Integrating Environmental Restoration and Ecological Restoration: Long-Term Stewardship at the Department of Energy

With the ending of the Cold War, several federal agencies are reclaiming land through remediation and restoration and are considering potential future land uses that are compatible with current uses and local needs. Some sites are sufficiently contaminated that it is likely that the responsible federal agency will retain control over the land for the foreseeable future, providing them with a stewardship mission. This is particularly true of some of the larger Department of Energy (DOE) facilities contaminated during the production of nuclear weapons. The use of the term “restoration” is explored in this paper because the word means different things to the public, ecologists, and environmental managers responsible for contaminated sites, such as Superfund sites and the DOE facilities. While environmental restoration usually refers to remediation and removal of hazardous wastes, ecological restoration refers to the broader process of repairing damaged ecosystems and enhancing their productivity and/or biodiversity. The goals of the two types of restoration can be melded by considering environmental restoration as a special case of ecological restoration, one that involves risk reduction from hazardous wastes, and by broadening environmental restoration to include a more extensive problem-formulation phase (both temporal and spatial), which includes the goal of reestablishing a functioning ecosystem after remediation. Further, evaluating options for the desired post remediation result will inform managers and policy-makers concerning the feasibility and efficacy of environmental restoration itself.     

Recreational Rates and Future Land Use Preferences for Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Facility

To manage ecosystems it is essential to understand physical properties and biological function, as well as the ecological services and social/cultural perceptions of a variety of stakeholders. Where land managers are required to make decisions about restoration, remediation and future land use, understanding attitudes and future land use preferences is essential. In this paper I synthesize data on five surveys of recreational rates and preferences for future land use for the Department of Energy's Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). Subjects were interviewed at several well-attended events at different distances from INEEL, representing local and regional views. Between 24 and 59% of the subjects hunted, between 55 and 71% fished, and up to 87% camped, indicating potential for exposure if INEEL were open for recreation. Average recreational rates varied by location, with the Shoshone-Bannock Indians having higher hunting, fishing, hiking and camping rates than all others. There were significant differences in future land use preferences; subjects living close to the site rated nuclear material processing very high, while those living farther away ranked it intermediate. Indians ranked this use the lowest. Using the land as a National Environmental Research Park (NERP) was rated the highest (or nearly the highest) for all groups. Industrial uses were generally rated low by all groups. These data can be used by local planners and policy makers in decision making regarding levels of clean-up, future land use, future end-states and long-term protection and stewardship of these contaminated lands. The relative unanimity in future land use preferences for NERP and recreation, rather than new industrial purposes, provides guidance for remediation, suggesting that residential clean-up standards may be more stringent than required. Further, the relative approval of continued nuclear reprocessing (but not nuclear storage) also provides guidance for risk-based end-state planning.     

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.     

Integrating long-term stewardship goals into the remediation process: natural resource damages and the Department of Energy

The United States and other developed countries are faced with restoring and managing degraded ecosystems. Evaluations of the degradation of ecological resources can be used for determining ecological risk, making remediation or restoration decisions, aiding stakeholders with future land use decisions, and assessing natural resource damages. Department of Energy (DOE) lands provide a useful case study for examining degradation of ecological resources in light of past or present land uses and natural resource damage assessment (NRDA). We suggest that past site history should be incorporated into the cleanup and restoration phase to reduce the ultimate NRDA costs, and hasten resource recovery. The lands that DOE purchased over 50 years ago ranged from relatively undisturbed to heavily impacted farmland, and the impact that occurred from DOE occupation varies from regeneration of natural ecosystems (benefits) to increased exposure to several stressors (negative effects). During the time of the DOE releases, other changes occurred on the lands, including recovery from the disturbance effects of farming, grazing, and residential occupation, and the cessation of human disturbance. Thus, the injury to natural resources that occurred as a result of chemical and radiological releases occurred on top of recovery of already degraded systems. Both spatial (size and dispersion of patch types) and temporal (past/present/future land use and ecological condition) components are critical aspects of resource evaluation, restoration, and NRDA. For many DOE sites, integrating natural resource restoration with remediation to reduce or eliminate the need for NRDA could be a win-win situation for both responsible parties and natural resource trustees by eliminating costly NRDAs by both sides, and by restoring natural resources to a level that satisfies the trustees, while being cost-effective for the responsible parties. It requires integration of remediation, restoration, and end-state planning to a greater degree than is currently done at most DOE sites.     

Defining an ecological baseline for restoration and natural resource damage assessment of contaminated sites: The case of the Department of Energy

Retrospective ecological risk assessment, restoration, natural resource damage assessment (NRDA) and managing ecosystems all require having a baseline. This policy and practice paper explores the factors that influence baseline selection, and it is suggested that ecological resources would best be served by: (1) integrating NRDA considerations into both future land-use planning and remediation/restoration; (2) selecting a baseline for NRDA that approximates the land-use conditions at the time of occupation (or a preferred ecosystem); and (3) integrating both the positive and negative aspects of industrial occupation into restoration decisions, baseline selection and NRDA. Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response and Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), natural resource damages are assessed for injuries incurred since 1980 due to releases, but the release itself may have occurred before 1980. The paper uses the Department of Energy as a case study to examine NRDA and the management of ecosystems. Releases occurred at many DOE sites from the 1950s to the 1980s during nuclear bomb production. It is suggested that the DOE has been responsible not only for injuries to natural resources that occurred as a result of releases, but for significant ecosystem recovery since DOE occupation, because some lands were previously farmed or industrialized. Natural resource injuries due to releases occurred simultaneously with ecosystem recovery that resulted from DOE occupation. While the 1980 date is codified in CERCLA law as the time after which damages can be assessed, baseline can be defined as the conditions the natural resources would have been in today, but for the release of the hazardous substance. It is also suggested that NRDA considerations should be incorporated into the remediation and restoration process at DOE sites, thereby negating the need for formal NRDA following restoration, and reducing the final NRDA costs.     

A Comparison of On-site Hunters,Sportsmen and the General Public about Recreational Rates and Future Land Use Preferences for the Savannah River Site

Management of ecosystems has been improved both by our understanding of how ecosystems function, as well as by what people consider to be suitable future land uses. This is particularly true with contaminated lands where decisions must be made about clean-up and future land use. In this paper I synthesize several surveys of public recreational rates and preferences for future land use of the Savannah River Site (SRS), a Department of Energy (DoE) facility located in South Carolina. Four groups of people were interviewed: on-site hunters; sportsmen; local residents attending an event near Aiken, South Carolina; and the general public attending a festival in Columbia, South Carolina. The general public that engaged in recreational activities averaged 20 days/ year or more for hunting and fishing, while sportsmen averaged over 50 days/year. All four groups rated maintaining SRS as a National Environmental Research Park (NERP) and using it for recreation as the highest preferred land uses. The general public rated hiking and camping higher than hunting and fishing, while sportsmen rated hunting higher than hiking and camping. All groups rated using SRS for homes as the lowest, or second lowest, preferred land use. There was disagreement on the ratings for industrial development, with people living closer to the site rating it higher than the general South Carolina population. These data can be used by local planners and managers in decision making regarding clean-up levels and future land use. The relative unanimity of views for cleaning up DoE sites, continued use of the site as a NERP and increased recreational use suggests that different groups of people share similar preferences for future use of SRS, and provides a useful paradigm for considering future land use decisions at other DoE sites nationwide. The relatively low ranking for housing and factories suggests that clean-up levels could be geared to future land use, such as recreation, which are less stringent than residential levels.     

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT EVALUATION OF HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL IN LAND1

Since the publication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring in 1962 there has been a rapidly growing public concern over widespread contamination of the environment with hazardous wastes. In recent years scientific findings on the ecological effects of various hazardous substances have posed several important questions. What exactly are hazardous wastes? Can these substances be disposed of in a technically feasible, economical, and safe way with assurance that they have been permanently eliminated from the ecosystem? What compositional alterations or movements of the hazardous wastes occur in water, soil, or air systems? What effect will these wastes have on the water, soil, or air systems? What effect will these wastes have on the water, soil, or air properties? Consequently, a University of Louisville study has developed a relevant definition of hazardous wastes for the Environmental Engineering profession together with priority of concern rating systems to delineate the degree of environmental impact imposed on a total ecosystem by a hazardous waste and the feasibility of disposing of hazardous substances at specific landfill sites. It is felt that refinements of the priority of concern rating systems offered here may provide a sound basis from which procedural decisions may be structured to establish future national hazardous waste disposal sites.     

Determinants of Trust for Public Lands: Fire and Fuels Management on the Bitterroot National Forest

Management of public lands occurs today with high levels of scrutiny and controversy. To succeed, managers seek the support, involvement, and endorsement of the public. This study examines trust as an indicator of managerial success and attempts to identify and measure the components that most influence it. A review of trust literature yielded 14 attributes that were hypothesized to contribute to trust, grouped into the three dimensions of Shared Norms and Values, Willingness to Endorse, and Perceived Efficacy. Operationalizing these attributes and dimensions, a telephone survey was administered to a sample of Montana, USA, residents living adjacent to the Bitterroot National Forest (n = 1,152). Each of the attributes was measured in the context of federal lands fire and fuel management. Structural equation modeling showed that all 14 attributes were found to be influential contributors to levels of trust. Results suggest that if managers are to maintain or increase levels of public trust, they need to consider each of trust’s attributes as they make social, ecological, and economic resource decisions.     

Considering Conservation Value in Economic Appraisals of Coastal Resources

Measuring the economic value of environmental quality is useful to evaluate policies that affect the use of natural resources. This paper presents the findings of a contingent valuation (CV) survey designed to measure non-use values for the natural coastal environment.This was attempted through evaluating public and scientific values of conservation quality. The results suggest that public perceptions of conservation quality are multidimensional,and that it may be difficult for some individuals to express their preferences for the conservation value of natural resources in monetary terms. Additionally, public and scientific judgments differ concerning some of the physical attributes imparting conservation value. These findings have important implications on efforts to consider environmental quality in land and coastal use decisions.     

How Useful are the Concepts of Familiarity, Biological Integrity, and Ecosystem Health for Evaluating Damages by GM Crops?

In the discussion about consequences of the release of genetically modified (GM) crops, the meaning of the term “environmental damage” is difficult to pin down. We discuss some established concepts and criteria for understanding and evaluating such damages. Focusing on the concepts of familiarity, biological integrity, and ecosystem health, we argue that, for the most part, these concepts are highly ambiguous. While environmental damage is mostly understood as significant adverse effects on conservation resources, these concepts may not relate directly to effects on tangible natural resources but rather to parameters of land use or ecological processes (e.g., the concept of biological integrity). We stress the importance of disclosing the normative assumptions underlying damage concepts and procedures for the evaluation of damages by GM crops. A conceptualization of environmental damage should precede its operationalization. We recommend an unambiguous definition for damage developed earlier and recommend that evaluation criteria be based on this. However, a general damage definition cannot replace case-specific operationalization of damage, which remains an important future challenge.     

Determining Ecological Equivalence in Service-to-Service Scaling of Salt Marsh Restoration

The amount of ecological restoration required to mitigate or compensate for environmental injury or habitat loss is often based on the goal of achieving ecological equivalence. However, few tools are available for estimating the extent of restoration required to achieve habitat services equivalent to those that were lost. This paper describes habitat equivalency analysis (HEA), a habitat-based “service-to-service” approach for determining the amount of restoration needed to compensate for natural resource losses, and examines issues in its application in the case of salt marsh restoration. The scientific literature indicates that although structural attributes such as vegetation may recover within a few years, there is often a significant lag in the development of ecological processes such as nutrient cycling that are necessary for a fully functioning salt marsh. Moreover, natural variation can make recovery trajectories difficult to define and predict for many habitat services. HEA is an excellent tool for scaling restoration actions because it reflects this ecological variability and complexity. At the same time, practitioners must recognize that conclusions about the amount of restoration needed to provide ecological services equivalent to those that are lost will depend critically on the ecological data and assumptions that are used in the HEA calculation.     

Assessing Societal Impacts When Planning Restoration of Large Alluvial Rivers: A Case Study of the Sacramento River Project, California

Studies have shown that ecological restoration projects are more likely to gain public support if they simultaneously increase important human services that natural resources provide to people. River restoration projects have the potential to influence many of the societal functions (e.g., flood control, water quality) that rivers provide, yet most projects fail to consider this in a comprehensive manner. Most river restoration projects also fail to take into account opportunities for revitalization of large-scale river processes, focusing instead on opportunities presented at individual parcels. In an effort to avoid these pitfalls while planning restoration of the Sacramento River, we conducted a set of coordinated studies to evaluate societal impacts of alternative restoration actions over a large geographic area. Our studies were designed to identify restoration actions that offer benefits to both society and the ecosystem and to meet the information needs of agency planning teams focusing on the area. We worked with local partners and public stakeholders to design and implement studies that assessed the effects of alternative restoration actions on flooding and erosion patterns, socioeconomics, cultural resources, and public access and recreation. We found that by explicitly and scientifically melding societal and ecosystem perspectives, it was possible to identify restoration actions that simultaneously improve both ecosystem health and the services (e.g., flood protection and recreation) that the Sacramento River and its floodplain provide to people. Further, we found that by directly engaging with local stakeholders to formulate, implement, and interpret the studies, we were able to develop a high level of trust that ultimately translated into widespread support for the project.     

Adapting to Climate Change on Western Public Lands: Addressing the Ecological Effects of Domestic, Wild, and Feral Ungulates

Climate change affects public land ecosystems and services throughout the American West and these effects are projected to intensify. Even if greenhouse gas emissions are reduced, adaptation strategies for public lands are needed to reduce anthropogenic stressors of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and to help native species and ecosystems survive in an altered environment. Historical and contemporary livestock production—the most widespread and long-running commercial use of public lands—can alter vegetation, soils, hydrology, and wildlife species composition and abundances in ways that exacerbate the effects of climate change on these resources. Excess abundance of native ungulates (e.g., deer or elk) and feral horses and burros add to these impacts. Although many of these consequences have been studied for decades, the ongoing and impending effects of ungulates in a changing climate require new management strategies for limiting their threats to the long-term supply of ecosystem services on public lands. Removing or reducing livestock across large areas of public land would alleviate a widely recognized and long-term stressor and make these lands less susceptible to the effects of climate change. Where livestock use continues, or where significant densities of wild or feral ungulates occur, management should carefully document the ecological, social, and economic consequences (both costs and benefits) to better ensure management that minimizes ungulate impacts to plant and animal communities, soils, and water resources. Reestablishing apex predators in large, contiguous areas of public land may help mitigate any adverse ecological effects of wild ungulates.     

Indigenous Studies Speaks to Environmental Management

This article describes the increasing connections between the fields of Indigenous studies and environmental management and examines some of the ways that an Indigenous studies perspective can guide thinking about environmental management. Indigenous groups have been involved in the management of environmental and natural resources on their lands since time immemorial. Indigenous groups have also become increasingly involved in Western practices of environmental management with the advent of co-management institutions, subsistence boards, traditional ecological knowledge forums, and environmental issues affecting Indigenous resources. Thus, it is an important time for scholarship that explores how Indigenous groups are both shaping and being affected by processes of environmental management. This article summarizes key findings and themes from eight papers situated at the intersection of these two fields of study and identify means by which environmental managers can better accommodate Indigenous rights and perspectives. It is the authors’ hope that increased dialog between Indigenous studies and environmental management can contribute to the building of sustainable and socially just environmental management practices.     

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.     

Shifting Priorities at the Department of Energy's Bomb Factories: Protecting Human and Ecological Health

More than 50 years of research, development, manufacture, and testing of nuclear weapons at Department of Energy (DOE) sites has left a legacy of on-site contamination that often spreads to surrounding areas. Despite substantial cleanup budgets in the last decade, the DOE's top-to-bottom review team concluded that relatively little actual cleanup has been accomplished, although milestones have been met and work packages completed. Rather than solely use regulatory constraints to direct cleanup, many people have suggested that human and ecological health should guide long-term stewardship goals of DOE-managed sites. The main questions are how ecological and human health considerations should be applied in deciding the extent of cleanup that contaminated sites should receive and how near-term and longer run considerations of costs and benefits should be balanced as cleanup decisions are made. One effort to protect ecological integrity is the designation of the largest sites as National Environmental Research Parks (NERPs). Recently, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) suggested isolating and conserving DOE sites as a policy priority because of their rich ecological diversity. A more effective long-term stewardship approach for former nuclear weapons complex sites may emerge if the guiding principles are to (1) reduce risks to human and ecological health, (2) protect cultural traditions, and (3) lower short- and long-term cleanup and remediation costs. A “net benefits” perspective that takes both near- and longer-term costs and consequences into account can help illuminate the trade-offs between expensive cleanup in the near term and the need to assure long-term protection of human health, cultural values, and high levels of biodiversity and ecological integrity that currently exist at many DOE sites.     

Refining the Use of Habitat Equivalency Analysis

When natural resources are injured or destroyed in violation of certain U.S. federal or state statutes, government agencies have the responsibility to ensure the public is compensated through ecological restoration for the loss of the natural resources and services they provide. Habitat equivalency analysis is a service-to-service approach to scaling restoration commonly used in natural resource damage assessments. Calculation of the present value of resource services lost due to injury and gained from compensatory restoration projects is complicated by assumptions concerning the within-time period crediting of losses and gains. Conventional beginning-of-period accounting leads to an underestimate of the loss due to injury and an overestimate of the gains from compensatory projects in cases with linear recovery projections. The resulting compensatory requirement is often insufficient to offset the true loss suffered by the public. Two algebraic equations are offered to correct for these estimation inaccuracies, and a numerical example is used to illustrate the magnitude of error for a typical, though hypothetical, injury scenario.     

Project River Recovery: Restoration of Braided Gravel-Bed River Habitat in New Zealand’s High Country

Ecological restoration is increasingly becoming a primary component of broader environmental and water resources management programs throughout the world. The New Zealand Department of Conservation implemented Project River Recovery (PRR) in 1991 to restore unique braided gravel-bed river and wetland habitat in the Upper Waitaki Basin in New Zealand’s high country of the South Island, which has been severely impacted by hydroelectric power development. These braided rivers are highly dynamic, diverse, and globally important ecosystems and provide critical habitat to numerous native wading and shore bird species, including several threatened species such as the black stilt. The objective of this study was to review and summarize PRR after more than 10 years of implementation to provide information and transfer knowledge to other nations and restoration programs. Site visits were conducted, discussions were held with key project staff, and project reports and related literature were reviewed. Primary components of the program include pest plant and animal control, wetland construction and enhancement, a significant research and monitoring component, and public awareness. The study found that PRR is an excellent example of an ecological restoration program focusing on conserving and restoring unique habitat for threatened native bird species, but that also includes several secondary objectives. Transfer of knowledge from PRR could benefit ecological restoration programs in other parts of the world, particularly riverine floodplain and braided river restoration. PRR could achieve even greater success with expanded goals, additional resources, and increased integration of science with management, especially broader consideration of hydrologic and geomorphologic effects and restoration opportunities.