Die Beurteilung von Wildverbiß durch SOLL-IST-Vergleich: Assessment of browsing impacts by comparison of target and status

Publikationen: Beitrag in FachzeitschriftZeitungsartikel

AutorInnen

Forschungseinrichtungen

Details

Three methods of browsing assessment used in Austria, Germany and Switzerland are compared and discussed. These methods are based on different concepts of target-status comparison. Applicabilities and limits as well as further research needs are shown. 1. The "EIBERLE" method (Switzerland) records the browsing percentage without fenced comparison areas. Its advantage is the simple applicability concerning the selection and maintainance of the sample areas as well as the collection and evaluation of data. In addition to the browsing percentage, representative data regarding structure and distribution of the forest regeneration are gained. Despite the objective reproducibility and the operational target-status comparison, a realistic assessment of game damage is only possible under certain preconditions. The browsing percentage is merely an indirect indicator of game damage. 2. The 2 methods of Austria and Germany based on pairs of fenced and an unfenced patches give better results about the real impact of ungulates on the forest regeneration and the emerging damage as well. However, these methods are more costly than the "EIBERLE" method in respect of the erection and maintainance of the fences, and the analysis of the data. Representative data about structure and distribution of the whole forest regeneration are generally not obtained because the fences are usually erected in a certain regeneration layer only (e.g. starting phase of regeneration); these methods mostly do not replace common regeneration inventories. The same way of data collection allows different ways of data analysis depending on aim and condition of each country or region. In contrast to the "EIBERLE" method, targets and tolerance limits can be modified locally and regionally. Further development of the described methods requires soil, ground vegetation and zoological aspects to be considered. For a better understanding of the interactions between plants and ungulates as well as for a more objective assessment of "damage" and "benefit" caused by game, long term investigations using fenced and unfenced patches (comparison method) in different forest communities are necessary.
OriginalspracheDeutsch
ZeitschriftAllgemeine Forst und Jagdzeitung
Jahrgang168
Seiten (von - bis)214-226
Seitenumfang13
ISSN0002-5852
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - 1997

ID: 3217236

Dokumente

Beziehungsdiagramm anzeigen