The Hazel Grouse (Tetrastes bonasia) is considered an indicator of the naturalness and heterogeneity of the forest environment. This species occurs in various woods and forages on a variety of plants. The aim of this study was to verify the hypothesis that, in Norway spruce-dominated forest stands, the Hazel Grouse compensates for habitat poverty using non-forest areas and harsh topography, which deliver food resources and shelter for the birds. We compared 14 environmental and topographic variables in forest patches occupied and unoccupied by the Hazel Grouse in the Tatra Mountains (South Poland). Multivariate modelling showed that crucial factors for Hazel Grouse occurrence in spruce-dominated high-mountain forests were southern or western exposures, the presence of streams or glades and a multilayer forest structure with lower plant species richness in the undergrowth layer. Moreover, this species avoided clearcuts and depended either on wild sites (with a high share of deadwood and treefall gaps in mature stands at higher altitudes) or juvenile stands. The results of our study confirmed that gaps in forests and diverse topography could compensate the Hazel Grouse for habitat deficiency. These findings may be important for effective protection of this species in high-mountain spruce-only dominated forests.
HildénO.Habitat selection in birds: a review. Ann Zool Fenn1965; 2: 53–75.
2.
JonesJ.Habitat selection studies in avian ecology: a critical review. Auk2001; 118: 557–562.
3.
ChalfounADMartinTE.Assessments of habitat preferences and quality depend on spatial scale and metrics of fitness. J Appl Ecol2007; 44: 983–992.
4.
AldridgeCLBoyceMS.Accounting for fitness: combining survival and selection when assessing wildlife-habitat relationships. Isr J Ecol Evol2008; 53: 389–419.
5.
FahrigL.Relative effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on population extinction. J Wildlife Manage1997; 61: 603–610.
6.
FahrigL.Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol2003; 34: 487–515.
7.
ZachariasMARoffJC.Use of focal species in marine conservation and management: a review and critique. Aquat Conserv2001; 11: 59–76.
8.
HannonSJMcCallumC.Using the focal species approach for conserving biodiversity in landscapes managed for forestry: Knowledge Exchange and Technology Extension Program (KETE) Sustainable Forest Management Network. Edmonton, AB, Canada: Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, 2004.
9.
CaroT.Conservation by proxy: indicator, umbrella, key stone, flagship and other surrogate species. Washington, DC; Covelo, CA; London: Island Press, 2010.
PakkalaTLindénATiainenJet al. Indicators of forest biodiversity: which bird species predict high breeding bird assemblage diversity in boreal forests at multiple spatial scales?Ann Zool Fenn2014; 51: 457–476.
12.
SuterWGrafRFHessR.Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) and avian biodiversity: testing the umbrella-species concept. Conserv Biol2002; 16: 778–788.
13.
LõhmusALeivitsMPēterhofsEet al. The Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus): an iconic focal species for knowledge-based integrative management and conservation of Baltic forests. Biodivers Conserv2017; 26: 1–21.
14.
BergmannHHKlausSMüllerFet al. Das Haselhuhn Bonasa bonasia. Wittenberg: Ziemsen-Verlag, 1982 (in German).
15.
BergmannHHKlausSMüllerFet al. Die Haselhühner, Bonasa bonasia und B. sewerzowi (Die Neue Brehm-Bücherei). Magdeburg: Westrap Wissenschaften, 1996 (in German).
16.
SwensonJEAndreevAVDrovetskiiSV.Factors shaping winter social organization in Hazel Grouse Bonasa bonasia: a comparative study in the eastern and western Palearctic. J Avian Biol1995; 26: 4–12.
17.
ÅbergJSwensonJEAndrénH.The dynamics of Hazel Grouse (Bonasa bonasia L.) occurrence in habitat fragments. Can J Zool2000; 78(3): 352–358.
18.
SachotSPerrinNNeetC.Winter habitat selection by two sympatric forest grouse in western Switzerland: implications for conservation. Biol Conserv2003; 112: 373–382.
19.
HagemeijerEJMBlairMJ (eds). The EBCC atlas of European breeding birds: their distribution and abundance. London: T. & A. D. Poyser, 1997.
20.
Birdlife International. Birds in Europe: population estimates, trends and conservation status. Cambridge: Birdlife International, 2004.
21.
SwensonJEDanielsonJ.Status and conservation of Hazel Grouse in Europe. Ornis Scand1991; 22: 297–298.
22.
StorchI.Conservation status of grouse worldwide: an update. Wildlife Biol2007; 13: 5–12.
23.
BonczarZ.Hazel Grouse Bonasa bonasia. In: ChylareckiPSikoraACenianZ (eds) Monitoring of breeding birds: methodological guide concerning species protected by birds directive. Warszawa: Biblioteka Monitoringu Środowiska, 2009, pp. 287–291 (in Polish).
24.
MatysekM.Hazel Grouse (Tetrastes bonasia). In: WilkTBobrekRPępkowska-KrólAet al. (eds) The birds of the polish Carpathians – status, threats, conservation. Marki: OTOP, 2016, pp. 112–120 (in Polish with English summary).
25.
JohnsgardP.The grouse of the world. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1983.
26.
Kämpfer-LauensteinA.Habitat selection of Hazel Grouse Bonasa bonasia and natural dynamics in different central European woodland associations. Wildlife Biol1997; l: 3–289.
27.
ÅbergJSwensonJEAngelstamP.The habitat requirements of Hazel Grouse (Bonasa bonasia) in managed boreal forest and applicability of forest stand descriptions as a tool to identify suitable patches. Forest Ecol Manag2003; 175: 437–444.
28.
MathysLZimmermannNEZbindenNet al. Identifying habitat suitability for Hazel Grouse Bonasa bonasia at the landscape scale. Wildlife Biol2006; 12: 357–366.
29.
MüllerDSchröederBMüllerJ.Modelling habitat selection of the cryptic Hazel Grouse Bonasa bonasia in a Montane forest. J Ornithol2009; 150: 717–732.
30.
SchäublinSBollmanK.Winter habitat selection and conservation of Hazel Grouse (Bonasa bonasia) in mountain forests. J Ornithol2011; 152: 179–192.
31.
KajtochŁŻmihorskiMBonczarZ. Hazel Grouse occurrence in fragmented forests: habitat quantity and configuration is more important than quality. Eur J Forest Res2012; 131: 1783–1795.
32.
MontadertMLeonardP. Post-juvenile dispersal of Hazel Grouse (Bonasa bonasia) in an expanding population of the southeastern French Alps. Ibis2006; 148: 1–13.
33.
SitziaTDaineseMClementiTet al. Capturing cross-scalar variation of habitat selection with grid sampling: an example with Hazel Grouse (Tetrastes bonasia L.). Eur J Wildlife Res2014; 60(2): 177–186.
34.
LudwigTKlausS.Habitat selection in the post-breeding period by Hazel Grouse: Tetrastes bonasia in the Bohemian forest. J Ornithol2017; 158: 101–112.
35.
MatysekMGwiazdaRBonczarZ.Seasonal changes of the Hazel Grouse Tetrastes bonasia habitat requirements in managed mountain forests (Western Carpathians). J Ornithol2018; 159(1): 115–127.
36.
MüllerDSchröderBMüllerJ. Modelling habitat selection of the cryptic Hazel Grouse Bonasa bonasia in a montane forest. J Ornith2006; 717–732.
37.
KajtochŁWilkTBobrekRet al. The importance of forests along submontane stream valleys for bird conservation: the Carpathian example. Bird Conserv Int2016; 26: 350–365.
38.
CichockiJMatysekM.About Hazel Grouse, the smallest and uncountable forest associated grouse in Tatra Mountains. Tatry2015; 52: 70–75 (in Polish).
39.
Piękoś-MirkowaHMirekZ.Plant assemblages. In: MirekZ (ed.) Nature of Tatry National Park. Kraków; Zakopane: Tatra National Park and Polish Academy Sciences, 1996, pp. 237–274.
40.
FabijanowskiJDziewolskiJ.Tatra forests. In: MirekZ (ed.) Nature in Tatra National Park. Zakopane; Kraków: Tatra National Park and Polish Academy of Sciences, 1996, pp. 675–696 (in Polish with English summary).
41.
MirekZ.Anthropogenic changes in the plant cover. In: MirekZ (ed.) Nature in Tatra National Park. Zakopane; Kraków: Tatra National Park and Polish Academy Sciences, 1996, pp. 637–654 (in Polish with English summary).
42.
SwensonJE.Evaluation of the density index for territorial male from Hazel Grouse Bonasa bonasia in spring and autumn. Ornis Fenn1993; 68: 57–65.
43.
FreckletonRP.Dealing with collinearity in behavioural and ecological data: model averaging and the problems of measurement error. Behav Ecol Sociobiol2011; 65: 91–101.
44.
LebretonJBurnhamKClobertJet al. Model survival and testing biological hypotheses using marked animals: a unified approach with case studies. Ecol Monogr1992; 62: 67–118.
45.
BurnhamKPAndersonDR.Multimodel inference: understanding AIC and BIC in model selection. Sociol Method Res2004; 33: 261–304.
46.
MontadertMLeonardP.Survival in an expanding Hazel Grouse Bonasa bonasia population in the southeastern French alps. Wildl Biol2003; 9: 357–364.
47.
SwensonJE.Hazel Grouse (Bonasa bonasia) pairs during the nonbreeding season: mutual benefits of a cooperative alliance. Behav Ecol1993; 4: 14–21.
48.
PiętaMPiętaGBinkiewiczB.Communities of breeding birds in forest gaps created after bark beetle outbreaks and windthrows in Tatra National Park. Chrońmy Przyr Ojcz2016; 72: 184–195 (in Polish with English summary).
