EFFECT OF POCKET GOPHERS ON ASPEN REGENERATION

STACEY T. COGGINS; MICHAEL R. CONOVER

doi:10.2193/0022-541X(2005)069[0752:EOPGOA]2.0.CO;2

We can help you reset your password using the email address linked to your BioOne Complete account.

For additional assistance, contact our Help Desk, helpdesk@bioone.org

Registered users receive a variety of benefits including the ability to customize email alerts, create favorite journals list, and save searches. Please note that a BioOne web account does not automatically grant access to full-text content. An institutional or society member subscription is required to view non-Open Access content. Contact helpdesk@bioone.org with any questions.

All Fields are Required

First Name

Last/Family Name

Password

Password Requirements: Minimum 8 characters, must include as least one uppercase, one lowercase letter, and one number or permitted symbol Valid Symbols for password:
~ Tilde
! Exclamation Mark
@ At sign
$ Dollar sign
^ Caret
( Opening Parenthesis
) Closing Parenthesis
_ Underscore
. Period

Confirm Password

Web Account created successfully

STACEY T. COGGINS,¹ MICHAEL R. CONOVER^2,*

¹aJack H. Berryman Institute, Forest, Range, and Wildlife Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT
²bJack H. Berryman Institute, Forest, Range, and Wildlife Sciences, Utah State University, Logan, UT

^*conover@cc.usu.edu

Abstract

The decline of aspen (Populus tremuloides) in the western United States is well known but the role that pocket gophers (Thomomys spp.) may play in that decline is not known. We investigated the effects of pocket gophers on aspen regeneration in Utah through a series of 4 treatments comprised of baited and fenced plots. The treatments were control (no treatment), baited (pocket gopher removal), fenced (ungulate exclusion), and fenced and baited combined. Fencing reduced browsing rates and increased the height and growth of aspen suckers but did not affect their density. Pocket gopher removal had no effect. Aspen suckers on control plots were the only ones that showed no increase in growth between spring and fall. Overall, these results indicate that the effect of pocket gophers on aspen regeneration is minimal compared to the effects of browsing by ungulates and livestock.

Citation Download Citation

STACEY T. COGGINS and MICHAEL R. CONOVER "EFFECT OF POCKET GOPHERS ON ASPEN REGENERATION," Journal of Wildlife Management 69(2), 752-759, (1 April 2005). https://doi.org/10.2193/0022-541X(2005)069[0752:EOPGOA]2.0.CO;2

Published: 1 April 2005

This article is only available to subscribers.
It is not available for individual sale.

You currently do not have any folders to save your paper to! Create a new folder below.

aspen

Cervus canadensis

deer

elk

herbivory

Odocoileus hemionus

pocket gophers

Include:

Citation Only

Citation & Abstract

Format:

RIS

EndNote

BibTex

Show All Keywords

KEYWORDS/PHRASES

PUBLICATION TITLE:

COLLECTION:

PUBLICATION YEARS