4.7 Article

Prescribed burning effects on summer elk forage availability in the subalpine zone, Banff National Park, Canada

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Volume 77, Issue 3, Pages 183-193

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.04.003

Keywords

biomass; Cervus elaphus; rocky mountains; vegetation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The effects of prescribed burning on forage abundance and suitability for elk (Cervus elaphus) during the snow-free season was evaluated in east-central Banff National Park, Canada. Six coniferous forest and mixed shrub-herb plant communities (n = 144 plots), and 5223 ha of burned (n = 13 1) vegetation < 12 years old were sampled using a stratified semi-random design. Sampling units represented various combinations of vegetation, terrain conditions, and stand ages that were derived from digital biophysical data, with plant communities the basic unit of analysis. Burning coniferous forest stands reduced woody biomass. and increased herbaceous forage from 146 to 790 kg/ha. Increases commonly occurred in the percent cover of hairy wild rye (Leymus innovatus (Beal) Pigler) and fireweed (Chamerion angustifolium (L.) Holub.). The herbaceous components of mixed shrub-herb communities increased from 336747 kg/ha to 517-1104 kg/ha in response to burning (P < 0.025, Mann-Whitney U-test). Browse biomass (mostly Salix spp. and Betula nana L.) increased >= 220% (P <= 0.003, Mann-Whitney U-test) from 653 kg/ha in deciduous shrub types. Elk preferences for unburned and burned vegetation-types were assessed as low and moderate, respectively. Potential summer carrying capacity, based on forage availability, increased from eight to 28 elk/100 km(2) within burned areas, whereas spring grazing potential rose from 13 to 45 elk/100 km(2). Most of the increase (73%) was attributable to changes within burned Engelmann Spruce stands, which composed 58% of the burned area. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available