Perceptions of Species Abundance,Distribution, and Diversity: Lessons from Four Decades of Sampling on a Government-Managed Reserve

/ We examined data relative to species abundance, distribution, anddiversity patterns of reptiles and amphibians to determine how perceptionschange over time and with level of sampling effort. Location data werecompiled on more than one million individual captures or observations of 98species during a 44-year study period on the US Department of Energy's(DOE) Savannah River Site National Environmental Research Park (SRS-NERP) inSouth Carolina. We suggest that perceptions of herpetofaunal speciesdiversity are strongly dependent on level of effort and that land managementdecisions based on short-term data bases for some faunal groups could resultin serious errors in environmental management. We provide evidence thatacquiring information on biodiversity distribution patterns is compatiblewith multiyear spatially extensive research programs and also provide aperspective of what might be achieved if long-term, coordinated researchefforts were instituted nationwide.To conduct biotic surveys on government-managed lands, we recommend revisionsin the methods used by government agencies to acquire and report biodiversitydata. We suggest that government and industry employees engaged inbiodiversity survey efforts develop proficiency in field identification forone or more major taxonomic groups and be encouraged to measure the status ofpopulations quantitatively with consistent and reliable methodologies. Wealso suggest that widespread academic cooperation in the dissemination ofinformation on regional patterns of biodiversity could result byestablishment of a peer-reviewed, scientifically rigorous journal concernedwith status and trends of the biota of the United States. KEY WORDS: Abundance; Amphibian; Biodiversity; Distribution; Landmanagement; Reptile     

The Need for Integrated Linkages and Long-Term Monitoring of Mercury in Canada

A nation-wide ecosystem science network for Canada was formed in 1994. At that time, mercury was a re-emerging issue in Canada and the Coordinating Office for the networksought collaboration to assess the issue. The key mechanismsby which the network has added value in addressing this issue are: 1) Information Dissemination, the network has organised, facilitated and co-hosted a number of regional,national and international mercury events (meetings, conferences and workshops) which have served to bring theexpertise together, the network also disseminates informationon it's web page, and the Coordinating Office hosts an annualNational Science Conference; 2) Collaborative Mercury Monitoring, network partners advocated the need for a singlehemispheric mercury network which resulted in the developmentof a compatible Canada–U.S. mercury deposition network, whichmay also be expanded into Mexico, and 3) Environmental Reporting, the network has collaborated with others to reporton current mercury findings through initiatives such as the 1998 Northeast States and Eastern Canadian Mercury Study, a 1999 Mercury Case Study and is presently a partner in the University of Quebec's proposal to form a Collaborative Mercury Ecosystem Research Network in Canada.