Attitudes and Perceptions about Ecological Resources, Hazards, and Future Land Use of People Living near the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory

This paper examines the attitudes and perceptions of local people about ecological resources, environmental hazards, and future land use of the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). Such monitoring of attitudes is an important aspect of environmental assessment. We interviewed 262 people who attended the 42nd Annual Free Fishermen's Breakfast at St. Anthony, Idaho, on 23 March 1997. We tested the null hypotheses that there were no differences in perceptions about ecological resources, hazards and future land use of INEEL as a function of gender, age, education, and place of residence. Dumping trash in the ocean and cutting rainforests rated as the environmental problems of highest concern, and ozone, radon and high voltage lines rated the lowest; cleaning up Department of Energy sites rated intermediate. Respondents were most willing to expend government funds to make drinking water clean. Three significant differences were found: 1) women rated environmental problems as more severe than did men, and women were more willing to expend federal funds to solve these problems, 2) respondents under 30 years of age rated environmental problems as more severe than older people, and they were more willing to spend money to solve them, and, 3) respondents who had not finished high school were more concerned with environmental problems and were more willing to spend money to solve them than respondents with a high school education. Maintaining INEEL as a National Environmental Research Park (NERP) rated as the most preferred future land use, followed by continued reprocessing of nuclear materials and hunting. Using INEEL for housing and additional nuclear waste storage rated the lowest. Men rated grazing livestock and additional nuclear waste storage higher than did women. In general, respondents from 30 – 49 rated several economic uses (hunting, grazing livestock, growing crops) higher than did people in other age groups. Respondents with some college rated these economic uses higher than did respondents who had not graduated from high school. These results indicate that respondents living around INEEL believe that INEEL should continue with a reprocessing and NERP mission, but that other peripheral uses, such as hunting, hiking and grazing, should be allowed on some of the land. These views should aid in environmental assessment of the site, and in developing further management plans for INEEL.     

Periphyton and Sediment Bioassessment in North Florida Bay

Periphyton colonization and sediment bioassessment were used ina survey to compare the relative environmental condition ofsampling sites located in Florida Bay and four peripheral sloughareas during the summer of 1995. Periphyton biomass, pigmentcontent, tissue quality and community composition weredetermined. In addition, benthic community composition and thetoxicities of whole sediments and associated pore waters weredetermined for two species of rooted macrophytes, an epibenthicinvertebrate and bioluminescent bacteria. Several locational differences were observed for the response parameters.Periphyton biomass was significantly greater in the Taylor Riverand the least in Shell Creek (P < 0.05). Most sediments were notacutely toxic to mysid shrimp nor phytotoxic. However, sedimentsfrom the Taylor River were more phytostimulatory than others (P< 0.05). Contaminant bioresidues were similar at most sites,however, mercury, chromium and nickel concentrations weregreater for periphyton colonized in the Taylor River and TroutCreek areas. Structural characteristics of the periphytic algalcommunity usually were statistically similar but a consistenttrend of lower density and diversity was evident for ShellCreek. The benthic community was the least diverse and dense inthe Canal C-111. The results of this study provide an initialindication of differences in the role of several slough areas aspossible sources of bioavailable contaminants to Florida Baywhich warrants additional investigation.     

Risk perception, future land use and stewardship: comparison of attitudes about Hanford Site and Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory

With the ending of the Cold War, the Department of Energy (DOE) is evaluating mission, future land use and stewardship of departmental facilities. This paper compares the environmental concerns and future use preferences of 351 people interviewed at Lewiston, Idaho, about the Hanford Site and Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), two of DOE's largest sites. Although most subjects lived closer to Hanford than INEEL, most resided in the same state as INEEL. Therefore their economic interests might be more closely allied with INEEL, while their health concerns might be more related to Hanford. Few lived close enough to either site to be directly affected economically. We test the null hypotheses that there are no differences in environmental concerns and future land-use preferences as a function of DOE site, sex, age and education. When asked to list their major concerns about the sites, more people listed human health and safety, and environmental concerns about Hanford compared to INEEL. When asked to list their preferred future land uses, 49% of subjects did not have any for INEEL, whereas only 35% did not know for Hanford. The highest preferred land uses for both sites were as a National Environmental Research Park (NERP), and for camping, hunting, hiking, and fishing. Except for returning the land to the tribes and increased nuclear storage, subjects rated all future uses as more preferred at INEEL than Hanford. Taken together, these data suggest that the people interviewed know more about Hanford, are more concerned about Hanford, rate recreational uses and NERP as their highest preferred land use, and feel that INEEL is more suited for most land uses than Handford. Overall rankings for future land uses were remarkably similar between the sites, indicating that for these stakeholders, DOE lands should be preserved for research and recreation. These preferences should be taken into account when planning for long-term stewardship at these two DOE sites.     

Genetic Criteria for Establishing Evolutionarily Significant Units in Cryan's Buckmoth

Buckmoths ( Hemileuca spp.) are day-flying saturniid moths with diverse ecologies and host plants. Populations that feed on Menyanthes trifoliata , known commonly as Cryan's buckmoths, have been found in only a few bogs and fens near eastern Lake Ontario in New York and near Ottawa in Ontario, Canada. Because of their unique ecological traits, geographic isolation from other Hemileuca populations, and the small number of sites they occupy, there is concern that the Cryan's buckmoth populations are phylogenetically distinct and should be protected. The Cryan's buckmoths have not yet been taxonomically described and do not appear to have clear distinguishing morphological characters. Both molecular genetic traits (allozymes and mitochondrial DNA sequences) and an ecologically based character (host performance) were investigated to determine whether these populations possess fixed diagnostic characters signifying genetic differentiation from other eastern Hemileuca populations. Such differences would merit separate conservation management as an evolutionarily significant unit. Our studies showed that the Cryan's buckmoths clearly belong to the Hemileuca maia species group, but they could not be readily distinguished from other members of that group by means of molecular genetic techniques. There were no fixed differences in alleles or haplotypes distinguishing any of the populations or species, suggesting recent divergence. Nonetheless, in the host-plant performance experiment only the Cryan's buckmoth larvae were able to develop on M. trifoliata , a significant difference from other Hemileuca larvae tested. The Cryan's buckmoth appears to be unique in host performance and warrants protection and management us an evolutionarily significant unit. In cases such as this where groups appear to have recently diverged, investigations into ecologically significant traits may provide indicators of conservation significance as reliable as molecular genetic markers.