Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T19:02:20.194Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - Landscape ecology and wildlife management

from PART V - Applications of landscape ecology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2009

By
Jørund Rolstad
Edited by
John A. Wiens  and
Michael R. Moss
Jørund Rolstad
Affiliation:
Norwegian Forest Research Institute Norway
John A. Wiens
Affiliation:
The Nature Conservancy, Washington DC
Michael R. Moss
Affiliation:
University of Guelph, Ontario
Get access

Summary

In his seminal book Game Management (1933: 128–129), Aldo Leopold set the stage for a marriage between landscape ecology and wildlife management:

The game must usually be able to reach each of the essential types each day. The maximum population of any given piece of land depends, therefore, not only on its environmental types or composition, but also on the interspersion of these types in relation to the cruising radius of the species. Composition and interspersion are thus the two principal determinants of potential abundance on game range … Management of game range is largely a matter of determining the environmental requirements and cruising radius of the possible species of game, and then manipulating the composition and interspersion of types on the land, so as to increase the density of its game population.

Although Leopold did not explicitly mention landscape ecology, he definitely introduced a landscape ecological perspective to wildlife management, at a time in history when ivory-billed woodpeckers (Campephilus principalis) still roamed swamp forests in Louisiana. Thirty years later radiotelemetry was made generally available, opening up a new era in wildlife biology. Now wildlife managers could see for themselves how the wildlife was moving around in the landscape. Some 70 years since Leopold's book, and 40 years since radiotelemetry was introduced, what is the state of the art? Have wildlife managers grasped the concepts of landscape ecology? Have landscape ecologists found wildlife management an interesting arena in which to play out their scientific endeavors?

Type
Chapter
Information
Issues and Perspectives in Landscape Ecology , pp. 208 - 216
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aarssen, L. W. (1997). On the progress of ecology. Oikos, 80, 177–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angelstam, P., Lindström, E., and Widén, P. (1984). Role of predation in short-term population fluctuations of some birds and mammals in Fennoscandia. Oecologia, 62, 199–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beissinger, S. R. and Westphal, M. I. (1998). On the use of demographic models of population viability in endangered species management. Journal of Wildlife Management, 62, 821–841.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafson, E. J. (1998). Quantifying landscape spatial pattern: what is the state of the art?Ecosystems, 1, 143–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hildén, O. (1965). Habitat selection in birds. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 2, 53–75.Google Scholar
King, A. W. (1997). Hierarchy theory: a guide to system structure for wildlife biologists. In Wildlife and Landscape Ecology: Effects of Pattern and Scale, ed. Bissonette, J. A.. New York, NY: Springer, pp. 185–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurki, S., Nikula, A., Helle, P., and Lindén, H. (2000). Landscape fragmentation and forest composition effects on grouse breeding success in boreal forests. Ecology, 81, 1985–1997.Google Scholar
Leopold, A. (1933). Game Management. New York, NY: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Leopold, A. (1939). Academic and professional training in wildlife work. Journal of Wildlife Management, 3, 156–161Google Scholar
Leopold, A. (1949). A Sand County Almanac and Sketches Here and There. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Letcher, B. H., Priddy, J. A., Walters, J. R., and Crowder, L. B. (1998). An individual-based, spatially-explicit simulation model of the population dynamics of the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker, Picoides borealis. Biological Conservation, 86, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lindén, H. and Rajala, P. (1981). Fluctuations and long-term trends in the relative densities of tetraonid populations in Finland, 1964–1977. Finnish Game Research, 39, 13–34.Google Scholar
Loehle, C. (1990). A guide to increased creativity in research: inspiration or perspiration?BioScience, 40, 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matter, W. J. and Mannan, R. W. (1989). More on gaining reliable knowledge: a comment. Journal of Wildlife Management, 53, 1172–1176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntyre, N. E. (2002). Landscape ecology explained. Ecology, 83, 301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolstad, J. and Rolstad, E. (2000). Influence of large snow depths on black woodpecker Dryocopus martius foraging behavior. Ornis Fennica, 77, 65–70.Google Scholar
Rolstad, J. and Wegge, P. (1989). Capercaillie Tetrao urogallus populations and modern forestry: a case for landscape ecological studies. Finnish Game Research, 46, 43–52.Google Scholar
Rolstad, J., Majewski, P., and Rolstad, E. (1998). Black woodpecker use of habitats and feeding substrates in a managed Scandinavian forest. Journal of Wildlife Management, 62, 11–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rolstad, J., Løken, B., and Rolstad, E. (2000). Habitat selection as a hierachical spatial process: the green woodpecker at the northern edge of its distribution range. Oecologia, 124, 116–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, K. A., Goheen, J. R., and Naumann, R. (2001). Incidental nest predation in songbirds: behavioral indicators detect ecological scales and processes. Ecology, 82, 2937–2947.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swenson, J. E. (1993). The importance of alder to hazel grouse in Fennoscandian boreal forest: evidence from four levels of scale. Ecography, 16, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiens, J. A., Stenseth, N. C., Horne, B., and Ims, R. A. (1993). Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology. Oikos, 66, 369–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×