Return to Wildland Fire
Return to Northern Bobwhite site
Return to Working Lands for Wildlife site
Return to Working Lands for Wildlife site
Return to SE Firemap
Return to the Landscape Partnership Literature Gateway Website
return
return to main site

Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Sections

Personal tools

You are here: Home / Expertise Search / Costanzo, Bridgett Estel
121 items matching your search terms.
Filter the results.
Item type
























New items since



Sort by relevance · date (newest first) · alphabetically
File Bog Turtle Wildlife Habitat Evaluation Guide (WHEG)
WLFW uses WHEGs to evaluation before and after conditions anticipated from a contract.
Located in Information Materials / NRCS Conservation Practices and Materials
File Managing Longleaf Pine Forests for Our Future
Longleaf Climate Smart Guide (2024) by TNC, Clemson, and The Longleaf Alliance, 17 pages
Located in Resources / General Resources and Publications
File chemical/x-pdb Link to 2024 Paper on Bobwhite Response to Pine Savanna Management
A few bobwhite related papers that have been published in the past few months. July 2024
Located in Resources / General Resources and Publications
File FY21 WLFW-GWWA Project Boundary
Updated to include new priority areas in NY.
Located in Information Materials / Maps & Data / Maps
Abstract Forest management planning requires the specification of measurable objectives as desired future conditions at spatial extents ranging from stands to landscapes and temporal extents ranging from a single growing season to several centuries. Effective implementation of forest management requires understanding current conditions and constraints well enough to apply the appropriate silvicultural strategies to produce desired future conditions, often for multiple objectives, at varying spatial and temporal extents. We administered an online survey to forest managers in the eastern US to better understand how wildlife scientists could best provide information to help meet wildlife-related habitat objectives. We then examined more than 1000 review papers on bird–vegetation relationships in the eastern US compiled during a systematic review of the primary literature to see how well this evidence-base meets the information needs of forest managers. We identified two main areas where wildlife scientists could increase the relevance and applicability of their research. First, forest managers want descriptions of wildlife species–vegetation relationships using the operational metrics of forest management (forest type, tree species composition, basal area, tree density, stocking rates, etc.) summarized at the operational spatial units of forest management (stands, compartments, and forests). Second, forest managers want information about how to provide wildlife habitats for many different species with varied habitat needs across temporal extents related to the ecological processes of succession after harvest or natural disturbance (1–2 decades) or even longer periods of stand development. We provide examples of review papers that meet these information needs of forest managers and topic-specific bibliographies of additional review papers that may contain actionable information for foresters who wish to meet wildlife management objectives. We suggest that wildlife scientists become more familiar with the extensive grey literature on forest bird–vegetation relationships and forest management that is available in natural resource management agency reports. We also suggest that wildlife scientists could reconsider everything from the questions they ask, the metrics they report on, and the way they allocate samples in time and space, to provide more relevant and actionable information to forest managers. View Full-Text Keywords: forestry; silviculture; forest wildlife–habitat relationships; evidence-based practice; implementation gap; research relevance; synthesis; knowledge exchange; science–practice
Located in Information Materials / Research / WLFW Outcomes: Funded Research
File NRCS WLFW Outcomes Assessment 2012-2018 (released 2021)
An outcomes assessment report completed under a contract to Dr. JJ Apodaca from NRCS-WLFW. This document is being shared with conservation partners but broad or public sharing is not approved.
Located in Information Materials / Research / WLFW Outcomes: Funded Research
Project Range-wide assessment of grazing and hydrology in bog turtle wetlands
In December 2018, a meeting of bog turtle experts was hosted in Richmond, VA and experts across the Eastern range of the species identified as a high priority the need to better understand the benefits and potential negative impacts of livestock grazing in bog turtle inhabited wetlands. Hydrologic conditions in bog turtle wetlands emerged as a secondary concern needing more research. Recently, NRCS’ Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) awarded funds to Dr. Carola Haas leading a team of researchers at Virginia Tech University to conduct an assessment on these two topics (grazing and hydrology).
Located in Information Materials / Research / WLFW Outcomes: Funded Research
Video WLFW Northern bobwhite, Grasslands, and Savannas Framework - Partners’ webinar 3/2/2022
On March 2, 2022 Bridgett Costanzo of NRCS's Working Lands for Wildlife and Jessica McGuire of QF presented on the WLFW framework for NOBO, grasslands and savannas. Ms. Costanzo presented on the content of the new framework document, the priority areas and conservation practice goals set by the 24 NRCS state offices, and responses received from the needs assessment survey. Ms. McGuire presented on staffing and monitoring plans associated with launching this framework.
Located in Training Resources / Webinars and Instructional Videos
File Troff document Map of Fescue Belt
Map of fescue belt within the U.S. superimposed over map of states participating in WLFW NOBO, Grasslands, and Savannas
Located in Information / Maps and Spatial Data
File BBS Hotspots for Northern bobwhite
Hot spot map based on breeding bird survey data for northern bobwhite, as of 2011.
Located in Information / Maps and Spatial Data