Simple Spatial Modeling Tool for Prioritizing Prescribed Burning Activities at the Landscape Scale

Abstract:   Resources for prescribed fire are frequently insufficient to manage public lands for all conservation and resource management objectives, necessitating prioritization of the application of fire across the landscape within any given year. Defining tradeoffs when applying prescribed fire to large landscapes is problematic not only because of the complexity of weighing competing management objectives at the landscape scale, but also because of the difficult nature of independently applying need-to-burn criteria to large areas. We present a case study of a simple modeling process implemented at Eglin Air Force Base in the Florida Panhandle (U.S.A.) to prioritize the application of prescribed fire. In a workshop setting, managers and biologists identified key conservation criteria and landscape management objectives that drive the application of prescribed fire. Remote sensing and other spatial data were developed to directly or indirectly represent all these criteria. Using geographic information system software, managers and biologists weighted each criterion according to its relative contribution to overall burn prioritization, and individual values for the criterion were scored according to how they influence the need to burn. Subsequently, this process has been validated and modified through ecological monitoring. This modeling process has also been applied to the 77,400-ha Blackwater River State Forest, public land adjacent to Eglin Air Force Base, demonstrating its applicability to lands with varying management priorities. The advantages of this model-based approach for prioritizing prescribed fire include the reliance on accessible, inexpensive software, the development of spatially explicit management objectives, the ease of transferability, and clearly stated assumptions about management that may be tested and reviewed through monitoring and public comment.     

Simulating Soil Water Content,Evapotranspiration, and Yield of Variably Irrigated Grain Sorghum Using AquaCrop

Use of models to simulate crop production has become important in optimizing irrigation management in arid and semiarid regions. However, applicability and performance of these models differ across regions, due to differences in environmental and management factors. The AquaCrop model was used to simulate soil water content (SWC), evapotranspiration (ET), and yield for grain sorghum under different irrigation regimes and dryland conditions at two sites in Central and Southern High Plains. Prediction error (P_e), estimated as the difference between simulated and measured divided by measured, for SWC ranged from ?17% to 4% in fully irrigated, ?3% to ?10% in limited irrigated, and ?16% to 25% in dryland treatments. The P_e within ±4%, ?5%, and ?17% to 24% were attained for seasonal ET under fully irrigated, limited irrigated, and dryland conditions, respectively. P_e values for grain yield were within those previously reported and ranged from ?10% to 12%, ?12% to 7%, and 9% to 17% for fully irrigated, limited irrigated and dryland conditions, respectively. Overall performance of the AquaCrop model showed it could be used as an effective tool for evaluating the impacts of variable crop and irrigation managements on the production of grain sorghum in the study area. Finally, the application of the model in the study area revealed planting date has a significant impact on sorghum yield and irrigation requirements, but the impact of planting density was negligible. Editor's note : This paper is part of the featured series on Optimizing Ogallala Aquifer Water Use to Sustain Food Systems. See the February 2019 issue for the introduction and background to the series.     

Integrating Nonindigenous Aquatic Plant Control with Protection of Snail Kite Nests in Florida

The endangered snail kite (Rostrhamus sociabilis) feeds primarily on the freshwater apple snail (Pomacea paludosa) in Florida. The nonindigenous, floating water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) and water lettuce (Pistia stratiotes) impede kites from finding snails. Effective control of these aquatic plants in the littoral zone of central and south Florida lakes benefits kites by maintaining open foraging habitat. However, incidental herbicide spraying of nesting substrates result in nest collapse when kites breed in nonwoody, emergent plants [cattail (Typha spp.) and giant bulrush (Scirpus validus)] in the outer littoral zone during lower lake levels. Many endangered species recovery plans and their implementation have experienced problems due to inaction and/or noncooperation by various governmental agencies and their personnel. Herein, we describe the development and implementation of a buffer zone strategy to prevent secondary impacts from an aquatic plant control program to snail kites nesting on lakes in central and south Florida. A strategy was jointly developed by personnel of five state and federal agencies to control herbicide application near kite nesting areas during the normal breeding season. Although requiring various modifications during its implementation, this cooperative effort successfully integrated aquatic plant control objectives with snail kite conservation on Lake Okeechobee during 1988. The program was expanded the following year to lakes Kissimmee and Tohopekaliga. Since the implementation of the snail kite impact preclusion program, no nest loss was attributed to incidental herbicide applications on lakes Okeechobee, Kissimmee, and Tohopekaliga.     

Establishing Representative No-Take Areas in the Great Barrier Reef: Large-Scale Implementation of Theory on Marine Protected Areas

Abstract:  The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, an area almost the size of Japan, has a new network of no-take areas that significantly improves the protection of biodiversity. The new marine park zoning implements, in a quantitative manner, many of the theoretical design principles discussed in the literature. For example, the new network of no-take areas has at least 20% protection per "bioregion," minimum levels of protection for all known habitats and special or unique features, and minimum sizes for no-take areas of at least 10 or 20 km across at the smallest diameter. Overall, more than 33% of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is now in no-take areas (previously 4.5%). The steps taken leading to this outcome were to clarify to the interested public why the existing level of protection was inadequate; detail the conservation objectives of establishing new no-take areas; work with relevant and independent experts to define, and contribute to, the best scientific process to deliver on the objectives; describe the biodiversity (e.g., map bioregions); define operational principles needed to achieve the objectives; invite community input on all of the above; gather and layer the data gathered in round-table discussions; report the degree of achievement of principles for various options of no-take areas; and determine how to address negative impacts. Some of the key success factors in this case have global relevance and include focusing initial communication on the problem to be addressed; applying the precautionary principle; using independent experts; facilitating input to decision making; conducting extensive and participatory consultation; having an existing marine park that encompassed much of the ecosystem; having legislative power under federal law; developing high-level support; ensuring agency priority and ownership; and being able to address the issue of displaced fishers.     

Motivations for the Restoration of Ecosystems

Abstract:  The reasons ecosystems should be restored are numerous, disparate, generally understated, and commonly underappreciated. We offer a typology in which these reasons—or motivations—are ordered among five rationales: technocratic, biotic, heuristic, idealistic, and pragmatic. The technocratic rationale encompasses restoration that is conducted by government agencies or other large organizations to satisfy specific institutional missions and mandates. The biotic rationale for restoration is to recover lost aspects of local biodiversity. The heuristic rationale attempts to elicit or demonstrate ecological principles and biotic expressions. The idealistic rationale consists of personal and cultural expressions of concern or atonement for environmental degradation, reengagement with nature, and/or spiritual fulfillment. The pragmatic rationale seeks to recover or repair ecosystems for their capacity to provide a broad array of natural services and products upon which human economies depend and to counteract extremes in climate caused by ecosystem loss. We propose that technocratic restoration, as currently conceived and practiced, is too narrow in scope and should be broadened to include the pragmatic rationale whose overarching importance is just beginning to be recognized. We suggest that technocratic restoration is too authoritarian, that idealistic restoration is overly restricted by lack of administrative strengths, and that a melding of the two approaches would benefit both. Three recent examples are given of restoration that blends the technocratic, idealistic, and pragmatic rationales and demonstrates the potential for a more unified approach. The biotic and heuristic rationales can be satisfied within the contexts of the other rationales.