Land Use and Wildlife Resources (1970) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 Influence of Land Management on Wildlife
4 Influence of Land Management on Wildlife
Pages 92-148
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 92... ...
That the general public has an interest and a responsibility in effecting and perpetuating sound management policies for all natural resources has been inherent in the conservation idea from its beginning. MULTIPLE USE A significant and commonly accepted policy relating to land husbandry is that of "multiple use." Logically it developed first as a guide to operations on certain public properties, especially the national forests, although its applicability to other types and ownerships is becoming progressively evident.
|
From page 93... ...
Both imply the satisfaction of minority interests as well as those of a simple majority. In 1964, the Congress instructed the Secretary of the Interior to develop and administer for multiple use and sustained yield those public lands under the administration of the Bureau of Land Management consistent with and supplemental to the Taylor Grazing Act (48 Stat 1269; 43USC 3151.
|
From page 94... ...
Many federal lands other than the national forests and lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management are managed for several uses. Military lands, for example, are being developed for wildlife habitat, hunting, and fishing, when compatible with military objectives.
|
From page 95... ...
Appl ications on Private Lands 95 The American Society of Range Management (Hues, 1964) defines multiple use as: Harmonious use of range for more than one of the following purposes: Grazing of livestock, wildlife production, recreation, watershed, and timber production.
|
From page 96... ...
The fact that multiple use is a desirable policy in the management of most public lands does not mean that it is applicable in equal degree to private lands. Motivations in public land management derive from legislation (including appropriations)
|
From page 97... ...
Significantly, from the standpoint of the management of wildlife for public recreation, nearly half of the forested area of the country is under public ownership. Wildlife Habitat Objectives From latitudes 20°N in Hawaii to 60°N in Alaska, at elevations from sea level to 12,000 feet, and showing many different successional stages within the several life zones, forest lands of the United States vary greatly in the composition of their plant and animal communities.
|
From page 98... ...
Through well-coordinated management for timber and wildlife, habitat conditions can be fostered; without coordination they may be damaged. Public clamor for fish hatcheries has often obscured the fact that effective fishery management starts with land management on the watershed.
|
From page 99... ...
On the managed national and state forests, and on managed private lands where there is an incentive to do so, wildlife biologists working with timber managers can develop plans that will increase the more useful species of both animals and trees. On unmanaged "preserves" such as the New York State Forest Preserve and some national and state parks, the opportunities are limited or lacking.
|
From page 100... ...
Each cutting provides opportunities for wildlife habitat manipulation. For example, on the Allegheny National Forest in Pennsylvania, coordination between timber management and wildlife management is a part of the multiple-use program.
|
From page 101... ...
The U.S. Forest Service (1965)
|
From page 102... ...
Planting north slopes, where snow accumulates, may be desirable in places where escape cover is needed. Where wildlife habitat is one of the recognized uses, coordination between timber and wildlife managers is essential, both for enhancing wild animal values and for protecting forest regeneration from excessive animal damage.
|
From page 103... ...
Wildlife has benefited incidentally from many of the burns prescribed for timber management, but little has been done experimentally toward burning for wildlife habitat improvement itself (Komarek, 19661. Stoddard ( 193 1 )
|
From page 104... ...
There are other examples of the use of fire in forest-wildlife habitat management, but the opportunities probably are far greater than have been explored. However, with growing public concern over air pollution, studies of the effects of prescribed burning should not be overlooked.
|
From page 105... ...
Much of the opposition to commercial timber operations is motivated by esthetics-a situation deserving industry consideration. From the standpoint of wildlife management logging may be favorable or unfavorable.
|
From page 106... ...
Of the federal lands grazed (243 million acres) , nearly three fourths are administered by the Bureau of Land Management and most of the rest by the Forest Senice.
|
From page 107... ...
The Bureau of Land Management (U.S. Department of the Intenor, 1960)
|
From page 108... ...
Lower stages usually are undesirable in terms of both grazing and soil stability. Soil Conservation Service methods for determining range sites and conditions are widely used on private lands (Renner and Allred, 19629.
|
From page 109... ...
The ecological approach to livestock range management does not imply that climax conditions are the ultimate objective, for climax types often are low in livestock and game production. Some wildlife managers have missed opportunities by not working more closely with range managers in developing livestock range condition ratings.
|
From page 110... ...
Grazing has affected duck nesting favorably in some places and unfavorably in others, depending to a large extent upon degrees of stocking and range conditions. Prairie grouse have been affected by habitat changes caused by livestock grazing.
|
From page 111... ...
Research directly relating livestock grazing and range conditions to fish production is lacking.
|
From page 112... ...
Different practices may affect wildlife in different ways and degrees; general and unqualified statements as to the effects of livestock grazing on wildlife mean little.
|
From page 113... ...
Until researchers recognize the various systems of management being practiced, and the standards for range condition classes, sound bases for grazing and wildlife coordination are lacking; merely comparing "grazed" and "ungraded" is not enough. Fencing is a major tool of range and pasture management, and often a benefit to wildlife habitat if range condition improves as a result; it can also protect key areas for wildlife.
|
From page 114... ...
Prescribed burning for range improvement is used, particularly in the South. As discussed in the section on forest and woodland, there is need for experimentation in the use of controlled fire for wildlife habitat improvement.
|
From page 115... ...
In the early 1950's there were many "brush eradication" programs. However, it soon became apparent that a more appropriate term for these efforts would be "brush control." Further consideration of the ecological factors involved, including wildlife, prompted a shift of emphasis toward the concept of "brushland management." The following discussion deals with brushlands as related to wildlife in the context of brushland management.
|
From page 116... ...
Juniper Juniper is often mixed with pinyon, and, either alone or mixed, it occupies about 75 million acres in the Southwest. Two thirds of the juniper acreage is on federal lands.
|
From page 117... ...
Forest Service to protect wildlife resources in pinyonjuniper areas where control is planned. These guidelines include: ~ 1 ~ retention of dead woody plant material over at least 15 percent of the area; (2)
|
From page 118... ...
It was publicized nationally in a news release of the National Wildlife Federation (Johns, 19651. The Western Association of State Game and Fish Commissioners, meeting in Anchorage in July, 1965, passed a resolution urging federal agencies responsible for public land management and for technical and financial assistance on private lands to give adequate consideration to wildlife habitat requirements in planning and executing sagebrush control projects.
|
From page 119... ...
Thus there is no assurance under present policies that wildlife habitat needs will be considered in sagebrush control on privately owned lands. There is need for more research on the effect of sagebrush control on wildlife, and for incentives to encourage private landowners to utilize practices known to benefit wildlife.
|
From page 120... ...
The U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management consult with the California Department of Fish and Game during the planning stage prior to field operations.
|
From page 121... ...
This practice improves habitat for both game and nongame wildlife species, although in many areas there is depredation of planted trees by deer. From 1956 to 1965, the Forest Service alone undertook to replace brush with trees on 45,000 acres in California.
|
From page 122... ...
Preponderant evidence shows that range seedings have benefited both wildlife and livestock, provided that sufficient shrub-forage is available to carry browse-dependent animals through critical winter periods. However, since seedings for livestock often involve only grasses, interest has developed among those concerned with wildlife habitat in the inclusion of browse and legumes in seed mixtures.
|
From page 123... ...
Even a secondary value may be expected to have economic and social importance on such a large area. The nature of wildlife habitats is largely determined by the major land-use industry-as noted in the foregoing sections on forest and grazing ranges.
|
From page 124... ...
Cultivated lands commonly abound in weed-seed and grain-residue foods (Baumgras, 1943; Allen, 1949) that support, at once, the often undesirable rodents and the usually desirable game birds.
|
From page 125... ...
There is, literally, no "waste" space on such farms, except for roadsides and the banks of waterwaysditches that must be accessible to cleaning with a dragline at intervals, and streams in various stages of conversion to ditches. The stabilization of banks with grass and legumes or shrubs is an essential part of land management, and such areas receive heavy use by nesting pheasants, as well as songbirds and rabbits.
|
From page 126... ...
D iversif fed Farms The land-use capability classification of the Soil Conservation Service designates classes I through IV as suitable for cultivated crops, with progressively increasing limitations and need for conservation practices. Classes V through VIII are generally unsuited to cultivation but can be allocated to pasturing, forestry, and wildlife management (Nunns, 19581.
|
From page 127... ...
Habitat Objectives Leopold (1933) , pioneer in wildlife management, recognized "carrying capacity" as a universal characteristic of habitat (see also Errington, 19451.
|
From page 128... ...
The map of a farm planned on the basis of soil capability typically shows a markedly increased interspersion of cover types and resulting edge (Graham, 1941a; Hedge and Klingebiel, 19571. The conversion of an agricultural area from rectangular fields to a completely revised farm plan often results in the removal of old brushy fencerows and borders and an initial degradation of wildlife habitat.
|
From page 129... ...
However, this procedure and summer fallowing for weed control'contributed to the total area of bare soil and the reduction of wildlife cover (Swanson and Yocum, 19581. In Colorado, Sandfort (1952)
|
From page 130... ...
It is evident that nearly all of the practices desirable for the production of wild creatures are either necessary for good land management or at least are not inimical to it. It is clear also that improvements in the engineering of agricultural implements are a part of increased efficiency on the farm.
|
From page 131... ...
Originally, many planting materials were recognized as potentially useful in wildlife management (McAtee, 1941) , and extensive trials have been made to screen out those regionally adapted to specific purposes (Davison, 1941, 1945; Graham, 1941b, 1942; Dambach, 1948a; Edminster and May, 1951; Borell, 19621.
|
From page 132... ...
made a field reconnaissance of 15 states and carried out a qualitative appraisal of wildlife management practicesprimarily plantings in small plots. In order of importance, the plants used were shrub lespedeza, multiflora rose, several other deciduous shrubs, conifers, sericea lespedeza, and various annuals such as Korean lespedeza and partridge pea (Chamaecrista fasciculata)
|
From page 133... ...
Outstanding examples can be cited where this has been done with the bobwhite and California quails (Hawbecker and Bond, 1942; Rosene, 1950; Steen, 1950; Burger and Linduska, 19671. In each of these management operations, the basis was a soil conservation plan into which quail food and cover types were fitted, especially on edges and unused areas.
|
From page 134... ...
This habit also assures the rapid spreading of woody plants in brushpiles placed as wildlife cover around old gullies and odd areas. The adequacy of natural distribution mechanics for early shrub and tree stages of succession is evident in late summer when the droppings of omnivorous mammals (especially the fox, raccoon, and opossum)
|
From page 135... ...
Some 23 states now have trained wildlife management extension specialistsa type of service for which there is great need. The increasing orientation of many agricultural programs toward wildlife benefits is evident, and there are far-reaching possibilities.
|
From page 136... ...
Such areas are converted to vegetation that often provides nesting cover for game birds or otherwise contributes usefully to the wildlife habitat. A notably beneficial requirement is that whenever mowing is undertaken for weed control it be done after the peak of nesting, or otherwise in the manner least damaging to wildlife.
|
From page 137... ...
Wl LD Ll F E OF U RBAN AR EAS Songbirds, squirrels, and other wild creatures have long been accepted as part of the "landscaping" of city and suburban dooryards and parkways. However, it is largely in recent years, with the recognition of "natural beauty" as a feature of our environment worth managing, that particular public attention has been given to the wildlife of metropolitan areas.
|
From page 138... ...
However, limited success was achieved until 1947, when a flock of 12 large geese from Nebraska was willed to the city by a former patient of the Mayo Clinic who had enjoyed watching the geese at Silver Lake. This pinioned flock was presumably responsible for decoying wild birds to the lake in autumn.
|
From page 139... ...
, management is not intensive, pastures are maintained as "vista" open spaces or for riding horses, erosion scars are repaired, gullies are planted to woody vegetation or used for ponds, and conditions generally favorable to wild creatures are maintained. Often these conditions develop without any real consideration being given to the effect on wildlife.
|
From page 140... ...
Resident species of wildlife can be encouraged by such simple measures as the seasonal control of weed burning, of mowing, and of in
|
From page 141... ...
This should help to minimize the harmful effects of road building on wildlife and, in some cases, result in improved wildlife habitat. A Department of the Interior news release of February 5, 1968, refiected a growing optimism concerning the prospects of preserving and managing the open lands and green spaces of the built-up portions of the country: The year 1967 marked another victory for the American people in the continuing effort to preserve undeveloped lands and waters for public conservation and recreation purposes against the encroachment of urban expansion, highways, airports, and similar developments, Secretary of the Interior Stewart L
|
From page 142... ...
, Pheasants in North America. The Stackpole Co., Harrisburg, Pa., and Wildlife Management Institute, Washington, D.C.
|
From page 143... ...
1959. Prescribed burning and other methods of deer range improvement in ponderosa pine in California.
|
From page 144... ...
1966. Wildlife habitat management as a means of increasing recreation on public lands.
|
From page 145... ...
R.1956. Forage, food habits, and range management of the mule deer.
|
From page 146... ...
1941. Plants useful in upland wildlife management.
|
From page 147... ...
1952. An evaluation of reclaimed coal strip-mined lands as wildlife habitat.
|
From page 148... ...
1967. Wildlife habitat in urban and suburban environments.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.