Laserfiche WebLink
<br />or elimination by overgrazing. In such cases, a plant species such as <br />willow continues to exist in a plant community subject to heavy grazing <br />because of beaver-created isolation from livestock caused by flooding. <br />If beaver are removed from the stream and the ponds recede, these plants <br />become vulnerable once again and can rapidly be eliminated from the plant <br />community. Beaver in some circumstances have created elevated meadows <br />through the deposition of sediments over several generations of ponds. <br />This has perched the meadow higher than the geologic knick point eleva- <br />tion. Streambanks formed through old beaver activity are generally low in <br />bank rock content and are sensitive to mechanical damage. Heavy grazing <br />can result in streambank collapse, accelerated meandering, enlarged chan- <br />nels, and losses of most stream dependent resources. As a consequence, <br />the loss of beaver in these circumstances can lead to the lowering of <br />water tables and ultimately lead to the change from a mesic meadow type <br />to a more xeric plant community, thus resulting in reduced forage pro- <br />duction (Munther, 1981). In contrast, the amount of forage flooded by <br />beaver ponds is more than compensated for in many cases by the increased <br />production of adjacent lands resulting from higher water tables. <br />Stand structure of aspen, cottonwood, or other hardwoods in or adja- <br />cent to riparian areas can be altered by beaver in search of food. Large <br />percentages of stands adjacent to ponds are cut down, particularly within <br />300 feet of water (Yeager and Rutherford, 1957). Once cut, many species <br />can rapidly regenerate by suckering. However, if the suckers are contin- <br />ually grazed heavily by livestock, a stand of trees can be prevented from <br />successfully regenerating. This ~cenario has lead to loss of aspen <br />groves and cottonwood stands in western Montana. <br /> <br />Timber Management <br /> <br />Active timber management in or adjacent to riparian areas has the <br />potential to affect beaver distribution through the successional pattern <br />resulting from timber harvest. silvicultural prescriptions that favor <br />early successional stages composed of deciduous shrubs or hardwoods can be <br />beneficial in creating a food supply appropriate for beaver. This food <br />supply, in combination with suitable stream size and channel conditions <br />is the primary component of beaver habitat. In contrast, uneven age <br />management of conifer stands in riparian areas does little to create <br />large amounts of beaver food. Timber management options are viable <br />management techniques to influence beaver distribution. Conservative <br />prescriptions such as individual tree selection or salvage prescriptions <br />are usually detrimental to beaver, while clearcuts or group selection <br />prescriptions are more favorable. <br /> <br />Fire Management <br /> <br />The management of fire greatly influences the food supply of beaver, <br />particularly in habitat types with successional stages favoring conifers. <br />Without treatments of these habitat types to create earlier successional <br />stages, large amounts of beaver forage plants are eventually lost to seral <br />stages favoring conifer stands. Some wetter riparian habitats in major <br /> <br />76 <br />