42 Richard R. Repasky and Phillip D. Doerr 



trunk within crown of live pines, trunk below crown of live pines, and 

 hardwoods. 



Statistical summaries and tests were performed with the Statistical 

 Analysis System (SAS Institute 1982a, 1982b). Analyses of variance 

 were performed with the General Linear Models (GLM) procedure. 

 Contingency table tests were performed with the frequency (FREQ) 

 procedure. 



RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

 Home Range Use 



The year-round range of family group A was 180 ha and that for 

 group B was 139 ha. Territories comprised 35% and 62% of the year- 

 round home ranges, respectively. The two groups spent 26% and 16%, 

 respectively, of foraging time outside of the territories. 



Pine characteristics of foraging areas were compared with those of 

 the overall home ranges. Significant differences were found for group A 

 but not for group B (Tables 1 and 2). For group A, median pine bole 

 surface density and median tree density were greater in areas used than 

 within the home range at large. Median DBH was less. Results for 

 family group B were opposite to those for group A, although the 

 comparisons were not statistically significant. Median pine bole surface 

 density and tree density in foraging areas were less in areas available 

 than in foraging areas, whereas median DBH was nearly identical. 

 When the same comparisons were made for individual tracking periods, 

 the results were similar to the overall comparisons for each group 

 (Tables 1 and 2), although few of the differences were significant. 



Two forest stand characteristics that are expected to be positively 

 related to foraging habitat quality are negatively related to one another 

 in nature. Tree density is expected to be positively related to foraging 

 quality because of improved insect habitat quality and decreasing flight 

 distance with increasing tree density (Wood 1983). Habitat quality is 

 also expected to increase as tree size increases because larger trees 

 should provide better prey habitat (Travis 1977, Jackson 1979) and 

 more foragable surface per distance travelled between trees (Hooper and 

 Lennartz 1981). In natural stands, however, tree size and density are 

 inversely related to one another (Wahlenberg 1946). DeLotelle et al. 

 (1987) demonstrated that red-cockaded woodpeckers prefer stands of 

 larger tree size when density is held constant and that they prefer stands 

 of greater density when tree size is held constant. The type of stands 

 selected for foraging by a family group is likely to depend on the 

 variation in stand density relative to variation in tree size. 



Variation in density was greater than variation in tree size in the 

 home ranges studied. The coefficients of variation of tree density (group 



