia. Wilson Bull 108:496–506

    Google Scholar 

  • Howell CA, Dijak WD, Thompson FR III (2007) Landscape context and selection for forest edge by breeding brown-headed cowbirds. Landscape Ecol 22:273–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey JW, Newton AC, Peace AJ, Holden E (2000) The importance of conifer plantations in northern Britain as a habitat for native fungi. Biol Conserv 96:241–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson SL, Jones JA (2000) Stream temperature responses to forest harvest and debris flows in Western Cascades, Oregon. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 57:30–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller CME, Robbins CS, Hatfield JS (1993) Avian communities in riparian forests of different widths in Maryland and Delaware. Wetlands 13:137–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiffney PM, Richardson JS, Bull JP (2003) Responses of periphyton and insects to experimental manipulation of riparian buffer width along forest streams. J Appl Ecol 40:1060–1076

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgo JC, Sargent RA, Chapman BR, Miller KV (1996) Nest-site selection by hooded warblers in bottomland hardwoods of South Carolina. Wilson Bull 108:53–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilgo JC, Sargent RA, Miller KV, Chapman BR (1997) Landscape influences on breeding bird communities in hardwood fragments in South Carolina. Wildl Soc Bull 25:878–885

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilgo JC, Sargent RA, Chapman BR, Miller KV (1998) Effect of stand width and adjacent habitat on breeding bird communities in bottomland hardwoods. J Wildl Manag 62:72–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinley TA, Newhouse NJ (1997) Relationship of riparian reserve zone width to bird density and diversity in southeastern British Columbia. Northwest Sci 71:75–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Knopf FL, Johnson RR, Rich T, Samson FB, Szaro RC (1988) Conservation of riparian ecosystems in the United States. Wilson Bull 100:272–284

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert JD, Hannon S (2000) Short-term effects of timber harvest on abundance, territory characteristics, and pairing success of ovenbirds in riparian buffer strips. Auk 117:687–698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson MA, Dijak WD, Thompson FR III, Millspaugh JJ (2003) Landscape-level habitat suitability models for twelve species in southern Missouri. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, General Technical Report NC-233, St. Paul, Minnesota

  • Laurent GD, Chism JD, Rhodes RK, Wilson CR, Townsend WR (1989) Soil survey of Garland County, Arkansas. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee P, Smyth C, Boutin S (2004) Quantitative review of riparian buffer width guidelines from Canada and the United States. For Ecol Manag 70:165–180

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Hobbs RJ (2004) Faunal conservation in Australian plantation forests—a review. Biol Conserv 119:151–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Cunningham RB, Donnelly CF, Nix H, Lindenmayer BD (2002) Effects of forest fragmentation on bird assemblages in a novel landscape context. Ecol Monogr 72:1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, McIntyre A, Fischer J (2003) Birds in eucalypt and pine forests: landscape alteration and its implications for research models of faunal habitat use. Biol Conserv 110:45–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacArthur RH, Wilson EO (1967) The theory of island biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Machtans CS, Villard M, Hannon SJ (1996) Use of riparian buffer strips as movement corridors by forest birds. Conserv Biol 10:1366–1379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Bailey LL (2004) Assessing the fit of site occupancy models. J Agri Biol Environ Stat 9:300–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Lachman GB, Droege S, Royle JA, Langtimm CA (2002) Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one. Ecology 83:2248–2255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Royle JA, Pollock KH, Bailey LL, Hines JE (2006) Occupancy estimation and modeling: inferring patterns and dynamics of species occurrence. Academic Press, Boston, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Marczak LB, Sakamaki T, Turvey SL, Deguise I, Wood SLR, Richardson JS (2010) Are forested buffers an effective conservation strategy for riparian fauna? An assessment using meta-analysis. Ecol Appl 20:126–134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre NE (1995) Effects of forest patch size on avian diversity. Landscape Ecol 10:85–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meiklejohn BA, Hughes JD (1999) Bird communities in riparian buffer strips of industrial forests. Am Midl Nat 141:172–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melchiors MA, Cicero C (1987) Streamside management zones and adjacent upland habitats in the Ouachita Mountains. Proc Annu Conf Southeast Assoc Fish Wildl Agencies 42:385–393

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller DA, Wigley TB, Miller KV (2009) Managed forests and conservation of terrestrial biodiversity in the southern United States. J For 107:197–203

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitra SS, Sheldon FH (1993) Use of an exotic tree plantation by Bornean lowland forest birds. Auk 110:529–540

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore NW, Hooper MD (1975) On the number of bird species in British Woods. Biol Conserv 8:239–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray NL, Stauffer DF (1995) Nongame bird use of habitat in central Appalachian riparian forests. J Wildl Manag 59:78–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norton MR, Hannon SJ, Schmiegelow FKA (2000) Fragments are not islands: patch vs landscape perspectives on songbird presence and abundance in a harvested boreal forest. Ecography 23:209–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Opdam P (1991) Metapopulation theory and habitat fragmentation: a review of holarctic breeding bird studies. Landscape Ecol 5:93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panjabi AO, Dunn EH, Blancher PJ, Hunter WC, Altman B, Bart J, Beardmore CJ, Berlanga H, Butcher GS, Davis SK, Demarest DW, Dettmers R, Easton W, Gomez de Silva Garza H, Iñigo-Elias EE, Pashley DN, Ralph CJ, Rich TD, Rosenberg KV, Rustay CM, Ruth JM, Wendt JS, Will TC (2005) The Partners in flight handbook on species assessment. Version 2005. Partners in flight technical series no. 3. Rocky Mountain Bird Observatory. http://www.rmbo.org/pubs/downloads/Handbook2005.pdf

  • Pawson SM, Brockerhoff EG, Meenken ED, Didham RK (2008) Non-native plantation forests as alternative habitat for native forest beetles in a heavily modified landscape. Biodivers Conserv 17:1127–1148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peak RG, Thompson FR III (2006) Factors affecting avian species richness and density in riparian areas. J Wildl Manag 70:173–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson SF, Manuwal DA (2001) Breeding bird responses to riparian buffer width in managed Pacific Northwest Douglas-fir forests. Ecol Appl 11:840–853

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peduzzi P, Cancato J, Kemper E, Holford TR, Feinstein A (1996) A simulation of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidem 99:1373–1379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins DW, Hunter ML Jr (2006) Effects of riparian timber management on amphibians in Maine. J Wildl Manag 70:657–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rich AC, Dobkin DS, Niles LJ (1994) Defining forest fragmentation by corridor width: the influence of narrow forest-dividing corridors on forest-nesting birds in southern New Jersey. Conserv Biol 8:1109–1121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rich TD, Beardmore CJ, Berlanga H, Blancher PJ, Bradstreet MSW, Butcher GS, Demarest DW, Dunn EH, Hunter WC, Iñigo-Elias EE, Kennedy JA, Martell AM, Panjabi AO, Pashley DN, Rosenberg KV, Rustay CM, Wendt JS, Will TC (2004) Partners in flight North American Landbird conservation plan. Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins CS, Dawson DK, Dowell BA (1989) Habitat area requirements of breeding forest birds of the Middle Atlantic States. Wildl Mono 103:1–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson SK, Thompson FR III, Donovan TM, Whitehead D, Faaborg J (1995) Regional forest fragmentation and the nesting success of migratory birds. Science 267:1987–1990

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rodewald AD, Vitz AC (2005) Edge- and area-sensitivity of shrubland birds. J Wildl Manag 69:681–688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudolph DC, Dickson JG (1990) Streamside zone width and amphibian and reptile abundance. Southwest Nat 35:472–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sargent RA, Kilgo JC, Chapman BR, Miller KV (1998) Predation of artificial nests in hardwood fragments enclosed by pine and agricultural habitats. J Wildl Manag 62:1438–1442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schieck J (1997) Biased detection of bird vocalizations affect comparisons of bird abundance among forested habitats. Condor 99:179–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sedjo RA (1999) Potential of high-yield plantation forestry for meeting timber needs. New For 17:1–3

    Google Scholar 

  • Sedjo RA (2001) The role of forest plantations in the world’s future timber supply. For Chron 77:221–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Shirley SM, Smith JNM (2005) Bird community structure across riparian buffer strips of varying width in a coastal temperate forest. Biol Conserv 125:475–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skiles A (1981) Arkansas climate atlas. Arkansas Energy Office; Arkansas Industrial Development Commission, Little Rock, Arkansas

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith KG (1977) Distribution of summer birds along a forest moisture gradient in an Ozark watershed. Ecology 58:810–819

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spackman SC, Hughes JW (1995) Assessment of minimum stream corridor width for biological conservation: species richness and distribution along mid-order streams in Vermont, USA. Biol Conserv 71:325–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stauffer DF, Best LB (1980) Habitat selection by birds of riparian communities: evaluating effects of habitat alterations. J Wildl Manag 44:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson FR III, Dijak WD, Kulowiec TG, Hamilton DA (1992) Breeding bird populations in Missouri Ozark Forests with and without clearcutting. J Wildl Manag 56:23–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson FR III, Donovan TM, DeGraaf RM, Faaborg J, Robinson SK (2002) A multi-scale perspective of the effects of forest fragmentation on birds in eastern forests. Stud Avian Biol 25:8–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurmond DP, Miller KV, Harris TG (1995) Effects of streamside management zone width on avifauna communities. South J Appl For 19:166–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Triquet AM, McPeek GA, McComb WC (1990) Songbird diversity in clearcuts with and without a riparian buffer strip. J Soil Water Conserv 45:500–503

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner JC, Gerwin JA, Lancia RA (2002) Influences of hardwood stand area and adjacency on breeding birds in an intensively managed pine landscape. For Sci 45:323–330

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallecillo S, Brotons L, Herrando S (2007) Assessing the response of open habitat bird species to landscape changes in Mediterranean mosaics. Biodivers Conserv 17:103–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dorp D, Opdam PFM (1987) Effects of patch size, isolation and regional abundance on forest bird communities. Landscape Ecol 1:59–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward JM, Jackson CR (2004) Sediment trapping within forestry streamside management zones: Georgia Piedmont, USA. J Am Water Resour Assoc 40:1421–1431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiens JA (1994) Habitat fragmentation: island vs landscape perspectives on bird conservation. Ibis 137:S97–S104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilcove DS, McClellan CH, Dobson AP (1986) Habitat fragmentation in the temperate zone. In: Soulé MS (ed) Conservation biology: the science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer Assoc, Sunderland, Massachusetts, pp 237–256

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank D Reed, J Krystofik, E Gardiner, J Taulman, R Brown, D Peitz, B Gibbons, H Williamson, and students from the University of Arkansas at Monticello for field assistance. We thank AJ Kroll for assistance with analysis, and N Koerth, JC Kilgo, and DG Krementz for review of an earlier draft. Weyerhaeuser Company, the U.S. Forest Service, the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station, and the Arkansas Nongame Preservation Committee provided funding. The use of trade or firm names in this publication is for reader information and does not imply endorsement of any product or service by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. US Forest Service, US Department of Agriculture, Southern Research Station, P.O. Box 1270, Hot Springs, AR, 71902, USA

    Roger W. Perry

  2. National Council for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., P.O. Box 340317, Clemson, SC, 29634, USA

    T. Bently Wigley

  3. Timberlands Technology, Weyerhaeuser Company, P.O. Box 9777, Federal Way, WA, 98063, USA

    M. Anthony Melchiors

  4. US Forest Service, US Department of Agriculture, Southern Research Station, 506 Hayter St., Nacogdoches, TX, 75965, USA

    Ronald E. Thill

  5. School of Forest Resources, University of Arkansas at Monticello, Monticello, AR, 71656, USA

    Philip A. Tappe

  6. Timberlands Technology, Weyerhaeuser Company, P.O. Box 2288, Columbus, MS, 39704, USA

    Darren A. Miller

Authors
  1. Roger W. Perry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Bently Wigley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Anthony Melchiors
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ronald E. Thill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Philip A. Tappe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Darren A. Miller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roger W. Perry.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Perry, R.W., Wigley, T.B., Melchiors, M.A. et al. Width of riparian buffer and structure of adjacent plantations influence occupancy of conservation priority birds. Biodivers Conserv 20, 625–642 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9971-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-010-9971-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation