Farmland set‐aside programs provide important habitat for many wildlife species, yet little information exists regarding how vegetation structure and species respond to conservation practice and site age. This information could provide managers with a guide for how to implement, enhance, and maintain wildlife benefits of conservation programs. We describe how vegetation structure and avian species respond to conservation practice and time since restoration at 172 sites enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) in Illinois, USA. We surveyed 172 sites enrolled in 4 different conservation practices (CP) within CREP during the breeding seasons of 2012–2015 using avian point counts and vegetation surveys. Vegetation structure and composition varied among CPs, with hardwood tree plantings (CP3A) having the greatest amount of understory vegetation and tree cover. Conversely, permanent wildlife habitat (CP4D) had the greatest grass cover and least tree cover. Many bird species were found in similar numbers across CP types; however, only dickcissel (Spiza americana) density was greater in sites enrolled as permanent wildlife habitat. Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii) and yellow‐billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus) were more numerous in hardwood tree plantings. Dickcissel density decreased and field sparrow (Spizella pusilla) density increased as fields aged, but the relationships were not consistent among CP types. Differences among CPs largely resulted from differences in dominance in woody vegetation due to initial habitat management and differential succession rates. Interestingly, many of our focal species had wider successional tolerances than previously suggested. Overall, our results demonstrate that conservation benefits change over time depending on the starting CP, that there can be considerable similarity in vegetation structure and bird communities among what appear to be very different conservation practices. This information can be used to target conservation benefits toward conservation priority species. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.

中文翻译：

---

保护实践和场地年龄会影响恢复田地的植被结构和鸟类丰度吗？

农田预留计划为许多野生动植物物种提供了重要的栖息地，但是关于植被结构和物种如何响应保护实践和遗址年龄的信息很少。这些信息可以为管理人员提供有关如何实施，增强和维护保护计划的野生动植物利益的指南。我们描述了自美国伊利诺伊州自然保护区增强计划（CREP）的172个站点恢复以来，植被结构和鸟类物种如何响应保护实践和时间。我们使用鸟类点数和植被调查调查了2012-2015年繁殖季节在CREP内采用4种不同保护措施（CP）的172个地点。各CP的植被结构和组成各不相同，硬木树种（CP3A）的林下植被和树木被覆数量最多。相反，永久性野生生物栖息地（CP4D）的草被覆盖率最高，树木被覆盖率最低。在不同的CP类型中发现了许多相似数量的鸟类。但是，只有dickcissel（在永久性野生动植物栖息地中，美洲螺密度更高。贝尔的vireo（Vireo bellii）和黄嘴的杜鹃（Coccyzus americanus）在硬木树上的种植数量更多。Dickcissel密度下降，田野麻雀（Spizella pusilla）密度随田地老化而增加，但CP类型之间的关系不一致。CPs之间的差异主要是由于最初的栖息地管理和不同的演替率造成的木本植被优势度差异所致。有趣的是，我们的许多重点物种具有比以前建议的更广的演替容忍度。总体而言，我们的结果表明，保护效益会随着时间的流逝而变化，这取决于开始的CP，在似乎非常不同的保护实践之间，植被结构和鸟类群落可能存在很大的相似性。该信息可用于将保护利益用于保护优先物种。©2020野生动物协会。