The Development of an Ecosystem Services Framework for South East Queensland

Extensive research has been conducted globally into conceptual frameworks for ecosystem services, the most notable being the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (Millennium ecosystem assessment: ecosystems and human well-being; a framework for assessment. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC, pp 51, 53–55, 2005). The South East Queensland (SEQ) Ecosystem Services Framework (Australia) aims to provide the tools to enable government, industry, business, researchers, non-government organizations and land managers to apply the concept of ecosystem services in their planning and management practices. This article describes the Framework and the process that has produced matrices and maps that identify and illustrate the linkages between ecosystems, ecosystem functions, ecosystem services and the community’s well-being. The matrices and maps derived can identify areas in the region where the most ecosystem services are generated. This allows areas to be considered as valuable natural assets of the region, deserving appropriate protection measures or significant offsets if they are diminished or degraded in any way. Although the Framework requires further refinement and ongoing development, the process applied and the products produced has enabled decision makers to turn the concept of ecosystem services into practical application in SEQ.     

Can Warmwater Streams Be Rehabilitated Using Watershed-Scale Standard Erosion Control Measures Alone?

Degradation of warmwater streams in agricultural landscapes is a pervasive problem, and reports of restoration effectiveness based on monitoring data are rare. Described is the outcome of rehabilitation of two deeply incised, unstable sand-and-gravel-bed streams. Channel networks of both watersheds were treated using standard erosion control measures, and aquatic habitats within 1-km-long reaches of each stream were further treated by addition of instream structures and planting woody vegetation on banks (“habitat rehabilitation”). Fish and their habitats were sampled semiannually during 1–2 years before rehabilitation, 3–4 years after rehabilitation, and 10–11 years after rehabilitation. Reaches with only erosion control measures located upstream from the habitat measure reaches and in similar streams in adjacent watersheds were sampled concurrently. Sediment concentrations declined steeply throughout both watersheds, with means ≥40% lower during the post-rehabilitation period than before. Physical effects of habitat rehabilitation were persistent through time, with pool habitat availability much higher in rehabilitated reaches than elsewhere. Fish community structure responded with major shifts in relative species abundance: as pool habitats increased after rehabilitation, small-bodied generalists and opportunists declined as certain piscivores and larger-bodied species such as centrarchids and catostomids increased. Reaches without habitat rehabilitation were significantly shallower, and fish populations there were similar to the rehabilitated reaches prior to treatment. These findings are applicable to incised, warmwater streams draining agricultural watersheds similar to those we studied. Rehabilitation of warmwater stream ecosystems is possible with current knowledge, but a major shift in stream corridor management strategies will be needed to reverse ongoing degradation trends. Apparently, conventional channel erosion controls without instream habitat measures are ineffective tools for ecosystem restoration in incised, warmwater streams of the Southeastern U.S., even if applied at the watershed scale and accompanied by significant reductions in suspended sediment concentration.     

Lakes,Wetlands, and Streams as Predictors of Land Use/Cover Distribution

The importance of the surrounding landscape to aquatic ecosystems has been well established. Most research linking aquatic ecosystems to landscapes has focused on the one-way effect of land on water. However, to understand fully the complex interactions between aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, aquatic ecosystems must be seen not only as receptors of human modification of the landscape, but also as potential drivers of these modifications. We hypothesized that the presence of aquatic ecosystems influences the spatial distribution of human land use/cover of the nearby landscape (≤1 km) and that this influence has changed through time from the 1930s to the 1990s. To test this hypothesis, we compared the distribution of residential, agricultural, and forested land use/cover around aquatic ecosystems (lakes, wetlands, and streams) to the overall regional land use/cover proportion in an area in southeast Michigan, USA; we also compared the distribution of land use/cover around county roads/highway and towns (known determinants of many land use/cover patterns) to the regional proportion. We found that lakes, wetlands, and streams were strongly associated with the distribution of land use/cover, that each ecosystem type showed different patterns, and that the magnitude of the association was at least as strong as the association with human features. We also found that the area closest to aquatic ecosystems (<500 m) was more strongly associated with land use/cover distribution than areas further away. Finally, we found that the strength of the association between aquatic ecosystems and land use/cover increased from 1938 to 1995, although the overall patterns were similar through time. Our results show that a more complete understanding is needed of the role of aquatic ecosystems on the distribution of land use/cover.     

Reflections in a Stock Pond: Are Anthropogenically Derived Freshwater Ecosystems Natural, Artificial, or Something Else?

“A skyscraper is as natural as a bird’s nest” –Alan Watts For millennia, people have altered freshwater ecosystems directly through water development and indirectly by global change and surrounding land-use activities. In these altered ecosystems, human impacts can be subtle and are sometimes overlooked by the people who manage them. This article provides two case studies near Boulder, Colorado that demonstrate how perceptions regarding these ecosystems affect their management. These examples are typical of lakes and streams along the Front Range of Colorado that are simultaneously natural and social in origin. Although natural, many of the region’s freshwater ecosystems are affected by ongoing ecologic, hydrologic, chemical, and geomorphic modifications produced by human activity. People and nature are both active participants in the production of these freshwater ecosystems. The concept of “hybridity,” borrowed from geographers and social scientists, is useful for describing landscapes of natural and social origin. Hybrid freshwater ecosystems are features of the humanized landscape and are derived from deliberate cultural activities, nonhuman physical and biological processes, and incidental anthropogenic disturbance. Our perceptions of “natural” freshwater ecosystems and what definitions we use to describe them influences our view of hybrid systems and, in turn, affects management decisions regarding them. This work stresses the importance of understanding the underlying societal forces and cultural values responsible for the creation of hybrid freshwater ecosystems as a central step in their conservation and management.     

Development and application of an ecosystem management approach for protected natural areas

Preservation of small natural areas is not in itself a sufficient measure to maintain the integrity of the ecosystems for which they were initially set aside. Intense pressure from recreational use is just one of the many human-caused stresses that may degrade natural areas. Therefore, land-use planning and management from an ecological perspective is necessary to assess, ensure, and in some cases increase, the ecological integrity of protected natural areas. An ecosystem management approach for small protected natural areas with high recreational use is presented, based on three interrelated components: an ecological evaluation procedure of ecosystems, the implementation of management interventions on ecosystems, and the development of a monitoring scheme of ecosystem components. The ecological evaluation procedure combines two concepts: the biotic value of vegetation and wildlife and the abiotic fragility of the soils. This combined evaluation process results in the creation of a sensitivity map that can be used as a management tool for planners and managers. Management interventions, the second component of the management approach, are derived from concepts of ecological succession. Intentional human interventions are used to maintain the ecological integrity of ecosystems or in some cases to restore degraded sites. For the third component, only the basic principles of the monitoring program will be discussed. A pilot project in one of the Montreal urban community protected areas is presented to illustrate aspects of the proposed ecosystem management approach.     

A national critical loads framework for atmospheric deposition effects assessment: I. Method summary

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with the assistance of the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is examining the utility of a critical loads approach for evaluating atmospheric pollutant effects on sensitive ecosystems. A critical load has been defined as, “a quantitative estimate of an exposure to one or more pollutants below which significant harmful effects on specified sensitive elements of the environment do not occur according to present knowledge.” Working in cooperation with the United Nations Economic Community for Europe’s (UN-ECE) Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP) Convention, the EPA has developed a flexible, six-step approach for setting critical loads for a range of ecosystem types. The framework is based on regional population characteristics of the ecosystem(s) of concern. The six steps of the approach are: (1) selection of ecosystem components, indicators, and characterization of the resource; (2) definition of functional subregions; (3) characterization of deposition within each of the subregions; (4) definition of an assessment end point; (5) selection and application of models; and (6) mapping projected ecosystem responses. The approach allows for variable ecosystem characteristics and data availability. Specific recognition of data and model uncertainties is an integral part of the process, and the use of multiple models to obtain ranges of critical loads estimates for each ecosystem component in a region is encouraged. Through this intercomparison process uncertainties in critical loads projections can be estimated. The research described in this article has been funded by the US Environmental Protection Agency. This document has been prepared at the EPA Environmental Research Laboratory in Corvallis, Oregon, through contract #68-C8-0006 with Man Tech Environmental Technology, Inc. It has been subjected to the agency’s peer and administrative review and approved for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorse ment or recommendation for use.     

Threshold-Based Resource Management: A Framework for Comprehensive Ecosystem Management

The problems posed by adaptive management for improved ecosystem health are reviewed. Other kinds of science-informed ecosystem management are needed for those regions of conflict between rapid human population growth, increased resource extraction, and the rising demand for better environmental amenities, where large-scale experiments are not feasible. One new framework is threshold-based resource management. Threshold-based resource management guides management choices among four major science and engineering approaches to achieve healthier ecosystems: self-sustaining ecosystem management, adaptive management, case-by-case resource management, and high-reliability management. As resource conflicts increase over a landscape (i.e., as the ecosystems in the landscape move through different thresholds), management options change for the environmental decision-maker in terms of what can and cannot be attained by way of ecosystem health. The major policy and management implication of the framework is that the exclusive use or recommendation of any one management regime, be it self-sustaining, adaptive, case-by-case, or high-reliability management, across all categories of ecosystems within a heterogeneous landscape that is variably populated and extractively used is not only inappropriate, it is fatal to the goals of improved ecosystem health. The article concludes with detailed proposals for environmental decision-makers to undertake “bandwidth management” in ways that blend the best of adaptive management and high-reliability management for improved ecosystem health while at the same time maintaining highly reliable flows of ecosystem services, such as water.     

CHANNEL FORM AND STREAM ECOSYSTEM MODELS1

A system is proposed to classify running water habitats based on their channel form which can be considered in three different sedimentological settings: a cobble and boulder bed channel, a gravel bed channel, or a sand bed channel. Three physical factors (relief, lithology, and runoff) are selected as state factors that control all other interacting parameters associated with channel form. When these factors are integrated across the conterminous United States, seven distinct stream regions are evident, each representing a most probable succession of channel forms downstream from the headwaters to the mouth. Coupling these different channel profiles with typical biotic community structures usually associated with each of the channel types should result in considerable refinement of the applicability of the River Continuum Concept and other holistic ecosystem models by realizing the nonrandomness of the effects of geo-morphology on stream ecosystems. Thus, this regional perspective of streams should serve to make persons concerned with water resources more aware of the geographical considerations that affect their study areas.     

城市群的生态研究方向:城市群落学解析

城市群落是若干城市在共同的生境条件下通过竞争、共生等生态行为所形成,并与环境相互作用的城市群体,是具有协同进化、演替等生态功能的有机体.运用群落生态学的理论、方法对群落中城市种群间的关系、城市群落的结构特征及城市群落演替等方面进行研究,试图探求促进城市群落持续发展的规律.首先界定城市群落、城市群落学等相关概念,构建城市群落学理论框架;其次对比分析了生物群落与城市群落的特征和生态功能上的相似性和差异性;最后阐述了有关城市群落的种群组成、种间关联、群落结构及群落演替的研究内容,并提出了相应的城市群落研究方法.从生态学角度来看城市问题,借鉴群落生态学的原理和研究方法来认识城市群的发展,是"回归自然"的城市发展观点,有利于促进城市群落功能的发挥,推动城市群落向特定的方向演替.     

ECOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS CAUSED BY HEATED WASTE WATER DISCHARGE INTO THE AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT1

Discharge of heated waste water may affect the entire aquatic ecosystem–the interrelated biological, chemical, physical system–and, if the temperature change is large, may destroy the capacity of the ecosystem to serve a variety of beneficial purposes. However, it is possible to discharge heated waste water in carefully controlled amounts without seriously degrading the aquatic ecosystem. There are four basic alternatives which are open to us with regard to the heated waste water problem which we may choose singly or in various combinations: (1) Placing all heated, waste water in streams, lakes, and oceans without regard to the effects. Thus considering the environmental damage as a necessary consequence of our increased power demand. (2) Using, but not abusing, existing ecosystems. This means regulating the heated waste water discharge to fit the receiving capacity of the ecosystem. (3) Finding alternative ways to dissipate or beneficially use waste heat. (4) Modifying ecosystems to fit the new temperature conditions. We are all dependent upon a life-support system which is partly industrial and partly ecological. Unfortunately, we have reached a stage of development where the non-expandable, ecological portion of our life-support system is endangered by the expanding industrial portion. Optimal function and full beneficial use of both portions of our life-support system will only be possible if a variety of disciplines and diverse points of view can cooperate and work together effectively. Since wastes in amounts that are acceptable taken one at a time may be lethal collectively, environmental management should be on a regional basis.     

U.S. Natural Resources and Climate Change: Concepts and Approaches for Management Adaptation

Public lands and waters in the United States traditionally have been managed using frameworks and objectives that were established under an implicit assumption of stable climatic conditions. However, projected climatic changes render this assumption invalid. Here, we summarize general principles for management adaptations that have emerged from a major literature review. These general principles cover many topics including: (1) how to assess climate impacts to ecosystem processes that are key to management goals; (2) using management practices to support ecosystem resilience; (3) converting barriers that may inhibit management responses into opportunities for successful implementation; and (4) promoting flexible decision making that takes into account challenges of scale and thresholds. To date, the literature on management adaptations to climate change has mostly focused on strategies for bolstering the resilience of ecosystems to persist in their current states. Yet in the longer term, it is anticipated that climate change will push certain ecosystems and species beyond their capacity to recover. When managing to support resilience becomes infeasible, adaptation may require more than simply changing management practices—it may require changing management goals and managing transitions to new ecosystem states. After transitions have occurred, management will again support resilience—this time for a new ecosystem state. Thus, successful management of natural resources in the context of climate change will require recognition on the part of managers and decisions makers of the need to cycle between “managing for resilience” and “managing for change.”     

Hydrologic Connectivity and the Contribution of Stream Headwaters to Ecological Integrity at Regional Scales1

Abstract: Cumulatively, headwater streams contribute to maintaining hydrologic connectivity and ecosystem integrity at regional scales. Hydrologic connectivity is the water‐mediated transport of matter, energy and organisms within or between elements of the hydrologic cycle. Headwater streams compose over two‐thirds of total stream length in a typical river drainage and directly connect the upland and riparian landscape to the rest of the stream ecosystem. Altering headwater streams, e.g., by channelization, diversion through pipes, impoundment and burial, modifies fluxes between uplands and downstream river segments and eliminates distinctive habitats. The large‐scale ecological effects of altering headwaters are amplified by land uses that alter runoff and nutrient loads to streams, and by widespread dam construction on larger rivers (which frequently leaves free‐flowing upstream portions of river systems essential to sustaining aquatic biodiversity). We discuss three examples of large‐scale consequences of cumulative headwater alteration. Downstream eutrophication and coastal hypoxia result, in part, from agricultural practices that alter headwaters and wetlands while increasing nutrient runoff. Extensive headwater alteration is also expected to lower secondary productivity of river systems by reducing stream‐system length and trophic subsidies to downstream river segments, affecting aquatic communities and terrestrial wildlife that utilize aquatic resources. Reduced viability of freshwater biota may occur with cumulative headwater alteration, including for species that occupy a range of stream sizes but for which headwater streams diversify the network of interconnected populations or enhance survival for particular life stages. Developing a more predictive understanding of ecological patterns that may emerge on regional scales as a result of headwater alterations will require studies focused on components and pathways that connect headwaters to river, coastal and terrestrial ecosystems. Linkages between headwaters and downstream ecosystems cannot be discounted when addressing large‐scale issues such as hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico and global losses of biodiversity.     

A Case Study of Ecosystem Services in Urban Planning in Finland: Benefits,Rights and Responsibilities

The concept of ecosystem services is entering the agenda of land-use planning and scientists optimistically expect it to inform planners and decision-makers about the benefits that ecosystems provide. While tools and methods have been developed for mapping and valuing ecosystem services, only little attention has been paid to the practical application of the approach or its institutional preconditions and implications. We empirically analysed two urban planning processes for building residential areas in the outskirts of growing population centres in Finland. Our analysis of documents and interviews with planners focused on the benefits provided by ecosystems as well as the associated rights and responsibilities. We found that the concept ‘ecosystem service’ was not used, yet various benefits were identified. The rights of different stakeholders to ecosystem services were not explicitly identified, but many ecosystem services were perceived as public goods and particularly access to recreation was highlighted as an important justification for green areas. The results show that while the ecosystem services approach introduces new insights to land-use planning, it is still not embedded in the current practices or institutions. Operationalizing ecosystem services requires institutional adaptation, case-specific tailoring of methods, and deliberation among practitioners and stakeholders.     

Ecosystem health: I. Measuring ecosystem health

Ecosystem analysis has been advanced by an improved understanding of how ecosystems are structured and how they function. Ecology has advanced from an emphasis on natural history to consideration of energetics, the relationships and connections between species, hierarchies, and systems theory. Still, we consider ecosystems as entities with a distinctive character and individual characteristics. Ecosystem maintenance and preservation form the objective of impact analysis, hazard evaluation, and other management or regulation activities. In this article we explore an approach to ecosystem analysis which identifies and quantifies factors which define the condition or state of an ecosystem in terms of health criteria. We relate ecosystem health to human/nonhuman animal health and explore the difficulties of defining ecosystem health and suggest criteria which provide a functional definition of state and condition. We suggest that, as has been found in human/nonhuman animal health studies, disease states can be recognized before disease is of clinical magnitude. Example disease states for ecosystems are functionally defined and discussed, together with test systems for their early detection.This article is contribution VI in D.J. Schaeffer's Environmental Audit series.     

A nonequilibrium thermodynamic framework for discussing ecosystem integrity

During the last 20 years our understanding of the development of complex systems has changed significantly. Two major advancements are catastrophe theory and nonequilibrium thermodynamics with its associated theory of self-organization. These theories indicate that complex system development is nonlinear, discontinuous (catastrophes), not predictable (bifurcations), and multivalued (multiple developmental pathways). Ecosystem development should be expected to exhibit these characteristics. Traditional ecological theory has attempted to describe ecosystem stress response using some simple notions such as stability and resiliency. In fact, stress-response must be characterized by a richer set of concepts. The ability of the system to maintain its current operating point in the face of the stress, must be ascertained. If the system changes operating points, there are several questions to be considered: Is the change along the original developmental pathway or a new one? Is the change organizing or disorganizing? Will the system return to its original state? Will the system flip to some new state in a catastrophic way? Is the change acceptable to humans? The integrity of an ecosystem does not reflect a single characteristic of an ecosystem. The concept of integrity must be seen as multidimensional and encompassing a rich set of ecosystem behaviors. A framework of concepts for discussing integrity is presented in this article.     

Riparian Zone Management in the Pacific Northwest: Who's Cutting What?

Oncorhynchus sp.), regional governments now restrict timber harvest in riparian forests. I summarize and assess the riparian zone management guidelines of the states of California, Oregon, and Washington (USA) and the province of British Columbia (Canada). Only Oregon and British Columbia protect fish-bearing streams with “no-harvest” zones, and only the wider (20–50 m) no-harvest zones for larger fish-bearing streams in British Columbia are likely to maintain near-natural linkages between riparian and stream ecosystems. All four jurisdictions protect most streams with “management zones” of variable width, in which timber harvest activities are restricted. All the management zone guidelines permit the harvest of the largest conifers from riparian forests and will, if applied over a series of timber harvest rotations (60–80 years), result in the continued removal of potential sources of large woody debris from the region's watersheds. All four jurisdictions require additional protection for streams and watersheds that are severely degraded or (in the United States) contain threatened or endangered species. The governments of the PNW have taken a “manage until degraded, then protect” approach to riparian forest management that is unlikely to maintain or restore the full suite of riparian-stream linkages necessary for lotic ecosystems to function naturally at the stream, watershed, basin, or regional scale.     

SOUND POLICY OR SMOKE AND MIRRORS: DOES ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT MAKE SENSE?1

ABSTRACT: Protection of ecosystems as entities on the landscape has attracted a wide range of support. Ecosystem-based public policies are claimed to be more effective, efficient, and scientifically sound than other approaches to environmental and natural resource policy. The ecosystem concept was never intended to serve as a public policy guide or to determine landscape units for land management purposes. This paper critically examines the use of the ecosystem concept in public policy and land use management and analyzes the proposed rule to manage the National Forest System according to ecosystem management principles. The concept is found to be unsuitable as a basis for guiding environmental and natural resource public policies in general while the proposed rule to manage the national forests according to ecosystem management principles is shown to be incoherent.     

A regional framework for establishing recovery criteria

Effective assessments of aquatic ecosystem recovery require ecologically sound endpoints against which progress can be measured. Site-by-site assessments of end points and potential recovery trajectories are impractical for water resource agencies. Because of the natural variation among ecosystems, applying a single set of criteria nationwide is not appropriate either. This article demonstrates the use of a regional framework for stratifying natural variation and for determining realistic biological criteria. A map of ecoregions, drawn from landscape characteristics, formed the framework for three statewide case studies and three separate studies at the river basin scale. Statewide studies of Arkansas, Ohio, and Oregon, USA, streams demonstrated patterns in fish assemblages corresponding to ecoregions. The river basin study in Oregon revealed a distinct change at the ecoregion boundary; those in Ohio and Montana demonstrated the value of regional reference sites for assessing recovery. Ecoregions can be used to facilitate the application of ecological theory and to set recovery criteria for various regions of states or of the country. Such a framework provides an important alternative between site-specific and national approaches for assessing recovery rates and conditions.     

Lack of theoretical basis for predicting rate and pathways of recovery

An inadequate basis for precisely predicting the outcome of lotic ecosystem recovery, whether due to unaided natural processes or management techniques or both, exists because: (1) the field of ecology has not yet matured as a rigorous predictive science; (2) the precise sequence of events, including climatic occurrences, affecting the recovery process may be unique events and thus rarely or never repeated; and (3) even when attempts are made to control the recolonization process through introduction of species, etc., the interaction of these species may not follow deterministic models. Although this symposium focuses on lotic ecosystems, such systems are influenced strongly by exports from the surrounding land mass and, under certain circumstances, this may be the overriding influence on the recovery process; therefore, unless the boundary conditions are determined realistically, the recovery process may not follow desirable pathways. Despite the lack of a robust theoretical support base for lotic ecosystem recovery, some remarkable and rapid recoveries have occurred to either a close approximation of the original condition or to a condition ecologically superior to the damaged condition. In some cases, the recovery was due entirely to natural processes and, in others, often followed relatively straightforward management practices. There is evidence indicating that lotic ecosystem restoration is both cost effective and likely to produce satisfying results relatively rapidly. It is both fortunate that this is the case, since society is likely to support such efforts when the results have been extraordinarily successful, and unfortunate since restoration ecology needs a predictive capability.     

Disturbance and recovery of large floodplain rivers

Disturbance in a river-floodplain system is defined as an unpredictable event that disrupts structure or function at the ecosystem, community, or population level. Disturbance can result in species replacements or losses, or shifts of ecosystems from one persistent condition to another. A disturbance can be a discrete event or a graded change in a controlling factor that eventually exceeds a critical threshold. The annual flood is the major driving variable that facilitates lateral exchanges of nutrients, organic matter, and organisms. The annual flood is not normally considered a disturbance unless its timing or magnitude is “atypical.” The record flood of 1973 had little effect on the biota at a long-term study site on the Mississippi River, but the absence of a flood during the 1976–1977 Midwestern drought caused short- and long-term changes. Body burdens of contaminants increased temporarily in key species, because of increased concentration resulting from reduced dilution. Reduced runoff and sediment input improved light penetration and increased the depth at which aquatic macrophytes could grow. Developing plant beds exerted a high degree of biotic control and were able to persist, despite the resumption of normal floods and turbidity in subsequent years. In contrast to the discrete event that disturbed the Mississippi River, a major confluent, the Illinois River, has been degraded by a gradual increase in sediment input and sediment resuspension. From 1958 to 1961 formerly productive backwaters and lakes along a 320-km reach of the Illinois River changed from clear, vegetated areas to turbid, barren basins. The change to a system largely controlled by abiotic factors was rapid and the degraded condition persists. Traditional approaches to experimental design are poorly suited for detecting control mechanisms and for determining the critical thresholds in large river-floodplains. Large river-floodplain systems cannot be manipulated or sampled as easily as small streams, and greater use should be made of man-made or natural disturbances and environmental restoration as opportunistic experiments to measure thresholds and monitor the recovery process. Coauthors are listed in alphabetical order.