-
Bats Work Group (CWPRI)
-
All materials for sharing related to this work group. Leaders of this group are Eric Britzke and Louise McCallie.
Located in
LP Members
/
Workspaces
/
Collaborative Wildlife Protection and Recovery Initiative (CWPRI)
-
California Tern Work Group
-
All materials related to this work group. Stephanie Hertz leads the group.
Located in
LP Members
/
Workspaces
/
Collaborative Wildlife Protection and Recovery Initiative (CWPRI)
-
Pinyon Jay Work Group (CWPRI)
-
All materials related to this work group. Rich Fischer leads the group.
Located in
LP Members
/
Workspaces
/
Collaborative Wildlife Protection and Recovery Initiative (CWPRI)
-
Freshwater Mussel Work Group (CWPRI)
-
All materials related to this work group. David Hu leads this group.
Located in
LP Members
/
Workspaces
/
Collaborative Wildlife Protection and Recovery Initiative (CWPRI)
-
Desert Thrashers Work Group (CWPRI)
-
All materials related to this work group. Chris McCreedy leads this group.
Located in
LP Members
/
Workspaces
/
Collaborative Wildlife Protection and Recovery Initiative (CWPRI)
-
Northern Bobwhite Work Group (CWPRI)
-
All materials for sharing related to this work group. Group leader is Bridgett Costanzo of USDA/NRCS.
Located in
LP Members
/
Workspaces
/
Collaborative Wildlife Protection and Recovery Initiative (CWPRI)
-
FY21 WLFW-GWWA Project Boundary
-
Updated to include new priority areas in NY.
Located in
Information Materials
/
Maps & Data
/
Maps
-
Do Review Papers on Bird–Vegetation Relationships Provide Actionable Information to Forest Managers in the Eastern United States?
-
Abstract
Forest management planning requires the specification of measurable objectives as desired future conditions at spatial extents ranging from stands to landscapes and temporal extents ranging from a single growing season to several centuries. Effective implementation of forest management requires understanding current conditions and constraints well enough to apply the appropriate silvicultural strategies to produce desired future conditions, often for multiple objectives, at varying spatial and temporal extents. We administered an online survey to forest managers in the eastern US to better understand how wildlife scientists could best provide information to help meet wildlife-related habitat objectives. We then examined more than 1000 review papers on bird–vegetation relationships in the eastern US compiled during a systematic review of the primary literature to see how well this evidence-base meets the information needs of forest managers. We identified two main areas where wildlife scientists could increase the relevance and applicability of their research. First, forest managers want descriptions of wildlife species–vegetation relationships using the operational metrics of forest management (forest type, tree species composition, basal area, tree density, stocking rates, etc.) summarized at the operational spatial units of forest management (stands, compartments, and forests). Second, forest managers want information about how to provide wildlife habitats for many different species with varied habitat needs across temporal extents related to the ecological processes of succession after harvest or natural disturbance (1–2 decades) or even longer periods of stand development. We provide examples of review papers that meet these information needs of forest managers and topic-specific bibliographies of additional review papers that may contain actionable information for foresters who wish to meet wildlife management objectives. We suggest that wildlife scientists become more familiar with the extensive grey literature on forest bird–vegetation relationships and forest management that is available in natural resource management agency reports. We also suggest that wildlife scientists could reconsider everything from the questions they ask, the metrics they report on, and the way they allocate samples in time and space, to provide more relevant and actionable information to forest managers. View Full-Text
Keywords: forestry; silviculture; forest wildlife–habitat relationships; evidence-based practice; implementation gap; research relevance; synthesis; knowledge exchange; science–practice
Located in
Research
/
WLFW Outcomes: Funded Research
-
Northern Bobwhite, Grasslands, and Savannas (2022) Framework for Conservation Action
-
This folder will contain the 2022 framework, as well as graphics, powerpoint presentations, and other materials that will support NRCS and partner staff in understanding this new path forward, and communicating it to others. Contact Bridgett Costanzo, NRCS, WLFW Regional Coordinator @ bridgett.costanzo@usda.gov with any questions or additional information needs.
Located in
Information
-
NRCS WLFW Outcomes Assessment 2012-2018 (released 2021)
-
An outcomes assessment report completed under a contract to Dr. JJ Apodaca from NRCS-WLFW. This document is being shared with conservation partners but broad or public sharing is not approved.
Located in
Research
/
WLFW Outcomes: Funded Research
