Browsing by Subject "game habitats"

The modern, intensive silviculture has affected negatively to the grouses. Main reasons are changes in the ground vegetation and decreasing proportion of blueberry. Main features for grouse habitats are variety in the forest cover and protection from the understorey. In managed forests fluctuation can be increased via thickets. Thicket size varies from couple of trees to approximately two ares. Tickets are uncleared patches containing trees in various sizes. To highlight grouses via game-friendly forest management, information about the habitat is required in the forest site and broader area. Observations about the grouses in the forest site and the information about capercaillie’s lekking sites, willow grouse’s habitats and the wintering areas have been beneficial. Information about grouse densities and population’s fluctuations has been gathered via game triangles. Guide books about game husbandry contain information about grouse habitats and thicket characteristics. The aim of this study was to investigate, whether it is possible to model suitable thickets and grouse habitats with open GIS (Geographical Information Systems) material via GIS- analyses. Examined grouse species in modelling were capercaillie, black grouse and hazel grouse. Weighted Overlay was done with ArcMap- software. Suitable thickets and habitats were examined in the whole research area and in suitable figures. Based on the results of the analysis, theme maps were made to represent the research area’s suitability for thickets and grouse habitats. The needed material for the thickets was collected and GIS- analyses were made in the research area in Tavastia Proper, Hausjärvi. For the research, 12 one-hectare squares were created. Together 45 suitable areas for thickets were charted via field inventory. After the field inventory and GIS- analyses, the results were compared. Key figures from the tickets were number of the thickets, areas, distance to the nearest thicket, averages and standard deviations. Statistical methods were applied to examine possible statistically significant differences between areas and between distances to the nearest thicket. Performed tests were One-Way ANOVA and Kruskall-Wallis. Grouse habitat’s tree characteristics were examined with up-to-date forest management plan. Tree characteristics were examined from 17 suitable figures, covering total area of 42,6 hectares. In field inventory, the average amount of found thickets in research grid was 3,8 and with modelling 1,4. The average area of thicket was 76,9 m2 in field inventory and 252 m2 in modelling. The average distance between thickets was 12,6 meters in field inventory and 24,8 meters with modelling. In field inventory thickets covered approximately 2,9 percent and modelled 3,6 percent of the research grid’s total area. According to statistical analyses, there was statistically significant difference between the inventory method to the total thicket area and distance to the nearest thicket. According to the modelling and forest management plan, capercaillie’s habitats were located in mature pine stands. Black grouse habitats were located in spruce dominated, young forest stands. Hazel grouse habitats included high proportion of broad-leaved trees, which were visible in ecotones between forest and field. Common for capercaillie, black grouse and hazel grouse habitats were minor surface area and mosaic-like structure. As a result, thickets and grouse habitats can be modeled with open GIS-material. However, modelling requires knowing the characteristics of thickets and examined species. With weighted overlay thickets were not found in areas where canopy density and spruce volume were naturally low. Research is needed to verify thicket’s occupation with trail cameras. The ecological impacts on the research area by saving thickets require evaluation.