ASSESSING ENVIRONMENTAL ATTITUDES AND CONCERNS ABOUT A CONTAMINATED SITE IN A DENSELY POPULATED SUBURBAN ENVIRONMENT

Considerable attention has been devoted to the concerns and perceptions of people residing around contaminated facilities, both brownfields in urban areas and others located in remote and lightly populated areas. This paper examines the concerns of recreationists and sportsmen residing near the Department of Energys (DOE) Brookhaven National Laboratory, in central Long Island, one of the most densely populated regions in the United States, where tourism is of prime importance. On an open-ended question, the greatest concern was pollution, followed by environmental health as a global concern, and human health as a concern for Brookhaven. Accidents/spills, loss of public health, and loss of ecological health were rated highest among a list of concerns, and change in property values was rated lowest. When asked to rank seven concerns, protecting human health was ranked the highest, and economic interests were ranked the lowest. For future land use at Brookhaven, recreational uses were rated the highest, while building houses and factories, and storage of nuclear material were rated the lowest. These data can be used by managers, decision and policy makers, and the general public to assess and manage local and regional environmental concerns and to consider future land uses for decommissioned lands, such as those at Brookhaven.     

Science, Policy, Stakeholders, and Fish Consumption Advisories: Developing a Fish Fact Sheet for the Savannah River

In recent years there has been a startling rise in the issuance of fish consumption advisories. Unfortunately, compliance by the public is often low. Low compliance can be due to a number of factors, including confusion over the meaning of advisories, conflicting advisories issued by different agencies, controversies involving health benefits versus the risks from consuming fish, and an unwillingness to act on the advisories because of personal beliefs. In some places, such as along the Savannah River, one state (South Carolina) had issued a consumption advisory while the other (Georgia) had not, although at present, both states now issue consumption advisories for the Savannah River. Herein we report on the development of a fish fact sheet to address the confusing and conflicting information available to the public about consuming fish from the Savannah River. The process involved interviewing fishers to ascertain fishing and consumption patterns, evaluating contaminant levels and exposure pathways, discussing common grounds for the provision of information, and consensus-building among different regulatory agencies (US Environmental Protection Agency, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Georgia Department of Natural Resources) and the Department of Energy. Consensus, a key ingredient in solving many different types of “commons” problems, was aided by an outside organization, the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP). The initial role for CRESP was to offer scientific data as a basis for groups with different assumptions about risks to reach agreement on a regulatory response action. The process was an example of how credible science can be used to implement management and policies and provide a basis for consensus-building on difficult risk communication issues. The paper provides several lessons for improving the risk process from stakeholder conflicts, through risk assessment, to risk management. It also suggests that consensus-building and risk communication are continuing processes that involve assimilation of new information on contaminants and food-chain processes, state and federal law, public policy, and public response.     

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.     

Assessing Multiregion Avian Benefits from Strategically Targeted Agricultural Buffers

Mounting evidence of wildlife population gains from targeted conservation practices has prompted the need to develop and evaluate practices that are integrated into production agriculture systems and targeted toward specific habitat objectives. However, effectiveness of targeted conservation actions across broader landscapes is poorly understood. We evaluated multiregion, multispecies avian densities on row‐crop fields with native grass field margins (i.e., buffers) as part of the first U.S. agricultural conservation practice designed to support habitat and population recovery objectives of a national wildlife conservation initiative. We coordinated breeding season point transect surveys for 6 grassland bird species on 1151 row‐crop fields with and without native grass buffers (9–37 m) in 14 U.S. states (10 ecoregions) from 2006 to 2011. In most regions, breeding season densities of 5 of 6 targeted bird species were greater in the 500‐m surrounding survey points centered on fields with native grass buffers than in landscapes without buffers. Relative effect sizes were greatest for Northern Bobwhite (Colinus virginianus), Dickcissel (Spiza americana), and Field Sparrow (Spizella pusilla) in the Mississippi Alluvial Valley and Eastern Tallgrass Prairie regions. Other species (e.g., Eastern Meadowlark [Sturnella magna], Grasshopper Sparrow [Ammodramus savannarum]) exhibited inconsistent relative effect sizes. Bird densities on fields with and without buffers were greatest in the Central Mixed‐grass Prairie region. Our results suggest that strategic use of conservation buffers in regions with the greatest potential for relative density increases in target species will elicit greater range‐wide population response than diffuse, uninformed, and broadly distributed implementation of buffers. We recommend integrating multiple conservation practices in broader agricultural landscapes to maximize conservation effectiveness for a larger suite of species. Evaluación de los Beneficios de la Mutliregionalidad de Aves a Partir de Amortiguadores Agriculturales Estratégicamente Señalados     

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.