Managing the Abundance and Diversity of Breeding Bird Populations through Manipulation of Deer Populations

By William J. McShea, J. Rappole. 2000

202 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Nature and Landscape Conservation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0c2a04b51e0bad8c58c6c73e9648f80e2e9b7d21

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology

1. W. Ripple
2. R. Beschta
3. J. Kie
4. Steeve D. Côté
5. R. Terry Bowyer
6. D. Waller
7. T. Rooney
8. J. Tremblay

In Nature and Landscape Conservation

1. R. Beschta
2. W. Ripple
3. D. Waller
4. Steeve D. Côté
5. T. Rooney
6. David A. Coomes
7. Mark A. White
8. J. Tremblay

Citations in the corpus

• Ecological Impacts of Deer Overabundance (2004, background): “…OF DEER OVERABUNDANCE 121 that utilize known deer density in enclosures appear more realistic and can be used to infer whole-community responses to manipulated deer densities (Côté et al. 2004, deCalesta 1994, Hester et al. 2000, Horsley et al. 2003, McShea & Rappole 2000, Tilghman 1989).”
• Effects of scale on interpreting life‐history characteristics of ungulates and carnivores (2006, background): “High densities of herbivores can have deleterious effects on birds, especially in ecosystems where large carnivores are absent or reduced in numbers (de Calesta, 1994; McShea & Rappole, 2000; Berger et al., 2001).”
• Integrating Landscape Ecology into Natural Resource Management: Focal patch landscape studies for wildlife management: Optimizing sampling effort across scales (2002, unknown): “…et al., 1996; Kohm and Franklin,1997), such as conflicts between management for short-term and long-term benefits, between management at small scales and large scales, and between management of different natural resources (Liu, 1995; Scott et al., 1995; Dale et al., 2000; McShea and Rappole,2000).”
• A natural experiment on the impact of overabundant deer on songbird populations (2005, unknown): “Species characteristic of the shrub layer were those most often affected (deCalesta, 1994; McShea and Rappole, 2000).”
• High white-tailed deer densities benefit graminoids and contribute to biotic homogenization of forest ground-layer vegetation (2009, background): “Fewer insects and the absence of shrubs and woody seedlings are likely detrimental to most birds that nest or feed in the shrub layer (McShea and Rappole 2000; Fuller 2001; Allombert et al. 2005).”
• Ecosystem and competition impacts of introduced deer (2008, unknown): “In turn, this can have cascade effects on biodiversity, including songbird abundance and species composition (McShea and Rappole 2000; Berger et al. 2001; Fuller 2001; Allombert et al. 2005 a ; Gill and Fuller 2007), nest predation rates (Martin and Joron 2003), the abundance and density of…”
• Legacy of top-down herbivore pressure ricochets back up multiple trophic levels in forest canopies over 30 years (2011, background): “Ungulate effects on birds reported throughout the literature are mainly in species of the shrub and ground layers where ungulate browsing is active (deCalesta 1994, McShea and Rappole 2000, Stockton et al. 2005).”
• BirdTrends 2014: trends in numbers, breeding success and survival for UK breeding birds (2014, background): “…and canopy closure (Mason 2007), due to changes in woodland management (Hopkins & Kirby 2007) on the low woodland layers, although good evidence from the UK is sparse (but there are some experimental studies in America on different species which demonstrate this effect, e.g. McShea & Rappole 2000).”
• Direct and indirect effects of white-tailed deer in forest ecosystems (2003, background): “By reducing the density of the shrubs and saplings, browsing can also reduce vertical complexity in forest stands (deCalesta, 1994; McShea and Rappole, 2000; Fuller, 2001).”
• Factors Preventing the Recovery of New Zealand Forests Following Control of Invasive Deer (2003, background): “We are currently collecting data to build a model similar to SORTIE, which was first developed to simulate dynamics in the forests of the north- Conservation Biology Volume 17, No. 2, April 2003 Coomes et al. Restoring Forests Altered by Deer 457 eastern United States ( Pacala et al. 1996 ).”
• A perfect storm: two ecosystem engineers interact to degrade deciduous forests of New Jersey (2008, background): “Similarly, structural changes in forest understories due to deer overbrowsing caused a shift in avian communities, with birds dependent on understory vegetation for foraging and nesting decreasing in abundance within, or becoming absent from, heavily browsed forests (McShea et al. 1995; McShea and ”
• Understanding Ungulate Herbivory–Episodic Disturbance Effects on Vegetation Dynamics: Knowledge Gaps and Management Needs (2006, background): “Herbivoryinduced changes in vegetative structure can dramatically affect the associated vertebrate populations (deCalesta 1994, McShea and Rappole 2000, Côté et al. 2004).”
• Linking a cougar decline, trophic cascade, and catastrophic regime shift in Zion National Park (2006, background): “Other researchers have documented a reduction in abundance and diversity of birds in areas without wolves and with abundant ungulate populations (McShea and Rappole, 2000; Berger et al., 2001).”
• Long-term effects of deer browsing: Composition, structure and productivity in a northeastern Minnesota old-growth forest (2012, background): “, 2003), forest songbirds (McShea and Rappole, 2000; Allombert et al., 2005a) and forest invertebrates (Allombert et al.”