Text Size:   A+ A- A   •   Text Only
Find     
Site Image
Criterion 1 Indicator 6
Rationale
 
Number of Forest-Dependent Speices
 
 
 
In order to properly manage forest resources, land managers need to know which species can be expected to be present in various forest types. Appendix B lists forest-dependent species, and provides managers a starting point for identifying species that may be affected by various forest management practices..

Can This Indicator Be Quantified
  Forest-dependent species are listed in Appendix B. We considered taxa only at the full species level. We did not include subspecies because the table is general, not exhaustive; and also because the inclusion of subspecies would bring up taxonomic questions. In making a table like this one, the exact number of species included depends on the definition of "forest dependent" that is used. A strict definition of forest-dependent species would include spotted owls and Larch Mountain salamanders, but exclude species that can survive in other than forested habitats (great horned owl and roughskin newt, for example). For this project, we used a broad definition that included all species that use forest habitats for some part of their lifecycle. Species did not have to be restricted to forest habitats to be included in the list.
 
We were also inclusive when identifying habitats used by the species in the table. For example, species that are primarily riparian, but could occur in riparian habitats running through any forest type, are listed as occurring in all forest types. We made no attempt to identify which forest habitats are used by fish. This information is not available in this format. In general, the presence or absence of fish species is determined to a much greater extent by water-related habitat factors than it is by forest habitat features. Although forest conditions can dramatically affect aquatic habitats, that assessment is beyond the scope of this indicator.
The database contains a total of 329 forest-dependent, vertebrate species in Oregon. Of these, 108 are mammals, 28 are amphibians, 171 are birds, and 22 are reptiles. On the next page, there is a list of the data fields in the database, and the type of information supplied in each field.
 
Forest-Dependent Species Database: List of Data Fields
1. Scientific name
 
2. Common name
 
3. Vertebrate type
   A: Amphibian
   B: Bird
   R: Reptile
   F: Fish
 
4. Region
   E: East
   W: West
   S: South
   E/W: most areas in Oregon
   D: Habitat use differs according to which side of Cascades
   C: Cascade Crest
 
5. Habitat comments
   General comments on preferred habitat and range.
 
6. Federal status
   LE: listed endangered
   LT: listed threatened
   PE: proposed for listed endangered
   PT: proposed listed threatened
   C: candidate for listing
   SOC: species of concern
   N: not listed
 
7. State status
   Same as above, plus the following ODFW definitions:
   SC: sensitive critical species
   SP: sensitive peripheral or naturally rare
   SV: sensitive vulnerable
   SU: sensitive undetermined
 
8. Neotropical migrant
   Y: Species is a neo-tropical migrant
 
9. Shrub nester
   H: High requirement of shrubs for nesting
   M: Medium requirement of shrubs for nesting
 
10. Cavity use 1
 
11. Downed wood 1
 
12. Deciduous
   Y: indicates deciduous habitat use
 
13. Riparian 2
 
14. SS1 1
   Grass-forb: dominant vegetation is herbaceous; logs present, not decayed.
 
15. SS2 1
   Shrub-seedlings: dominant vegetation is woody shrubs and/or seedlings; logs present, not decayed.
 
16. SS3 1
   Pole-sapling: stage dominated by trees; stand usually less than 40 years old; natural thinning not yet occurring; even-height canopy; logs on ground beginning to decay.
 
17. SS4 1
   Young: stage dominated by tress; stand usually less than 80 years old; natural thinning beginning, logs moderately decayed; beginnings of understory vegetation.
 
18. SS5 1
   Mature: stage dominated by trees; stand generally less than 140 years old; natural thinning occurring; both decaying and un-decayed logs on ground; uneven-aged canopy; some snags present; understory vegetation established.
 
19. SS6 1
   Old growth: stage dominated by trees; stand usually greater than 140 years old; understory vegetation well established; snags present; heart rot and other signs of stand decadence present; all tree ages and heights represented; abundant decayed and sound logs on ground.
 
20. Douglas-fir 2
 
21. Ponderosa pine 2
 
22. Spruce; hemlock 2
 
23. True fir; mountain hemlock 2
 
24. Lodgepole pine; Jeffrey pine; subalpine fir 2
 
25. Mixed deciduous 2
 
26. Deciduous 2
 
27. Grass/shrub/regenerating 2
 
  1. H: High habitat association; M: Medium habitat association; L: Low habitat association
  2. Y: Indicates habitat association
 
Oregon Forest-Dependent Species Example (Appendix B)

Trends
There are no documented trends identifying whether the number of forest-dependent species in Oregon has risen or declined. Forest clearing and fragmentation have benefited species that prefer edge habitats, but has resulted in declining populations of species that require forest interior habitats.

Data Source and Availability
  The species list for Indicator #6 was developed from the Oregon Natural Heritage Program element tracking database and the list contained in Likely Consequences of Forest Management on Terrestrial, Forest-Dwelling Vertebrates in Oregon, a study done for the Oregon Forest Resources Institute (Bunnell, et. al., 1997). Habitat use was determined from the Oregon Natural Heritage Program vertebrate characterization abstracts database and the Oregon Gap Analysis Project wildlife/habitat relationship matrix.
 
Data is available from the Oregon Natural Heritage Program on habitat use by forest-dependent vertebrates. Data is also available in the publications listed under "References."

Reliability of Data
   
The data used in this indicator is reliable. Professional judgment is involved in decisions on the inclusion of species in the database.

Scale
   
Statewide.

Recommended Action for Data Collection
   
It would be desirable to have additional information about vertebrate animals’ use of forests. The information would help managers to identify trends in forest-dependent vertebrate populations and habitat use. This work is traditionally done on a species-by-species basis, although it is possible to survey for populations of several similar species at once. For example, the Oregon Heritage Program monitors populations of several frog species at high elevation lakes.

Definitions
  Forest-dependent species — Any species which uses forested habitats, or portions of forested habitat, at any point during the life cycle. This does not include species that may occasionally wander into forests, but are not normally expected to be found in forested habitat.

Selected References
  Sources listed in the forest-dependent species database (see Appendix B) are numbered to save space, and can be cross-referenced to the list below.
 
Brown, E. R. 1985. Management of wildlife and fish habitats in forests of western Oregon and Washington. USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR. R6-F&WL-192-1985.
 
Bunnell, F. L., and L. Kremsater, R. Wells. 1997. Likely consequences of forest management on terrestrial, forest-dwelling vertebrates in Oregon. University of British Columbia, Centre for Applied Conservation Biology, Vancouver, BC.
 
Csuti, B., and A. J. Kimmerling, T. A. O’Neil, M. M. Shaughnessy, E. P. Gaines, M. M. P. Huso. 1997. Atlas of Oregon wildlife: distribution, habitat, and natural history. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR.
 
Gilligan, J., and M. Smith, D. Rogers, A. Contreras, editors. 1994. Birds of Oregon: status and distribution. Cinclus Publications, McMinnville, OR.
 
Kostow, K., editor. 1995. Biennial report on the status of wild fish in Oregon. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, OR.
 
Maser, C. 1998. Mammals of the Pacific Northwest: from the coast to the high Cascades. Oregon State University Press, Corvallis, OR.
 
Moyle, P. B. 1976. Inland fishes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
 
Nussbaum, R. A., and E. D. Brodie, Jr., R. M. Storm. 1983. Amphibians and reptiles of the Pacific Northwest. University of Idaho Press, Moscow, ID.
 
Oregon Natural Heritage Program. 1999. Element tracking database. Unpublished data. Available from Oregon Natural Heritage Program, Portland, OR.
 
Oregon Natural Heritage Program. 1999. Gap analysis project wildlife/habitat relationships matrix. Unpublished data. Available from Oregon Natural Heritage Program, Portland, OR.
 
Oregon Natural Heritage Program. 1999. Vertebrate characterization abstracts. Unpublished data. Available from Oregon Natural Heritage Program, Portland, OR.
 
Thomas, J. W., et. al., 1993. Viability assessments and management considerations for species associated with late-successional and old-growth forests of the Pacific Northwest: the report of the Scientific Analysis Team. USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Region, Portland, OR.
 
Verts, B. J., and L. N. Carraway. 1998. Land mammals of Oregon. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
 
Wydoski, R. S., and R. R. Whitney. 1979. Inland fishes of Washington. University of Washington Press, Seattle, WA.