Public lands alone are insufficient to address the needs of most at-risk wildlife species in the U.S. As a result, a variety of voluntary incentive programs have emerged to recruit private landowners into conservation efforts that restore and manage the habitats needed by specific species. We review the role of one such effort, Working Lands for Wildlife (WLFW), initiated by the Natural Resources Conservation Service in partnership with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Using two at-risk species in the eastern U.S. (where private lands dominate), we show the substantial potential that WLFW has for restoring and maintaining needed habitats. Monitoring how effective these efforts are on populations of the target species has been challenging, and both monitoring and implementation are being modified in response to new information. Identifying landowner motivations is essential for developing long-term relationships and conservation success. As WLFW projects develop, they are moving toward a more holistic ecosystem approach, within which the conservation goals of at-risk species are embedded.

Forest management planning requires the specification of measurable objectives as desired future conditions at spatial extents ranging from stands to landscapes and temporal extents ranging from a single growing season to several centuries. Effective implementation of forest management requires understanding current conditions and constraints well enough to apply the appropriate silvicultural strategies to produce desired future conditions, often for multiple objectives, at varying spatial and temporal extents. We administered an online survey to forest managers in the eastern US to better understand how wildlife scientists could best provide information to help meet wildlife-related habitat objectives. We then examined more than 1000 review papers on bird–vegetation relationships in the eastern US compiled during a systematic review of the primary literature to see how well this evidence-base meets the information needs of forest managers. We identified two main areas where wildlife scientists could increase the relevance and applicability of their research. First, forest managers want descriptions of wildlife species–vegetation relationships using the operational metrics of forest management (forest type, tree species composition, basal area, tree density, stocking rates, etc.) summarized at the operational spatial units of forest management (stands, compartments, and forests). Second, forest managers want information about how to provide wildlife habitats for many different species with varied habitat needs across temporal extents related to the ecological processes of succession after harvest or natural disturbance (1–2 decades) or even longer periods of stand development. We provide examples of review papers that meet these information needs of forest managers and topic-specific bibliographies of additional review papers that may contain actionable information for foresters who wish to meet wildlife management objectives. We suggest that wildlife scientists become more familiar with the extensive grey literature on forest bird–vegetation relationships and forest management that is available in natural resource management agency reports. We also suggest that wildlife scientists could reconsider everything from the questions they ask, the metrics they report on, and the way they allocate samples in time and space, to provide more relevant and actionable information to forest managers.

Accurate productivity estimates are essential to assess the overall sustainability of forest resources. Site index (SI) models for loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) in plantation and natural forests of the southeastern United States were developed using the Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) database. We extracted short (~20 years), unbalanced panel data from the FIA database. Ten different nonlinear models derived from the base models using the algebraic difference approach (ADA) or the generalized algebraic difference approach (GADA) were fitted to the extracted data. The performance of the models was ranked based on a variety of fit and evaluation statistics. The results showed that all top three models were derived using the GADA approach. The best model for loblolly pine plantation and natural forest stands was derived from the Hossfeld model and the Chapman–Richards model, respectively. The best-fitted models for planted forests were also compared with previously developed models. This study demonstrated that base-age invariant and polymorphic SI models could be developed using short panel data extracted from FIA data. The SI models presented here can be used as a height growth model component in forest growth and yield model systems. Study Implications: Improved site index equations for assessing the site quality of loblolly pine plantation and natural stands are now available to stakeholders at the policy, management, and operational levels. Activities such as forest management, restoration, and wildlife management, which require site quality data, will benefit from the new models. Furthermore, the approach of deriving panel data based on Forest Inventory and Analysis data offers information on developing and updating models for other species. Finally, the approach of this study, to use permanent plot measurement data in developing growth and yield models, is cost-effective and time-efficient.