Donald J. Lipscomb

Diet of nestling red-cockaded woodpeckers at three locations.

Abstract We conducted a 2-yr study of the nestling diet of Red-cockaded Woodpeckers (Picoides borealis) at three locations to determine how it varied among sites. We photographed 5939 nest visits by adult woodpeckers delivering food items for nestlings. In 1994, we located cameras near three nest cavities on the Lower Coastal Plain of South Carolina and near two cavities at the Savannah River Site, which is on the Upper Coastal Plain. In 1995, cameras were installed on the Savannah River Site and in the Piedmont National Wildlife Refuge, Georgia. The cameras recorded adults bringing 33 different types of food to nestlings. Wood roaches (Blattoidea: Blattellidae, Parcoblatta spp.) were the most common food composing 50% of the diet overall. They were also the most common prey at each location and for all but one of the woodpecker groups studied. Wood roaches were recorded in 26% of the visits photographed on the Lower Coastal Plain and 62% of the nest visits on the Upper Coastal Plain in 1994. In 1995, wood roaches were recorded in 57% and 50% of the visits on the Upper Coastal Plain and Piedmont, respectively. Woodpeckers on the Lower Coastal Plain used blueberries (Vaccinum sp.) and sawfly larvae (Hymenoptera: Diprionidae, Neodiprion sp.), two dietary items not commonly used at the other locations. Adults at two locations providing snail shells to nestlings possibly as an additional source of calcium. Moristas index of diet overlap (C) ranged from 0.94 to 0.99 for breeding males and females in the same group, from 0.63 to 0.99 among groups at the same location, and from 0.68 to 0.96 among locations. Because diet overlap of Red-cockaded Woodpecker nestlings at different geographical locations was within the range that occurred among groups at the same location, we conclude that nestling diets are similar across the geographical area studied, and that it varies little from year to year.

Mapping variable—width streamside management zones for water quality protection

Streamside management is an essential part of maintaining water quality during forest operations. Maintaining forest cover and forest floor near streams has been found to minimize the impact of upslope mechanical treatments. Throughout the Southeastern US streamside management is a major component in forestry practice guidelines. Width of streamside management zone is determined in most of these guidelines as a variable, based on slope perpendicular to the stream. Although a variable width zone is advantageous for water quality protection it complicates forest operation planning. Geographic Information Systems aid management planning by accurately mapping areas where operations must be altered. In the case of streamside management zones, harvest plans must include these zones in cutting, skidding, site preparation, and road and deck placement. This paper will outline a procedure (macro language program) which allows accurate mapping of streamside management zones that vary with side slope. An accurate map of streamside management zones can be produced from a map of stream bottom position and a high resolution Digital Elevation Model. The model allows determination of the position and extent of streamside management zones during operation planning without need to resort to ground mapping during the planning stage. Model applications will be shown on small harvested watersheds. Streamside management zone mapping can also be used in the context of identifying water quality impairment on larger watersheds that include agriculture and urban development.

Mapping Forestry Streamside Management Zones in the Piedmont Region

Voluntary Forestry Best Management Practices (BMPs) have successfully protected water quality throughout the Southeast. A variety of studies from the 1960s to 80s evaluated water quality impacts of forestry practices. They found several practices that contributed to sedimentation, the most common impairment to water quality by forestry. Forestry BMPs were then devised to eliminate those practices. A number of later studies have found BMPs effective in preventing water quality degradation found in the earlier studies. Streamside Management Zones are specified in all the southeastern US Best Management Practices guidelines. Opportunity costs of compliance with recommended SMZ width are quite high (over

The missing wetlands: using local ecological knowledge to find cryptic ecosystems

2000/ac) and vary considerably. In order to plan forest management activity, it would be very useful to have an accurate planning map of SMZ width. During the last three years we have developed an ARC -INFO, AML program to map variable width SMZ areas. We have used the program to evaluate differences in SMZ width on a series of watersheds in the piedmont of South Carolina and Georgia. The field definitions used in the manuals cannot be translated to maps using elevation data publicly available. The difficulty stems primarily from the inability to map a perennial stream channel that agrees with ground estimates using definitions in the manuals. Definitions based on valley order or on contributing area can be developed automatically by GIS techniques. However, neither method produces a robust estimate of SMZ area.