How good is GLASOD?

The Global Assessment of Soil Degradation (GLASOD) has been the most influential global appraisal of land quality in terms of environmental policy. However, its expert judgments were never tested for their consistency and could not be reproduced at unvisited sites, while the relationship between the GLASOD assessments of land degradation and the social and economic impact of that degradation remains unclear. Yet, other methodologies that could respond to urgent calls for an updated assessment of the global environmental quality are not operational or, at best, in progress. Therefore, we evaluate the reliability and social relevance of the GLASOD approach and assess its candidacy for new global environmental assessments. The study concentrates on the African continent, capitalizing on new GIS data to delineate and define the characteristics of GLASOD map units. Consistency is tested by comparing expert judgments on soil degradation hazard for similar combinations of biophysical conditions and land use. Reproducibility is evaluated by estimating an ordered logit model that relates the qualitative land degradation classes to easily available information on explanatory variables, the results of which can be used to assess the land degradation at unvisited sites. Finally, a cross-sectional analysis investigates the relation between GLASOD assessments and crop production data at sub-national scale and its association with the prevalence of malnutrition. The GLASOD assessments prove to be only moderately consistent and hardly reproducible, while the counter-intuitive trend with crop production reveals the complexity of the production-degradation relationship. It appears that increasing prevalence of malnutrition coincides with poor agro-productive conditions and highly degraded land. The GLASOD approach can be improved by resolving the differences in conceptualization among experts and by defining the boundaries of the ordered classes in the same units as independent, quantitative land degradation data.     

Summer Temperature Patterns in Headwater Streams of the Oregon Coast Range1

Abstract: Cool summertime stream temperature is an important component of high quality aquatic habitat in Oregon coastal streams. Within the Oregon Coast Range, small headwater streams make up a majority of the stream network; yet, little information is available on temperature patterns and the longitudinal variability for these streams. In this paper we describe preharvest spatial and temporal patterns in summer stream temperature for small streams of the Oregon Coast Range in forests managed for timber production. We also explore relationships between stream and riparian attributes and observed stream temperature conditions and patterns. Summer stream temperature, channel, and riparian data were collected on 36 headwater streams in 2002, 2003, and 2004. Mean stream temperatures were consistent among summers and generally warmed in a downstream direction. However, longitudinal trends in maximum temperatures were more variable. At the reach scale of 0.5‐1.7 km, maximum temperatures increased in 17 streams, decreased in seven streams and did not change in three reaches. At the subreach scale (0.1‐1.5 km), maximum temperatures increased in 28 subreaches, decreased in 14, and did not change in 12 subreaches. Models of increasing temperature in a downstream direction may oversimplify fine‐scale patterns in small streams. Stream and riparian attributes that correlated with observed temperature patterns included cover, channel substrate, channel gradient, instream wood jam volume, riparian stand density, and geology type. Longitudinal patterns of stream temperature are an important consideration for background characterization of water quality. Studies attempting to evaluate stream temperature response to timber harvest or other modifications should quantify variability in longitudinal patterns of stream temperature prior to logging.     

Advancing the Integration of History and Ecology for Conservation

Abstract: The important role of humans in the development of current ecosystems was recognized decades ago; however, the integration of history and ecology in order to inform conservation has been difficult. We identified four issues that hinder historical ecological research and considered possible solutions. First, differences in concepts and methods between the fields of ecology and history are thought to be large. However, most differences stem from miscommunication between ecologists and historians and are less substantial than is usually assumed. Cooperation can be achieved by focusing on the features ecology and history have in common and through understanding and acceptance of differing points of view. Second, historical ecological research is often hampered by differences in spatial and temporal scales between ecology and history. We argue that historical ecological research can only be conducted at extents for which sources in both disciplines have comparable resolutions. Researchers must begin by clearly defining the relevant scales for the given purpose. Third, periods for which quantitative historical sources are not easily accessible (before AD 1800) have been neglected in historical ecological research. Because data from periods before 1800 are as relevant to the current state of ecosystems as more recent data, we suggest that historical ecologists actively seek out data from before 1800 and apply analytic methods commonly used in ecology to these data. Fourth, humans are not usually considered an intrinsic ecological factor in current ecological research. In our view, human societies should be acknowledged as integral parts of ecosystems and societal processes should be recognized as driving forces of ecosystem change.     

Programs assessing implementation and effectiveness of state forest practice rules and BMPs in the West

The major forest nonpoint source control programs in the West are largely regulatory, either under forest practices acts (California, Idaho, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington) or a streamside management act (Montana). These programs and the specific rules they enforce continue to undergo intensive scrutiny. Still, the questions are the same for these regulatory programs as for states that base nonpoint source control on voluntary BMPs (Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming). Are the rules or BMPs being applied, and are they effective in reducing nonpoint source pollution to levels that protect beneficial uses of water? The level of debate about forestry in the West has resulted in detailed monitoring and research to answer these questions. In the past, state agencies have assumed levels of BMP compliance based on the percent of operations without enforcement actions. These estimates are being replaced by statistically valid and reproducible monitoring of forest practices rules and BMP compliance levels. BMP effectiveness is being assessed using both qualitative and quantitative methods. This can involve field assessments, process-based research, and control watershed studies. Some trend monitoring is also beginning. With the regional implementation rate for forestry BMPs at about 94% and rising, it is likely that effectiveness testing will continue to be a priority and consume the majority of assessment resources for this region.