Planning for the expansion of biomass production in the

Midwest: Remaining wildlife neutral

JoAnn HanowskiNatural Resources Research Institute

University of Minnesota-Duluth

Remaining Wildlife Neutral No net loss in Conservation Reserve

Program acreage Establish landscape appropriate biomass

crop Understand habitat change implications

from upland brush and timber harvest residue removal

Create positive habitat change for wildlife in under-utilized ecosystem types, lowland brush

No net loss in CRP acreage CRP protects almost

40 million acres of highly erodible farmland

CRP has restored over 1.8 million acres of wetland

CRP produces 2.1 million ducks/year

CRP provides critical habitat for 100’s of wildlife species

Establish landscape appropriate biomass crop

Avoid planting hybrid poplar in open landscapes

Switchgrass managed properly could have positive impacts on wildlife

Switchgrass mix would provide better wildlife habitat than monoculture

Breeding birds and hybrid poplar What are the pressing issues with wildlife

(specifically breeding birds)? Studies completed in Minnesota in the last

decade Developed recommendations for hybrid

poplar plantations Pulp prices have made it difficult to utilize

hybrid poplar as an energy source

Study Sites Large plantations (up

to 300 acres) located in western and southwestern MN

Eleven plantations were surveyed over 7 years

Oldest plantation was 11 years (in 2001)

Bird sampling in plantations and surrounding habitats

Habitat What species respond

positively to presence of plantation habitat?

What species are replaced when existing land-use is converted to plantation?

How can we increase plantation diversity?

Community response Total number of

individuals increase as plantations age

Species richness does not change much, usually 4 to 6 species

Plantation Age in Years1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

0

2

4

6

8

10

12Individuals

Species

Habitat guild response Composition of bird

community changes as plantations age

Young plantations have species associated with open and shrub habitats

Number of forest dwelling individuals increases with age 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

0

20

40

60

80

100

Both Open, shrub

Forest

Species response Species that colonize

plantations are generally found in adjacent habitats

Young plantations have lots of sparrows and blackbirds

Beginning to see vireos and warblers in older plantations and some permanent residents

1 7 8 9 10 11

0

20

40

60

80

100

Hay Other wild

Other non-wild Forest/shrub

Crop

Bird species replaced Dependent upon

habitat Replacement of

cropland least amount of impact

Replacement with “good” CRP most impact

Pheasants Forever? Initial concern that

pheasants would be negatively impacted

We observed pheasants in summer and winter

Likely not affected unless large percentage of area is in plantation

Landscape Context Species that colonize

plantations are dependent upon landscape context

Plantations in a predominantly agricultural landscape are colonized by mostly open country and shrub bird species

Plantations in forest landscapes are colonized earlier by forest birds

Negative landscape effects

Habitat quality Longevity of habitat

for individual species is short

Community turnover is almost 50% each year

Productivity of individuals is questionable

Are plantations largely sink habitats?

Are plantations attractive hazards?

Open tree architecture, lack of understory and ground cover may result in increase predation of bird nests and increased parasitism rates by Brown-headed Cowbirds

Artificial nest studies Plantation and

surrounding habitats Results indicated that

predation rates were independent of habitat type and distance from plantation edge

Predation rates were high on some sites, likely due to local predator populations

Recommendation: What to avoid Replacement of “good CRP

habitat” and highly erodible sites

Fragmentation of open habitats especially in areas with sharp-tailed grouse and prairie chickens

“Large” areas of single-aged plantations

Agroforestry in Minnesota’s Open Landscapes:

Information, Concerns, and Recommendations

in Regard to Native Wildlife and Their Habitats

by the Minnesota Chapter of The Wildlife Society

October 28, 2001

Understand habitat change implications from upland brush and timber harvest residue removal

Fire suppression has resulted in buildup of brush in forest ecosystems-create guidelines for habitat restoration

A percentage of residue from timber harvest could be removed from site-create guidelines

Minnesota guidelines: Woody Biomass Removal Retain timber harvest guidelines for

retention trees, snags and CWD Old guideline for slash- leave scattered on

site New guideline: Leave 20% of tree tops and

limbs scattered on site Issue for certified land owners to ensure

that operations are sustainable

Create positive habitat change for wildlife in under-utilized ecosystem types, lowland brush

Brush management for open country species includes shearing and burning brush on site which cost money

Opportunity to harvest biomass from these sites and have positive impact on wildlife

Lowland Brush Harvest Positive impact on open country birds Negative impact on other species Planning needs to be done on landscape

level to get best results for species with complicated life histories (Sharp-tailed grouse)

Identify species of concern Partners in Flight

species of concern 4 species, Veery,

Rose-breasted Grosbeak, Golden-winged Warbler and Canada Warbler, use upland and/or lowland brush habitat

Summary: remaining wildlife neutral Control crop expansion on CRP lands (corn

and soybeans) Establish landscape suitable biomass

crops and diverse species crops if possible Exploit woody biomass on timber harvest

sites with a plan Explore habitat restoration possibilities

with upland brush removal Plan landscape level lowland brush harvest

to benefit species of concern