polno besedilo - Digitalna knjižnica BF - Univerza v Ljubljani

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Perušek M. Vpliv nekaterih ekoloških in drugih dejavnikov na razširjenost izbranih vrst ptic v gozdovih kočevske. Mag. delo. Ljubljana. Univ. v Lj., Biotehniška fakulteta, Oddelek za gozdarstvo in obnovljive gozdne vire, 2006 as woodpeckers are concerned. The owls' niches overlap each other fairly well, the woodpeckers' to a much lesser extent. The greatest niche overlap was established between the Ural Owl and Hazel Grouse, the smallest between the Black Woodpecker and Whitebacked Woodpecker. The last two species have very different ecological demands, in spite of the fact that both have their habitats on tree trunks and in them. In the virgin forest reserves, passerine species prevail. The dominant species in both reserves are the Chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs), Robin (Erithacus rubecula), Treecreeper (Certhia familiaris), Wren (Troglodytes troglodytes) and Coal Tit (Parus ater), whereas in the Strmec reserve, the above listed species are joined by the Firecrest (Regulus ignicapillus). At Krokar reserve, 41 species were observed, at Strmec 27. Present at Krokar are, as far as the species under consideration are concerned, the Ural Owl, Whitebacked Woodpecker, Three-toed Woodpecker, Black Woodpecker and Red-breasted Flycatcher, while Strmec lacks the Red-breasted Flycatcher and White-backed Woodpecker. The different species structure is probably due to the different structure and age of the stands, size of the reserves, and to the ratio between coniferous and deciduous trees. Strmec is in the phase of decomposition on its sunward side and has a higher share of coniferous trees in the growing stock than Krokar, which is less favourable for these two species. The bird communities in both virgin forest remains are more or less alike. Forest and hunting measures have usually a quite distinct effect on ground breeders, such as the Hazel Grouse. Rigours of the weather and excessive reproduction of insects have, in the short run, a positive effect on woodpeckers and partially owls as well. The ample growing stocks suit the majority of the dealt with species. There is a strong effect of forest communities and forestry management classes on the narrowly specialised bird species (White-backed Woodpecker, Three-toed Woodpecker and Red-breasted Flycatcher). Quite explicit in forest owl species are the interspecific relations – particularly predation and thus withdrawal of smaller owl species from the areas inhabited by larger owls. The Ural Owl, as the largest one, selects the best habitats, whereas smaller owl species select mostly coniferous forests, i.e. those not inhabited by the bigger owls. Forest management has a significant impact on the living conditions of the birds under consideration, such as on the relations of development phases, growing stock degree, share of tree species, share of dead trees and trees with holes. It is important that commercially uninteresting trees, trees with holes, clusters of old trees and parts of the forests left to develop naturally are kept in the forests (Papež et al., 1997; Perušek 1993, 1996, 2001). The concept of biodiversity should be included in the forest cultivation practice (Diaci, 2000). A component part of forestry management planning is also the protection of endangered species through the conservation of rare forest structures. For the time being, forestry management plans do not deal in detail with the studied species, and neither can any special orientations for the protection of these species be found in some of the examined plans. In spite of it all, they are still one of the very good backgrounds for further work with forests and protected species. Within the framework of Natura 2000 Kočevsko – Kolpa network, 20 protected bird species are listed. The present theses can serve as an expedient in zonation for these species. With new forestry management plans it will be necessary to provide for all protected species in the future, in order to prevent further deterioration of conditions in which they live. 101
Perušek M. Vpliv nekaterih ekoloških in drugih dejavnikov na razširjenost izbranih vrst ptic v gozdovih kočevske. Mag. delo. Ljubljana. Univ. v Lj., Biotehniška fakulteta, Oddelek za gozdarstvo in obnovljive gozdne vire, 2006 10 VIRI Accetto M. 1995. Floristična presenečenja v stenah nad Kolpo in druge floristične zanimivosti s Kočevske. Gozdarski vestnik, 53, 7/8: 307-321 Adamič M. 1987. Ekologija divjega petelina (Tetrao urogallus L.) v Sloveniji. (Strokovna in znanstvena dela, 93). Ljubljana, Inštitut za gozdno in lesno gospodarstvo: 93 str. Anko B. 2000. Vloga gozdov pri ohranjanju biotske pestrosti na krajinski ravni – nekatera izhodišča za krajinskoekološko tipizacijo. Zbornik gozdarstva in lesarstva, 63: 183-198. Bergmann H.H., Klaus S., Muller F., Scherzinger W., Swenson J.E., Wiesner J. 1996. Die Haselhuhner. (Die Neue Brehm-Bucherei Bd. 77), Magdeburg, Westarp Wissenschaften: 278 str. Bibby C.J., Burges N.D., Hill D.A., 1992. Bird Census Techniques. London, Academic Press: 257 str. Bole J., Zupančič M. 1992: Flora vegetacija in favna Kočevsko-Ribniškega območja. Ljubljana, Biološki Inštitut Jovana Hadžija ZRC SAZU. Božič L. 2003. Mednarodno pomembna območja za ptice v Sloveniji 2. Predlogi posebnih zaščitenih območij (SPA) v Sloveniji. (Monografija DOPPS, št. 2) Ljubljana, Društvo za opazovanje in proučevanje ptic Slovenije DOPPS . Birdlife Slovenia: 139 str. Božič L., Vrezec A. 2000. Sove Pohorja. Acrocephalus, 21: 47-53 Bračko F. 1993. Mali muhar Ficedula parva. Acrocephalus, 58/59: 127-128 Bračko F. 1998. Mali skovik Glaucidium passerinum. Acrocephalus, 89: 118-119 Bračko F., Sovinc A., Štumberger B., Trontelj P., Vogrin M. 1994. Rdeči seznam ogroženih ptic gnezdilk Slovenije. Acrocephalus. 67: 165-180 Bühler U. 2001. Brutvorkommen des Weissruckenspechts Dendrocopos leucotos in Nordbunden. Der ornitologische Beobachter, 98: 1-11 Constantini C., Melletti M. 1992: Il Picchio dorsobianco, Picoides leucotos lilfordi, ed il Picchio rosso minore, Picoides minor, nelle faggete dei monti simbruini ed ernici (Italia centrale). Rivista Italiana di Ornitologia, 62 3/4: 164-170 Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Cramp S. 1998. The complete birds of Western Paleartctic (on CD – ROM), Oxford, Oxford University Press: 4 zgoščenke. Čas M. 1999. Prostorska ogroženost populacij divjega petelina (Tetrao urogallus L.) v Sloveniji leta 1998. Zbornik gozdarstva in lesarstva, 60: 5-52 Čas M. 2001. Divji petelin v Sloveniji – indikator devastacij, rabe, razvoja in biodiverzitete gorskih gozdnih ekosistemov. Gozdarski vestnik 59, 10: 411-428 Čas M., Adamič M. 1998. Vpliv spreminjanja gozda na razporeditev rastišč divjega petelina (Tetrao urogallus L.) v vzhodnih Alpah. Zbornik gozdarstva in lesarstva, 57: 5- 57 Čelik T., Rebeušek F. 1996. Atlas ogroženih vrst dnevnih metuljev Slovenije. Ljubljana, Slovensko entomološko društvo Štefana Michielija: 100 str. Desetletni lovsko gojitveni načrt za VI. Kočevsko-Belokrajnsko lovskogojitveno območje 2001 – 2010. Kočevje, Zavod za gozdove Slovenije, OE Kočevje. Diaci J. 2000. Vključevanje koncepta biotske pestrosti v prakso gojenja gozdov. Zbornik gozdarstva in lesarstva, 63: 255-278 102
Page 1 and 2:
UNIVERZA V LJUBLJANI BIOTEHNIŠKA F
Page 3 and 4:
Perušek M. Vpliv nekaterih ekološ
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64: Perušek M. Vpliv nekaterih ekološ
Page 113: Perušek M. Vpliv nekaterih ekološ
Page 121 and 122: PRILOGE Priloga A): Ptiči gnezdilc
Page 123 and 124: 84. grmovščica Phylloscopus sibil
Page 125 and 126: leto belohrbti detel črna žolna P
Page 127: UNIVERZA V LJUBLJANI BIOTEHNIŠKA F
show all

polno besedilo - Digitalna knjižnica BF - Univerza v Ljubljani

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?