Advertisement

Journal of Forestry Research

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 131–134 | Cite as

Characteristics of seasonal movement of hazel grouse (Bonasa bonasia) in a temperate forest

  • Shin-Jae Rhim
  • Woo-Shin Lee
Article

Abstract

This study were carried out in the Experimental Forest (37° 48′ 10″ N, 127° 48′ 50″ E) of Gangwon Forest Development Institute, Gamjeong-ri, Chuncheon, Gangwon-do Province, Korea from Dec. 1999 to Jul. 2002. Eight individuals (three males and five females) of hazel grouse were captured and they were marked with a 14-g necklace-type transmitter. The surveying results showed that females were more active than males throughout the year, but males were more mobile than females in spring. The degree of movement for females and males was similar from summer to winter. The overlap degree of habitat was very large from spring to autumn. Hazel grouse had greater shifts in area use in winter. They used similar area from spring to autumn, made a shift in their habitat use in winter, and then shifted back to the previous habitat.

Keywords

Activity Hazel grouse Bonasa bonasia Korea Movement 

CLC number

Q958.13 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aberg, J., Jansson, G., Swenson, J.E. and Angelstam, P. 1995. The effect of matrix on the occurrence of hazel grouse (Bonasa bonasia) in isolated habitat fragments [J]. Oecologia,103: 265–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bergmann, H.H., Klaus, S., Muller, F., and Wiesner, J. 1982. Das HaselhuhnBonasa bonasia. 2. Auflage [M]. A. Zimsen Verlag, Wittenberg: 245pp.Google Scholar
  3. Dunning, J.B., Danielsen, B.J. and Pulliam, H.R. 1992. Ecological processes that affect populations in complex landscapes [J]. Oikos,65: 375–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ellison, L.N. 1973. Seasonal social organization and movements of spruce grouse [J]. Condor,75: 375–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gaidar, A.A. 1973. Ring ofTetrastes bonasia L. and its results. Byulleten Moskovskogo Obshchestva Ispytatelei Prirody [J]. Otdel Biologicheskii,78: 120–124 (in Russian with English summary).Google Scholar
  6. Harvey, M.J. and Barbour, R.W. 1965. Home range ofMicrotus ochrogaster as determined by a modified minimum home range method [J]. Journal of Mammalogy,46: 398–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hjeljord, O., Wegge, P., Rolstad, J.,et al. 2000. Spring-summer movements of male capercaillieTetrao urogallus: a test of the landscape mosaic’ hypothesis [J]. Wildlife Biology,6: 251–256.Google Scholar
  8. Ivanter, E.V. 1962. K biololli ryabchika v Karelii [J]. Orhitologiya,4: 87–98 (in Russian with English summary).Google Scholar
  9. Opdam, P., D. Van Dorp and C.J.F. ter Brank. 1984. The effect of isolation on the number of woodland birds in small woodlots in the Netherlands [J]. Journal of Biogeography,11: 473–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Rhim, S.J. 2002. Characteristics of distribution, behavioral ecology and habitat using pattern of hazei grouseBonasa bonasia [D]. Ph.D. thesis of Graduate School, Seoul National University. Seoul (In Korean with English summary).Google Scholar
  11. Rhim, S.J. and Lee, W.S. 2001. Characteristics of hazel grouseBonasa bonasia distribution in southern Korea [J]. Wildlife Biology,7: 257–261.Google Scholar
  12. Rolstad, J. and Wegge, P. 1989. CapercaillieTetrao urogallus populations and modern forestry: a case for landscape ecological studies [J]. Finnish Game Research,46: 43–52.Google Scholar
  13. Schroeder, M.A. 1986. The fall phase of dispersal in juvenile spruce grouse [J]. Canadian Journal of Zoology,64: 16–20.Google Scholar
  14. Swenson, J.E. 1991a. Social organization of hazel grouse and ecological factors influencing it [D]. Ph.D. thesis of University of Alberta. Edmonton.Google Scholar
  15. Swenson, J.E. 1991b. Is the hazel grouse a poor disperser [C]? Proceeding of International Congress of Union Game Biologist20: 347–352.Google Scholar
  16. Swenson, J.E. 1995. Seasonal movements by hazel grouse in south-central Sweden [C]. Proceedings of the 6th International Conferences on Grouse, World pheasant association, Udine, Italy, pp. 37–40.Google Scholar
  17. Swenson, J.E. and Danielsen, J., 1995. The ecology of hazel grouse and management of its habitat [J]. Naturschutzreport,10: 227–238.Google Scholar
  18. Swenson, J.E. and P., Angelstam. 1993. Habitat separation by sympatric forest grouse in Fennoscandia in relation to boreal forest succession [J]. Canadian Journal of Zoology,71: 1303–1310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Taylor, P.D., Fahrig, L. Henein, k.,et al. 1993. Connectivity is a vital element of landscape structure [J]. Oikos,66: 571–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wiens, J.A., Stenseth, N.C., B. Van Horne,et al. 1993. Ecological mechanisms and landscape ecology [J]. Oikos,66: 369–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Northeast Forestry University 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University ForestsSeoul National UniversitySuwonKorea
  2. 2.Department of Forest ResourcesSeoul National UniversitySuwonKorea

Personalised recommendations