Vegetation Response to Western Juniper Slash Treatments

The expansion of piñon–juniper woodlands the past 100 years in the western United States has resulted in large scale efforts to kill trees and recover sagebrush steppe rangelands. It is important to evaluate vegetation recovery following woodland control to develop best management practices. In this study, we compared two fuel reduction treatments and a cut-and-leave (CUT) treatment used to control western juniper (Juniperus occidentalis spp. occidentalis Hook.) of the northwestern United States. Treatments were; CUT, cut-and-broadcast burn (BURN), and cut-pile-and-burn the pile (PILE). A randomized complete block design was used with five replicates of each treatment located in a curl leaf mahogany (Cercocarpus ledifolius Nutt. ex Torr. & A. Gray)/mountain big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt. spp. vaseyana (Rydb.) Beetle)/Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis Elmer) association. In 2010, 4 years after tree control the cover of perennial grasses (PG) [Sandberg’s bluegrass (Poa secunda J. Pres) and large bunchgrasses] were about 4 and 5 % less, respectively, in the BURN (7.1 ± 0.6 %) than the PILE (11.4 ± 2.3 %) and CUT (12.4 ± 1.7 %) treatments (P < 0.0015). In 2010, cover of invasive cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum L.) was greater in the BURN (6.3 ± 1.0 %) and was 50 and 100 % greater than PILE and CUT treatments, respectively. However, the increase in perennial bunchgrass density and cover, despite cheatgrass in the BURN treatment, mean it unlikely that cheatgrass will persist as a major understory component. In the CUT treatment mahogany cover increased 12.5 % and density increased in from 172 ± 25 to 404 ± 123 trees/ha. Burning, killed most or all of the adult mahogany, and mahogany recovery consisted of 100 and 67 % seedlings in the PILE and BURN treatments, respectively. After treatment, juniper presence from untreated small trees (<1 m tall; PILE and CUT treatments) and seedling emergence (all treatments) represented 25–33 % of pre-treatment tree density. To maintain recovery of herbaceous, shrub, and mahogany species additional control of reestablished juniper will be necessary.     

A mixed methodology for evaluating use of evidence in conservation planning

Conservation practitioners widely recognize the importance of making decisions based on the best available evidence. However, the effectiveness of evidence use in conservation planning is rarely assessed, which limits opportunities to improve evidence-based practice. We devised a mixed methodology for empirically evaluating use of evidence that applies social science tools to systematically appraise what kinds of evidence are used in conservation planning, to what effect, and under what limitations. We applied our approach in a case study of the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC), a leading land conservation organization. We conducted qualitative and quantitative analyses of 65 NCC planning documents (n = 13 in-depth) to identify patterns in evidence use, and surveyed 35 conservation planners to examine experiences of and barriers to using evidence. Although claims in plans contained a wide range of evidence types, 26% of claims were not referenced or associated with an identifiable source. Lack of evidence use was particularly apparent in claims associated with direct threats, particularly those identified as low (71% coded as insufficient or lacking evidence) or medium (45%) threats. Survey participants described relying heavily on practitioner experience and highlighted capacity limitations and disciplinary gaps in expertise among planning teams as barriers to using evidence effectively. We found that although time-intensive, this approach yielded actionable recommendations for improving evidence use in NCC conservation plans. Similar mixed-method assessments may streamline the process by including interviews and refining the document analysis frames to target issues or sections of concern. We suggest our method provides an accessible and robust point of departure for conservation practitioners to evaluate whether the use of conservation planning reflects in-house standards and more broadly recognized best practices.     

In search of a unifying criterion for meandering systems: examples from natural and built environments

Environmental Fluid Mechanics - Meandering of river systems has been attributed to erosion and deposition of sediments along river banks, yet a universal cause of the instability has not been...     

Resource users as land-sea links in coastal and marine socioecological systems

Coastal zones, which connect terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, are among the most resource-rich regions globally and home to nearly 40% of the global human population. Because human land-based activities can alter natural processes in ways that affect adjacent aquatic ecosystems, land-sea interactions are increasingly recognized as critical to coastal conservation planning and governance. However, the complex socioeconomic dynamics inherent in coastal and marine socioecological systems (SESs) have received little consideration. Drawing on knowledge generalized from long-term studies in Caribbean Nicaragua, we devised a conceptual framework that clarifies the multiple ways socioeconomically driven behavior can link the land and sea. In addition to other ecosystem effects, the framework illustrates how feedbacks resulting from changes to aquatic resources can influence terrestrial resource management decisions and land uses. We assessed the framework by applying it to empirical studies from a variety of coastal SESs. The results suggest its broad applicability and highlighted the paucity of research that explicitly investigates the effects of human behavior on coastal SES dynamics. We encourage researchers and policy makers to consider direct, indirect, and bidirectional cross-ecosystem links that move beyond traditionally recognized land-to-sea processes.