Measuring Plant Diversity in the Tall Threetip Sagebrush Steppe: Influence of Previous Grazing Management Practices

In July 2000, a 490-ha wildfire burned a portion of a long-term grazing study that had been established in 1924 at the US Sheep Experiment Station north of Dubois, Idaho, USA. Earlier vegetation measurements in this tall threetip sagebrush (Artemisia tripartita spp. tripartita) bunchgrass plant community documented significant changes in vegetation due to grazing and the timing of grazing by sheep. A study was initiated in May 2001 using 12 multiscale modified Whittaker plots to determine the consequences of previous grazing practices on postfire vegetation composition. Because there was only one wildfire and it did not burn all of the original plots, the treatments are not replicated in time or space. We reduce the potential effects of psuedoreplication by confining our discussion to the sample area only. There were a total of 84 species in the sampled areas with 69 in the spring-grazed area and 70 each in the fall- and ungrazed areas. Vegetation within plots was equally rich and even with similar numbers of abundant species. The spring-grazed plots, however, had half as much plant cover as the fall- and ungrazed plots and the spring-grazed plots had the largest proportion of plant cover composed of introduced (27%) and annual (34%) plants. The fall-grazed plots had the highest proportion of native perennial grasses (43%) and the lowest proportion of native annual forbs (1%). The ungrazed plots had the lowest proportion of introduced plants (4%) and the highest proportion of native perennial forbs (66%). The vegetation of spring-grazed plots is in a degraded condition for the environment and further degradation may continue, with or without continued grazing or some other disturbance. If ecosystem condition was based solely on plant diversity and only a count of species numbers was used to determine plant diversity, this research would have falsely concluded that grazing and timing of grazing did not impact the condition of the ecosystem.     

A Conceptual Framework for Selecting and Analyzing Stressor Data to Study Species Richness at Large Spatial Scales

/ In this paper we develop a conceptual framework for selectingstressor data and analyzing their relationship to geographic patterns ofspecies richness at large spatial scales. Aspects of climate and topography,which are not stressors per se, have been most strongly linked withgeographic patterns of species richness at large spatial scales (e.g.,continental to global scales). The adverse impact of stressors (e.g., habitatloss, pollution) on species has been demonstrated primarily on much smallerspatial scales. To date, there has been a lack of conceptual developmenton how to use stressor data to study geographic patterns of speciesrichness at large spatial scales.The framework we developed includes four components: (1) clarification of theterms stress and stressor and categorization of factors affecting speciesrichness into three groups-anthropogenic stressors, natural stressors, andnatural covariates; (2) synthesis of the existing hypotheses for explaininggeographic patterns of species richness to identify the scales over whichstressors and natural covariates influence species richness and to providesupporting evidence for these relationships through review of previousstudies; (3) identification of three criteria for selection of stressor andcovariate data sets: (a) inclusion of data sets from each of the threecategories identified in item 1, (b) inclusion of data sets representingdifferent aspects of each category, and (c) to the extent possible, analysisof data quality; and (4) identification of two approaches for examiningscale-dependent relationships among stressors, covariates, and patterns ofspecies richness-scaling-up and regression-tree analyses.Based on this framework, we propose 10 data sets as a minimum data base forexamining the effects of stressors and covariates on species richness atlarge spatial scales. These data sets include land cover, roads, wetlands(numbers and loss), exotic species, livestock grazing, surface water pH,pesticide application, climate (and weather), topography, and streams.KEY WORDS: Anthropogenic impacts; Biodiversity; Environmental gradients;Geographic information systems; Hierarchy     

Restoration ecology of riverine wetlands: II. An example in a former channel of the Rhône River

Riverine wetlands, which provide numerous valuable functions, are disappearing in floodplains of a channelized European river. A restoration project has been proposed by scientists to restore a former braided channel of the Rhône River by the removal of fine organic sediments in order to enhance groundwater supply. A precise and intensive prerestoration monitoring program during one year (including comparison with a reference channel) has taken into account several variables and ecological performance indicators measured at various spatial and temporal scales. Three restoration techniques were then suggested, taking into account two characteristics of ecosystem functions for increasing restoration success and self-sustainability: (1) the riparian forest as well as the shores must be preserved or disturbed as little as possible; and (2) the upstream alluvial plug must be preserved to prevent direct supply of nutrientrich water from the Rhône River. Among the three restoration options proposed, it was not possible to carry out the less ecologically disturbing one as it was considered too expensive, time consuming, and difficult to realize. A precise and intensive postrestoration monitoring program, conducted over two years, demonstrated restoration success but also unpredicted problems, such as a locally thick layer of fine organic sediment. As long as a self-sustainable state is not achieved, this monitoring should be continued. Afterwards, a less precise and less intensive long-term monitoring should enable the detection of future events that may influence ecosystem changes.     

Focusing biodiversity research on the needs of decision makers

The project on Biodiversity Uncertainties and Research Needs (BURN) ensures the advancement of usable knowledge on biodiversity by obtaining input from decision makers on their priority information needs about biodiversity and then using this input to engage leading scientists in designing policy-relevant research. Decision makers articulated concerns related to four issues: significance of biodiversity; status and trends of biodiversity; management for biodiversity; and the linkage of social, cultural, economic, legal, and biological objectives. Leading natural and social scientists then identified the research required to address the decision makers' needs and determined the probability of success. The diverse group of experts reached consensus on several fundamental issues, helping to clarify the role of biodiversity in land and resource management. The BURN participants identified several features that should be incorporated into policy-relevant research plans and management strategies for biodiversity. Research and assessment efforts should be: multidisciplinary and integrative, participatory with stakeholder involvement, hierarchical (multiple scales), and problem- and region-specific. The activities should be focused regionally within a global perspective. Meta-analysis of existing data is needed on all fronts to assess the state of the science. More specifically, the scientists recommended six priority research areas that should be pursued to address the information needs articulated by decision makers: (1) characterization of biodiversity, (2) environmental valuation, (3) management for sustainability—for humans and the environment (adaptive management), (4) information management strategies, (5) governance and stewardship issues, and (6) communication and outreach. Broad recommendations were developed for each research area to provide direction for research planning and resource management strategies. The results will directly benefit those groups that require biodiversity research to address their needs—whether to develop policy, manage natural resources, or make other decisions affecting biodiversity.     

Biodiversity laws: State experiences

The Western Governors' Association (WGA) includes both the public lands states with their issues and the plains states, which are 98% privately owned. WGA deals with most legislation affecting biodiversity, whether the effect is direct or tangential. It will probably not be possible, or desirable, for one entity to be in charge of biodiversity conservation. The Endangered Species Act, public lands laws, agricultural laws, water law, environmental laws, and funding legislation all affect biodiversity conservation and the responsibility for it. None of them on their own are enough, and most can cause harmful unintended consequences for biodiversity. The experience of western states in developing consensus principles for reauthorization of the Endangered Species Act provides an example of common-sense ways to improve management of biodiversity, notwithstanding the complexity and large stakes involved. The WGA's proposed changes call for increasing the role of states, streamlining the act, and increasing certainty for landowners and water users. To achieve sustainable conservation for biodiversity, the better question is not “Who is/should be in charge?”, it is “How do we get this done?” To answer this, we need goals, guidance, and bottom lines from federal laws, and management and oversight at the state level, but they all need to support local on-the-ground partnerships. Sustainable conservation requires the active participation of those who live there. WGA's experience in coordinating the Great Plains Partnership as well as its work with watershed efforts shed light on what to expect. Multilevel partnerships are not easy and require a different way of doing business. The ad hoc, sitespecific processes that result do not lend themselves to being legislated, fit into organizational boxes, or scored on a budget sheet. They do require common sense and a longterm perspective.     

Utility terrestrial biodiversity issues

Results from a survey of power utility biologists indicate that terrestrial biodiversity is considered a major issue by only a few utilities; however, a majority believe it may be a future issue. Over half of the respondents indicated that their company is involved in some management for biodiversity, and nearly all feel that it should be a goal for resource management. Only a few utilities are funding biodiversity research, but a majority felt more research was needed. Generally, larger utilities with extensive land holdings had greater opportunities and resources for biodiversity management. Biodiversity will most likely be a concern with transmission rights-of-way construction and maintenance, endangered species issues and general land resource management, including mining reclamation and hydro relicensing commitments. Over half of the companies surveyed have established voluntary partnerships with management groups, and biodiversity is a goal in nearly all the joint projects. Endangered species management and protection, prevention of forest fragmentation, wetland protection, and habitat creation and protection are the most common partnerships involving utility companies. Common management practices and unique approaches are presented, along with details of the survey.     

The role of corporations in ensuring biodiversity

Corporations own approximately 25% of all private land in the United States and, therefore, play an essential role in protecting biodiversity and maintaining natural habitats. The Wildlife Habitat Council (WHC) is a unique joint venture between conservation organizations and corporations to utilize corporate lands for ensuring biodiversity. The following case studies demonstrate how corporations have helped ensure healthy ecosystems and provided critical leadership in regional efforts. Amoco Chemical Company's Cooper River Plant has been instrumental in developing a cooperative project that involves numerous corporations, plantation owners, private citizens, nonprofit organizations, government agencies, and community groups to develop a comprehensive, ecosystem-based management plan for part of the Cooper River in Charleston, South Carolina, USA. The second case focuses on the Morie Company, a national sand quarry operator headquartered in southern New Jersey, USA. Morie Company is working with WHC, community groups, the Pinelands Commission, and other state regulatory agencies to explore sustainable development opportunities for companies within the Pinelands regulations. The third case takes us to DuPont Company's Asturias, Spain, site. A win—win success story of improved habitat and cost savings is the result of DuPont's concern for the environment, ability to work with a variety of groups, and willingness to consider innovative restoration techniques. The fourth case discusses Consumers Power Company's Campbell Plant in West Olive, Michigan, USA. In addition to implementing projects that contribute to biodiversity, Consumers Power has developed an environmental education field station to teach others about the importance of natural habitats. The final case highlights Baltimore Gas & Electric Company's efforts to maintain habitat for endangered species at their Calvert Cliffs site in Maryland.     

Hydropower,adaptive management,and Biodiversity

Adaptive management is a policy framework within which an iterative process of decision making is followed based on the observed responses to and effectiveness of previous decisions. The use of adaptive management allows science-based research and monitoring of natural resource and ecological community responses, in conjunction with societal values and goals, to guide decisions concerning man's activities. The adaptive management process has been proposed for application to hydropower operations at Glen Canyon Dam on the Colorado River, a situation that requires complex balancing of natural resources requirements and competing human uses. This example is representative of the general increase in public interest in the operation of hydropower facilities and possible effects on downstream natural resources and of the growing conflicts between uses and users of river-based resources. This paper describes the adaptive management process, using the Glen Canyon Dam example, and discusses ways to make the process work effectively in managing downstream natural resources and biodiversity.     

Transfrontier conservation areas: Integrating biodiversity and poverty alleviation in Southern Africa

Sub‐Saharan Africa continues to face the daunting challenge of alleviating poverty due to slow economic growth. In southern Africa, most countries are adopting policies that promote the integration of biodiversity conservation and rural development to contribute to rural poverty alleviation. Numerous approaches have been undertaken in this endeavour, including Transfrontier Parks (TFPs) and Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCAs). This paper discusses some of the limitations of the TFPs. In conclusion I posit that unlike TFPs, which are state controlled and managed, TFCAs, which promote multi‐land use and multi‐stakeholder participation are attainable and have a higher probability of sustaining biodiversity conservation and contributing to the alleviation of rural poverty, if: (i) areas of high biodiversity conservation within communal areas can be identified, zoned and leveraged to biodiversity conservation and managed in partnership between the communities and the private sector; (ii) local communities can secure legal rights to their customary land being devoted to biodiversity conservation and use such pieces of land as collateral in negotiating partnerships with the private sector in developing conservation‐based enterprises; (iii) functional community natural resource governance institutions can be established and empowered to represent their constituencies in securing fair equity from profits made from sustainable use of the conserved biodiversity assets and tourism businesses; (iv) concerted effort can be invested in developing and implementing family planning and fertility reduction strategies that would slow down human population growth to levels that can be sustained by the available natural resources; and (v) if sustainable financing mechanisms can be developed, and the governance of protected areas occurring in the TFCAs can be broadened to include other stakeholders.     

Modelling Change in Ground Vegetation Response to Acid and Nitrogen Pollution, Climate Change and Forest Management at in Sweden 1500–2100 a.d.

The ForSAFE model, designed for modelling biogeochemical cycles (water, acidity, base cation, nitrogen and carbon) in terrestrial ecosystems, was modified with a vegetation response module (VEG), incorporating the effects of: nitrogen pollution, acidification, soil moisture, temperature, wind chill exposure, light and shading by trees, grazing by animals, competition between plants, above ground for light and below ground for water and nutrients. The model calculates the response of number ground vegetation plant groups. The integrated model was tested and validated at integrated level II forest monitoring sites across Sweden, four have been shown here, and used to assess the effect of acidification and nitrogen pollution in relation to factors such as climate change, forest management and changing grazing pressure. The response functions have been derived from single-factor experiments and integrated through the model structure for use on whole systems. The tests with the model suggest that the ground vegetation composition is reasonably well predicted, that much research remains before the model is fully tested and operational, and that the model may serve as a tool for assessing impacts of climate change, acid rain and forest management on plant biodiversity in forested areas.