SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Current Landscape Ecology Reports”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources

USGS2008

A Landscape Indicator Approach to the Identification and Articulation of the Ecological Consequences of Land Cover Change in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, 1970-2000

The advancement of geographic science in the area of land surface status and trends and land cover change is at the core of the current geographic scientific research of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (McMahon and others, 2005). Perhaps the least developed or articulated aspects of USGS land change science have been the identification and analysis of the ecological consequences of land cover change. Changes in land use and land cover significantly affect the ability of ecosystems to provide essential ecological goods and services, which, in turn, affect the economic, public health, and social benefits that these ecosystems provide. One of the great scientific challenges for geographic science is to understand and calibrate the effects of land use and land cover change and the complex interaction between human and biotic systems at a variety of natural, geographic, and political scales. Understanding the dynamics of land surface change requires an increased understanding of the complex nature of human-environmental systems and will require a suite of scientific tools that include traditional geographic data and analysis methods, such as remote sensing and geographic information systems (GIS), as well as innovative approaches to understanding the dynamics of complex systems. One such approach that has gained much recent scientific attention is the landscape indicator, or landscape assessment, approach, which has been developed with the emergence of the science of landscape ecology.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2021

PS3: The Pheno-Synthesis software suite for integration and analysis of multi-scale, multi-platform phenological data

Phenology is the study of recurring plant and animal life-cycle stages which can be observed across spatial and temporal scales that span orders of magnitude (e.g., organisms to landscapes). The variety of scales at which phenological processes operate is reflected in the range of methods for collecting phenologically relevant data, and the programs focused on these collections. Consideration of the scale at which phenological observations are made, and the platform used for observation, is critical for the interpretation of phenological data and the application of these data to both research questions and land management objectives. However, there is currently little capacity to facilitate access, integration and analysis of cross-scale, multi-platform phenological data. This paper reports on a new suite of software and analysis tools – the “Pheno-Synthesis Software Suite,” or PS3 – to facilitate integration and analysis of phenological and ancillary data, enabling investigation and interpretation of phenological processes at scales ranging from organisms to landscapes and from days to decades. We use PS3 to investigate phenological processes in a semi-aride, mixed shrub-grass ecosystem, and find that the apparent importance of seasonal precipitation to vegetation activity (i.e., “greenness”) is affected by the scale and platform of observation. We end by describing potential applications of PS3 to phenological modeling and forecasting, understanding patterns and drivers of phenological activity in real-world ecosystems, and supporting agricultural and natural resource management and decision-making.

Ecological Informatics↗

USGS2009

Geography of Alaska lake districts: Identification, description, and analysis of lake-rich regions of a diverse and dynamic state

Lakes are abundant landforms and important ecosystems in Alaska, but are unevenly distributed on the landscape with expansive lake-poor regions and several lake-rich regions. Such lake-rich areas are termed lake districts and have landscape characteristics that can be considered distinctive in similar respects to mountain ranges. In this report, we explore the nature of lake-rich areas by quantitatively identifying Alaska’s lake districts, describing and comparing their physical characteristics, and analyzing how Alaska lake districts are naturally organized and correspond to climatic and geophysical characteristics, as well as studied and managed by people. We use a digital dataset (National Hydrography Dataset) of lakes greater than 1 hectare, which includes 409,040 individual lakes and represents 3.3 percent of the land-surface area of Alaska. The selection criteria we used to identify lake districts were (1) a lake area (termed limnetic ratio, in percent) greater than the mean for the State, and (2) a lake density (number of lakes per unit area) greater than the mean for the State using a pixel size scaled to the area of interest and number of lakes in the census. Pixels meeting these criteria were grouped and delineated and all groups greater than 1,000 square kilometers were identified as Alaska’s lake districts. These lake districts were described according to lake size-frequency metrics, elevation distributions, geology, climate, and ecoregions to better understand their similarities and differences. We also looked at where lake research and relevant ecological monitoring has occurred in Alaska relative to lake districts and how lake district lands and waters are currently managed. We identified and delineated 20 lake districts in Alaska representing 16 percent of the State, but including 65 percent of lakes and 75 percent of lake area. The largest lake districts identified are the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta, Arctic Coastal Plain, and Iliamna lake districts with high limnetic ratios of 19, 17, and 21 percent, respectively. The three smallest districts we considered were Tetlin in the eastern interior, Menhiskof on the Alaska Peninsula, and Matanuska–Susitna at the head of Cook Inlet with limnetic ratios of 14, 9, and 9 percent, respectively. Lake density and limnetic ratio were poorly related among lake districts, such that some districts had a few large lakes like Iliamna with Lakes Iliamna and Becharof—the two largest in the State, compared to other districts with many very small lakes like Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta with 111,130 lakes and 63 percent of these less than 10 hectares. Most lake districts are in regions with relatively low precipitation, but temperature regimes varied widely among lake districts. Approximately one-half of lake districts were glaciated during the Pleistocene and similar numbers occur in regions classified as having continuous, discontinuous, and sporadic permafrost, or perennially unfrozen soils. Most districts are at low elevations (less than 250 meters) with two important exceptions being Tetlin with a mean elevation of 530 meters and Ahtna with a mean elevation of 760 meters. These higher elevation districts, particularly Ahtna, had distinct characteristics from other lake districts such as continuous permafrost and Pleistocene glaciation. Several lake districts share similar boundaries to defined ecoregions with lake districts occurring in less than one-half of these 32 ecoregions of Alaska. Most lake districts are lands fully or partly managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park Service, with other land management by the Bureau of Land Management and State and borough government. Much of the U.S. Geological Survey’s lake water-quality sampling efforts has been done in the Arctic Coastal Plain, Matanuska-Susitna, and Iliamna districts but no recorded collections in nine lake districts. Similarly, most lake limnological studies in Alaska were site-specific and represent only a small portion of Alaska’s lake districts. This identification, characterization, and analysis of lake-rich regions may help provide a template to guide future limnological and other scientific research for Alaska.

Alaska↗

USGS2018

Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional Assessment—Volume II. Species and assemblages

The Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional Assessment was conducted in partnership with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Great Plains Landscape Conservation Cooperative. The overall goal of the Rapid Ecoregional Assessments (REAs) is to compile and synthesize regional datasets to facilitate evaluation of the cumulative effects of change agents on priority ecological communities and species. In particular, the REAs identify and map the distribution of communities and wildlife habitats at broad spatial extents and provide assessments of ecological conditions. The REAs also identify where and to what degree ecological resources are currently at risk from change agents, such as development, fire, invasive species, and climate change. The REAs can help managers identify and prioritize potential areas for conservation or restoration, assess cumulative effects as required by the National Environmental Policy Act, and inform landscape-level planning and management decisions for multiple uses of public lands. Management questions form the basis for the REA framework and were developed in conjunction with the BLM and other stakeholders. Conservation elements are communities and species that are of regional management concern. Core management questions relate to the key ecological attributes and change agents associated with each conservation element. Integrated management questions synthesize the results of the primary core management questions into overall landscape-level ranks for each conservation element. The ecological communities evaluated as conservation elements are shortgrass, mixed-grass, and sand prairies; all grasslands; riparian and nonplaya wetlands; playa wetlands and saline lakes; and prairie streams and rivers. Species and species assemblages evaluated are the freshwater mussel assemblage, Arkansas River shiner ( Notropis girardi ), ferruginous hawk ( Buteo regalis ), lesser prairie chicken ( Tympanuchus pallidicinctus ), snowy plover ( Charadrius nivosus ), mountain plover ( Charadrius montanus ), long-billed curlew ( Numenius americanus ), interior least tern ( Sternula antillarum athalassos ), burrowing owl ( Athene cunicularia ), black-tailed prairie dog ( Cynomys ludovicianus ), bat assemblage, swift fox ( Vulpes velox ), and mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ). The Southern Great Plains REA is summarized in a series of three reports and associated datasets. The pre-assessment report (available online at https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151003 ) summarizes the process used by the REA stakeholders to select management questions, conservation elements, and change agents. It also provides background information for each conservation element. Volume I of the Southern Great Plains REA report addresses the ecological communities (available online at https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171100 ). Volume II (this volume) addresses the species and species assemblages. All source and derived datasets used to produce the maps and graphs for REAs are available online at the BLM Landscape Approach Data Portal ( https://landscape.blm.gov/geoportal/catalog/REAs/REAs.page ).

Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, ↗

USGS2017

Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional assessment—Volume I. Ecological communities

The Southern Great Plains Rapid Ecoregional Assessment was conducted in partnership with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Great Plains Landscape Conservation Cooperative . The overall goal of the Rapid Ecoregional Assessments (REAs) is to compile and synthesize regional datasets to facilitate evaluation of the cumulative effects of change agents on priority ecological communities and species. In particular, the REAs identify and map the distribution of communities and wildlife habitats at broad spatial extents and provide assessments of ecological conditions. The REAs also identify where and to what degree ecological resources are currently at risk from change agents, such as development, fire, invasive species, and climate change. The REAs can help managers identify and prioritize potential areas for conservation or restoration, assess cumulative effects as required by the National Environmental Policy Act, and inform landscape-level planning and management decisions for multiple uses of public lands. Management questions form the basis for the REA framework and were developed in conjunction with the BLM and other stakeholders. Conservation elements are communities and species that are of regional management concern. Core management questions relate to the key ecological attributes and change agents associated with each conservation element. Integrated management questions synthesize the results of the primary core management questions into overall landscape-level ranks for each conservation element. The ecological communities evaluated as conservation elements are shortgrass, mixed-grass, and sand prairies; all grasslands; riparian and nonplaya wetlands; playa wetlands and saline lakes; and prairie streams and rivers. Species and species assemblages evaluated are the freshwater mussel assemblage, Arkansas River shiner ( Notropis girardi ), ferruginous hawk ( Buteo regalis ), lesser prairie chicken ( Tympanuchus pallidicinctus ), snowy plover ( Charadrius nivosus ), mountain plover ( Charadrius montanus ), long-billed curlew ( Numenius americanus ), interior least tern ( Sternula antillarum athalassos ), burrowing owl ( Athene cunicularia hypugaea ), black-tailed prairie dog ( Cynomys ludovicianus ), bat assemblage, swift fox ( Vulpes velox ), and mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ). The Southern Great Plains REA is summarized in a series of three reports and associated datasets. The pre-assessment report (available online at https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2015/1003/ ) summarizes the process used by the REA stakeholders to select management questions, conservation elements, and change agents. It also provides background information for each conservation element. Volume I of the Southern Great Plains REA report (this volume) addresses the ecological communities. Volume II will address the species and species assemblages. All source and derived datasets used to produce the maps and graphs for REAs are available online at the BLM Landscape Approach Data Portal ( https://landscape.blm.gov/geoportal/catalog/REAs/REAs.page ).

Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklahoma, ↗

USGS2012

Winter ecology and habitat use of lesser prairie-chickens in west Texas, 2008-11

The lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus) has experienced declines in population and occupied range by more than 90 percent since the late 1800s. The lesser prairie-chicken has been listed as a candidate species for protection under the Endangered Species Act and is undergoing review for actual listing. Populations and distribution of lesser prairie-chickens in Texas are thought to be at or near all time lows. These factors have led to substantially increased concern for conservation of the species. It is apparent that sound management and conservation strategies for lesser prairie-chickens are necessary to ensure the long-term persistence of the species. To develop those strategies, basic ecological information is required. Currently, there is a paucity of data on the wintering ecology of the species. We examined home range, habitat use, and survival of lesser prairie-chickens during the winters of 2008–9, 2009–10, and 2010–11 in sand shinnery oak (Quercus havardii) landscapes in west Texas. We captured and radio-tagged 53 adult lesser prairie-chickens. We obtained sufficient locations to estimate winter home-range size for 23 individuals. Home-range size did not differ between years or by sex. Although female prairie-chickens had slightly larger home ranges (503.5 ± 34.9 ha) compared to males (489.1 ± 34.9 ha), the differences were not significant ( t 2 = 0.05, P = 0.96). During the nonbreeding season, we found that 97.2 percent of locations of male and female prairie-chickens alike were within 3.2 kilometers (km) of the lek of capture. Most locations (96.8%) were within 1.7 km of a known lek and almost all locations (99.9%) were within 3.2 km of an available water source. Habitat cover types were not used proportional to occurrence within the home ranges, grassland dominated areas with sand shinnery oak were used more than available, and sand sagebrush (Artemisia filifolia) areas dominated with grassland as well as sand sagebrush areas dominated with bare ground were both used less than available. Survival rates during the first 2 years (year 1: 0.846 ± 0.141; year 2: 0.827 ± 0.092) were among the highest ever reported for the species during the nonbreeding season. Survival was markedly decreased in year 3 (0.572 ± 0.136) and resulted in an overall nonbreeding season average of 0.721 (± 0.0763). These are still among the highest survival rates reported for the species; it does not appear that winter season mortality is a strong limiting factor in lesser prairie-chicken persistence in the study area.

Texas↗

USGS2018

Quantifying variance across spatial scales as part of fire regime classifications

The emergence of large‐scale fire classifications and products informed by remote sensing data has enabled opportunities to include variability or heterogeneity as part of modern fire regime classifications. Currently, basic fire metrics such as mean fire return intervals are calculated without considering spatial variance in a management context. Fire return intervals are also only applicable at a particular grain size (defined as the spatial unit of interest) even though they are typically applied homogeneously. In this study, we utilized a 29‐yr fire occurrence database to show how spatial variance changes with respect to grain as postulated by Wiens ( 1989 ) when reporting fire patterns within the Great Plains, USA. We utilized data from the Monitoring Trends in Burn Severity database of fire occurrence for the years 1984–2012. We analyzed median numbers of fire along with their variance at four spatial grains ranging from small units (e.g., plots at 3 × 3 km resolution) to large units (e.g., landscapes at 1500 × 2700 km resolution). Median number of fire occurrences was consistently low, irrespective of grain. Despite the consistency in low median numbers of fires across grain, variance in the numbers of fires between units decreased. Variance within units, however, did not change as grain increased indicating fire‐pattern‐scale inconsistencies. Fire pattern interpretations depended entirely on the scale at which it is calculated. Given that the Great Plains region has a large disparity in fire patterns (i.e., some regions burn often, while others may never burn), fire regime classifications will benefit from including scale‐specific variance estimates as a foundation for understanding changes in fire regimes and corresponding social–ecological and policy responses.

Ecosphere↗

USGS2004

Migration stopover ecology of western avian populations: A southwestern migration workshop

The importance of migration stopover sites in ensuring that migratory birds successfully accomplish their journeys between breeding and non-breeding ranges has come to the forefront of avian research. Migratory birds that breed in western United States (US) and Canada and overwinter primarily in western Mexico migrate across the arid region of northern Mexico and southwestern US. Many of these migrants use lowland riparian stopover habitats, which comprise less than 0.1% of the western U.S. landscape. These habitats represent a significant conservation priority. Recognizing the importance of migration stopover habitats in the arid southwest, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Region 6 partnered with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to support a project---“Migration stopover ecology of western avian populations: patterns of geographic and habitat distribution.” A primary objective of the project was to convene a workshop for avian researchers, conservation professionals, and land managers involved in stopover needs of migratory birds that breed in western North America. The workshop included presentations on our current state of knowledge regarding passerine migration in western North America, techniques and technologies potentially useful in researching migration, and efforts that agencies and other partners are conducting within the realm of migration. Workshop presentations provided a backdrop for subsequent discussions, the goals of which were to identify research needs and initiate a coordinated approach to research of western migration stopover ecology. Workshop presentations spanned a wide range of concerns and interests. Highlights included indications that mid- and high-elevation riparian and montane shrubland habitats may be as crucial to western migrants in fall migration as lowland riparian habitats are in spring migration. Comparisons of eastern versus western migration systems elucidated large differences in stopover habitats used and the intensity with which certain types are used, underscoring the potential need to develop separate management approaches for eastern and western stopover sites. Presentations on techniques and technology for migration research revealed that rate of lipid deposition can serve as an indicator of habitat quality; that genetics and stable isotope analyses of feathers can be valuable tools to elucidate linkages between breeding and wintering areas; that radar imagery can be used to track large-scale movement patterns and habitat use; and that there are analytical options for combining multiple sources of information. Other presentations focused on partnership perspectives (USFWS and Sonoran Joint Venture), the genesis of a western migration monitoring network, premises of Coordinated Bird Monitoring, and how collaborative efforts could benefit migration research (e.g., combined bird and bat migration studies; linking avian researchers with fluvial geomorphologists; linking research throughout western North America; linking surveys and banding). Priority research needs and questions identified during the open discussions fell into three main categories: (1) habitat/landscape/climate relationships, (2) en route bird distribution patterns, and (3) general migration ecology. Tasks within these categories included: define the relative importance of various habitat types to migrants in spring and fall, determine what distinguishes high- from poor-quality stopover habitat; determine geographic patterns of loss in stopover habitats; model landscape attributes associated with species richness and abundance; identify effects of climate change and current climate anomalies on plant phonologies, associated insect flushes, and timing of migration; and determine effects of hydrologic changes on riparian vegetation, food availability, and stopover habitat quality. Workshop participants discussed a coordinated approach for addressing immediate research needs regarding migration patterns and crucial stopover sites and types. They envisioned a three-tiered, coordinated approach: (1) long-term research to address effects of climate change and other large-scale patterns, (2) intensive, short-term survey and monitoring efforts using a stratified random design within habitats of interest to elucidate regional patterns of distribution and habitat use, and (3) research conducted at existing survey and banding sites to address more in-depth questions (e.g., rates of lipid deposition, microhabitat use, isotope analyses). There was considerable interest in developing common research proposals to blend the broad expertise represented at this workshop. A second meeting is recommended to build on the momentum of these discussions, to facilitate collaborations, and further the goals of integrated approaches to broadscale research on migration stopover ecology.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2008

Using Molecular Genetic Markers to Resolve a Subspecies Boundary: The Northern Boundary of the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher in the Four-Corner States

*Executive Summary* The northern boundary of the endangered Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) is currently approximated as running through southern Colorado and Utah, but the exact placement is uncertain because this subspecies shares a border with the more northern and non-endangered E. t. adastus. To help resolve this issue, we evaluated the geographic distribution of mitochondrial and nuclear DNA by sampling breeding sites across the four-corner states (Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah). We found that breeding sites clustered into two major groups generally consistent with the currently designated boundary, with the exception of three sites situated along the current boundary. However, delineating a precise boundary that would separate the two subspecies is made difficult because (1) we found evidence for a region of intergradation along the boundary area, suggesting the boundary is not discreet, and (2) the boundary region is sparsely populated, with too few extant breeding populations to precisely locate a boundary. The boundary region encompasses an area where elevation changes markedly over relatively short distances, with low elevation deserts to the south and more mesic, higher elevation habitats to the north. We hypothesized that latitudinal and elevational differences and their concomitant ecological effects could form an ecological barrier that inhibited gene flow between the subspecies, forming the basis for the subspecies boundary. We modeled changes in geographic patterns of genetic markers as a function of latitude and elevation finding significant support for this relationship. The model was brought into a GIS environment to create multiple subspecies boundaries, with the strength of each predicted boundary evaluated on the basis of how much genetic variation it explained. The candidate boundary that accounted for the most genetic variation was situated generally near the currently recognized subspecies boundary, but should be more biologically meaningful because it incorporates the landscape features that may be driving separation of the subspecies. Even so, we caution that using any narrow boundary line as an indicator of subspecies identity could be misleading because biologically the boundary is a region of intergradation rather than a discrete line. Designating, a boundary ultimately becomes a regulatory and management decision based on how much of the genetic variation unique to a subspecies should be protected. We discuss how the results of this study can help guide this decision process by wildlife policy makers.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2025

Integrating sea level rise scenarios into Everglades restoration planning

One of the largest and most expensive restoration efforts in the world is occurring in the Everglades, a sub-tropical freshwater wetland system located in southern Florida. This unique ecosystem supports several endangered species, provides flood control for Florida’s large urban population, and provides water for both agriculture and drinking supply within the state. The Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), authorized by Congress in 2000, guides federal, state, and local efforts to build the infrastructure necessary to bring more water into the Everglades and restore its ecological integrity, while balancing other water-related needs such as water supply and flood protection in the human environment. The Everglades encompasses the southern coast of Florida and restoration efforts are likely to be impacted by climate-induced sea level rise. However, currently, many project planning studies do not formally incorporate the potential impacts of sea level rise when evaluating restoration plan outcomes. Resource managers and project planners require methods and tools to confidently incorporate scenarios of sea level rise into their evaluations. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and partners from the University of Florida worked with project planners from multiple agencies to identify restoration questions for consideration when addressing sea level rise. In addition, our project team sought to understand the types of sea level rise decision-support tools that would be of interest, and then worked with Everglades restoration managers and project planners to develop those tools. The tools developed by this project can be used by project planners to inform their decision-making abilities when considering multiple restoration plans across the Everglades landscape. Specifically, the novel ways to visualize output information from ecological models that came of this project can help project planners compare alternative restoration plans that include potential sea level rise impacts. This effort demonstrates how incorporating sea level rise scenarios into Everglades restoration project planning can help managers decide whether projects will maintain or improve ecological integrity and evaluate water availability for wildlife and humans.

Final Report↗

USGS2013

Vegetation inventory, mapping, and classification report, Fort Bowie National Historic Site

A vegetation mapping and characterization effort was conducted at Fort Bowie National Historic Site in 2008-10 by the Sonoran Desert Network office in collaboration with researchers from the Office of Arid lands studies, Remote Sensing Center at the University of Arizona. This vegetation mapping effort was completed under the National Park Service Vegetation Inventory program which aims to complete baseline mapping inventories at over 270 national park units. The vegetation map data was collected to provide park managers with a digital map product that met national standards of spatial and thematic accuracy, while also placing the vegetation into a regional and even national context. Work comprised of three major field phases 1) concurrent field-based classification data collection and mapping (map unit delineation), 2) development of vegetation community types at the National Vegetation Classification alliance or association level and 3) map accuracy assessment. Phase 1 was completed in late 2008 and early 2009. Community type descriptions were drafted to meet the then-current hierarchy (version 1) of the National Vegetation Classification System (NVCS) and these were applied to each of the mapped areas. This classification was developed from both plot level data and censused polygon data (map units) as this project was conducted as a concurrent mapping and classification effort. The third stage of accuracy assessment completed in the fall of 2010 consisted of a complete census of each map unit and was conducted almost entirely by park staff. Following accuracy assessment the map was amended where needed and final products were developed including this report, a digital map and full vegetation descriptions. Fort Bowie National Historic Site covers only 1000 acres yet has a relatively complex landscape, topography and geology. A total of 16 distinct communities were described and mapped at Fort Bowie NHS. These ranged from lush riparian woodlands lining the ephemeral washes dominated by Ash (Fraxinus), Walnut (Juglans) and Hackberry (Celtis) to drier upland sites typical of desert scrub and semi-desert grassland communities. These shrublands boast a diverse mixture of shrubs, succulents and perennial grasses. In many places the vegetation could be seen to echo the history of the fort site, with management of shrub encroachment apparent in the grasslands and the paucity of trees evidence of historic cutting for timber and fire wood. Seven of the 16 vegetation types were ‘accepted’ types within the NVC while the others have been described here as specific to FOBO and have proposed status within the NVC. The map was designed to facilitate ecologically-based natural resources management and research. The map is in digital format within a geodatabase structure that allows for complex relationships to be established between spatial and tabular data, and makes accessing the product easy and seamless. The GIS format allows user flexibility and will also enable updates to be made as new information becomes available (such as revised NVC codes or vegetation type names) or in the event of major disturbance events that could impact the vegetation.

Arizona↗

USGS2013

Maintaining and restoring sustainable ecosystems in southern Nevada

Managers in southern Nevada are challenge with determining appropriate goals and objectives and developing viable approaches for maintaining and restoring sustainable ecosystems in a time of rapid socio-ecological and environmental change. Sustainable or "healthy" ecosystems supply clean air, water and habitat for a diverse array of plants and animals. As described in Chapter 1, sustainable ecosystems retain characteristic processes like hydrological flux and storage, geomorphic processes, biogeochemical cycling and storage, biological activity and productivity, and population regeneration and reproduction over the normal cycle of disturbance events (modified from Chapin and others 1996 and Christensen and others 1996). Ecological restoration of stressed or disturbed ecosystems in an integral part of managing for sustainable ecosystems. The Society of Ecological Restoration International (SERI) defines ecological restoration as the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed (SERI 2004). Many of the southern Nevada's ecosystems are being subjected to anthropogenic stressors that span global, regional, and local scales (Chapter 2)., and are crossing ecological thresholds to new alternative states (Chapter 4 and Chapter 5). These alternative states often represent novel communities with disturbance regimes that differ significantly from historic conditions. Past management and restoration goals often focused on returning ecosystems to pre-disturbance conditions (Harris and others 2006). This approach assumes stable or equilibrium conditions and ignores changes in ecosystems processes due to land uses, increases in CO 2 concentrations, and climate change. A more realistic approach is to base management and restoration goals on the current potential of an ecosystem to support a given set of ecological conditions, and on the likelihood of future change due to warming climate (Harris and others 2006). This approach requires understanding ecosystem resilience to anthropogenic disturbance and climate change, the alternative states that exist for ecosystems, and the factors that result in threshold crossing (Bestelmeyer and others 2009; Hobbs and Harris 2001; Stingham and others 2003; Whisemnant 1999). It also requires the ability to predict how climate is likely to influence ecosystems in the future (Harris and others 2006). This chapter addresses the restoration aspects of Sub-goal 1.3 in the SNAP Science Research Strategy which is to restore and sustain proper function of southern Nevada's watersheds and landscapes (able 1.3; Turner and others 2009). The effects of global, regional and local stresses on southern Nevada ecosystems are presented in Chapter 2. Here, we discuss appropriate objectives and develop guidelines for maintaining and restoring southern Nevada ecosystems. We then discuss the differences in ecological resilience to stress and disturbance and resistance to invasive species in southern Nevada ecosystems and describe restoration and management approaches for the different ecosystem types. We conclude with knowledge gaps and management implications.

Nevada↗

USGS2015

Regulating services as measures of ecological resilience on DoD lands

Knowledge of the capacity and flow of ecosystem services can help DoD land managers make decisions that enhance cost-effectiveness, minimize environmental damage, and maximize resources available for military missions. We demonstrated a methodology to quantify and map selected regulating services (RS), which helps land managers envision tradeoffs. Our objectives were to 1) estimate current capacity of and demand for selected RS within DoD lands, 2) examine the effects of future DoD land management and climate changes on the capacity and flow of these RS, and 3) project how land-use and climate changes in nearby lands affect future demand for RS. Our approach incorporates widely accepted models and equations, remote sensing, GIS analysis, and stakeholder involvement. Required data include land cover/use, soil type, precipitation, and air temperature. We integrated data into the a) Surface Curve Number Method and b) Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation to estimate capacity of sediment, nitrogen (N) and surface-water regulation. Capacities and flows of RS vary greatly across landscapes and are likely to vary as climate changes or development occurs. Analyses of RS capacity and flow can help managers and planners prioritize actions in the context of best management practices and compatible use buffers. Staff surveys indicated that our approach was informative and easy to use. Implementation may be most limited by on-installation personnel time.

Report↗

USGS2015

Final project memorandum: sea-level rise modeling handbook: resource guide for resource managers, engineers, and scientists

Coastal wetlands of the Southeastern United States are undergoing retreat and migration from increasing tidal inundation and saltwater intrusion attributed to climate variability and sea-level rise. Much of the literature describing potential sea-level rise projections and modeling predictions are found in peer-reviewed academic journals or government technical reports largely suited to reading by other Ph.D. scientists who are more familiar or engaged in the climate change debate. Various sea-level rise and coastal wetland models have been developed and applied of different designs and scales of spatial and temporal complexity for predicting habitat and environmental change that have not heretofore been synthesized to aid natural resource managers of their utility and limitations. Training sessions were conducted with Federal land managers with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and NOAA National Estuarine Research Reserves as well as state partners and nongovernmental organizations across the northern Gulf Coast from Florida to Texas to educate and to evaluate user needs and understanding of concepts, data, and modeling tools for projecting sea-level rise and its impact on coastal habitats and wildlife. As a result, this handbook was constructed from these training and feedback sessions with coastal managers and biologists of published decision-support tools and simulation models for sea-level rise and climate change assessments. A simplified tabular context was developed listing the various kinds of decision-support tools and ecological models along with criteria to distinguish the source, scale, and quality of information input and geographic data sets, physical and biological constraints and relationships, datum characteristics of water and land elevation components, utility options for setting sea-level rise and climate change scenarios, and ease or difficulty of storing, displaying, or interpreting model output. The handbook is designed to be a primer to understanding sea-level rise and a practical synthesis of the current state of knowledge and modeling tools as a resource guide for DOl land management needs and facilitating Landscape Conservation Cooperative (LCC) research and conservation initiatives.

Conference Paper↗

USGS1989

Riparian ecosystem creation and restoration: a literature summary

Riparian ecosystems generally compose a minor proportion of surrounding areas, but typically are more structurally diverse and more productive in plant and animal biomass than adjacent upland areas. Riparian areas supply food, cover, and water (especially important in the arid West) for a large diversity of animals, and serve as migration routes and forest connectors between habitats for a variety of wildlife, particularly ungulates and birds. Because riparian ecosystems often are relatively small areas and occur in conjunction with waterways, they are vulnerable to severe alteration. Riparian ecosystems throughout the U.S. have been heavily impacted by man's activities. Riparian ecosystem creation and restoration have been used as mitigation for project impacts from highway, bridge, and pipeline construction; water development; flood control channel modifications; industrial and residential development; agriculture; irrigation; livestock grazing; mining; and accidental habitat loss. Creation of a riparian ecosystem in| a more mesic upland area (e.g., ‘grassland or cropland) adjacent to a river requires appropriate water supply and grading the topography to suitable elevations to support plantings of riparian vegetation. Restoration involves returning the ecosystem to pre disturbance conditions and typically implies revegetation. Removing exotic vegetation or restoring water supplies to pre disturbance level also may be involved. Enhancement of riparian ecosystems commonly refers to improving existing conditions to increase habitat value, usually by increasing plant or community diversity to increase value for wildlife. Managing a riparian ecosystem typically involves enhancement techniques. However, creation and restoration projects often involve use of techniques considered more management-oriented (e.g., fencing to prevent cattle grazing until planted vegetation of a created or restored wetland is established). Protection of an existing riparian ecosystem from impact should be of utmost importance during planning and construction phases of development projects. If loss or damage is unavoidable, wetland creation or restoration can be used as mitigation. Compared to other wetland types (e.g., coastal wetlands), projects and techniques involving creation or restoration of riparian ecosystems are not well documented. For example, only 8% of the records in the WCR Data Base contained information on riparian ecosystems, whereas 31% of the records contained information on coastal emergent or forested ecosystems. To provide a source of currently available literature, riparian information from 92 records (primarily published papers or reports) in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) Wetland Creation-Restoration (WCR) Data Base (Schneller-McDonald et al. 1988) was used to develop a literature summary of creation and restoration of riparian ecosystems. The summary provides an overview of the status of riparian ecosystems in the U.S., a discussion of several riparian functions, and a review of some techniques used for planning, implementing, monitoring, and measuring project success of creation-restoration efforts. Case studies of various creation or restoration projects are used to demonstrate these techniques and to report some results of their use. Several well-documented case studies are discussed in detail to illustrate more extensive efforts to plan, implement, or monitor riparian ecosystem creation-restoration projects. For the purpose of this report, riparian ecosystems are defined as landscapes adjacent to drainageways of floodplains that exhibit vegetation, soil, and hydrologic mosaics along topographic and moisture gradients that are distinct from the predominant landscape surface types. Major plant communities are described under palustrine system in Cowardin et al. (1979). Literature from the WCR Data Base was used to provide a summary of riparian ecosystem creation-restoration literature. Thus, information concerning natural systems is not included unless discussed in these articles. This focus allows the reader to compare relative information available on riparian ecosystem creation-restoration efforts. However, this focus also results in limited information in some sections of the report (e.g., Status of Riparian Ecosystems in the U.S.). Individuals involved in riparian ecosystem creation-restoration efforts are encouraged to thoroughly examine available literature on natural and altered systems. Brinson et al. (1981) provide a comprehensive review and synthesis of the ecology and status of riparian ecosystems. Over 500 articles are cited in their 124-page report. Chapters include the following topics: status of riparian ecosystems in the U.S., ecological functions and properties of riparian ecosystems (e.g., geomorphology, primary productivity, nutrient cycling, hydrology), importance of riparian ecosystems to fish and wildlife, and considerations in valuation (ecologic and economic) of riparian ecosystems. Brinson et al. (1981) also discuss management of riparian ecosystems. Riparian ecosystem management literature was not included in the WCR Data Base, unless the article also discussed creation or restoration.

Report↗

USGS2002

Landscape ecology of plague in the American southwest, September 19-20, 2000, Fort Collins, Colorado

During September 19-20, 2000, a workshop titled "Landscape Ecology of Plague in the American Southwest" was held in Fort Collins, Colorado. The workshop was funded by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)-Earth Surface Processes Team and sponsored by the USGS National Wildlife Health Center. Forty scientists and natural resource managers and administrators representing 8 federal agencies, 4 state agencies, 6 universities, and other local agencies and nongovernment organizations met to discuss historical and current status of plague in the United States, current activities in plague surveillance, research, and management in wildlife, and research and information needs relative to plague control and management. Eleven individual presentations on plague history, status, and trends; diagnostic technologies; epizootiological studies and observations; and control and management strategies and studies, followed by a panel discussion on the impact of plague on wildlife and ecosystems, led the way to extensive group discussions on important plague-related questions, issues and problems. Workshop attendees participated in identifying important research and information needs relevant to control and management of plague in wildlife, and in the process, established new cooperative and collaborative partnerships and enhanced existing relationships upon which future research and information needs can be met. The proceedings from this workshop are intended to be used by the natural resource managers and researchers from the various participating agencies, research facilities, as well as other stakeholders to aid in the development of future research and information programs and funding initiatives related to both zoonotic and sylvatic plague.

American Southwest↗

USGS2015

Modeling elk and bison carrying capacity for Great Sand Dunes National Park, Baca National Wildlife Refuge, and The Nature Conservancy's Medano Ranch, Colorado

Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve and the neighboring Baca National Wildlife Refuge constitute an extraordinary setting that offers a variety of opportunities for outdoor recreation and natural resource preservation in the San Luis Valley of Colorado. Adjacent to these federal lands, the Nature Conservancy (TNC) manages the historic Medano Ranch. The total land area of these three conservation properties is roughly 121,500 hectares (ha). It is a remote and rugged area in which resource managers must balance the protection of natural resources with recreation and neighboring land uses. The management of wild ungulates in this setting presents challenges, as wild ungulates move freely across public and private landscapes. The San Luis Valley was historically used for irrigated agriculture and ranching. Historically, livestock, including sheep ( Ovis aries ) and cattle ( Bos taurus ), were grazed throughout the valley. The former Luis Marie “Baca” Ranch, which makes up the northern part of Great Sand Dunes National Park (hereafter “Park”) and all of the Baca National Wildlife Refuge (hereafter “Refuge”), was actively grazed by cattle until 2004. Bison ( Bison bison ), elk ( Cervus elaphus ), mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ), and pronghorn ( Antilocapra americana ) were native to the area until about the 1840s, when bison, elk, and pronghorn were extirpated. Elk and pronghorn likely moved back into the area from surrounding populations to the north and south, and mule deer populations have varied through time. A population of 4,400 elk currently inhabits the area. The current bison population was established in 1986 for meat production. In 1999 TNC purchased the ranch and established a bison conservation herd, and eventually subcontracted management to a private rancher in 2005. A population of bison ranging in size from 1,200–2,000 ranges freely within the 16,100 ha Medano Ranch. Ungulate populations in the valley are regulated by hunting, with the exception of bison, which are rounded up and culled annually to maintain population levels. In an effort to create and form the basis of a multi-agency ungulate management plan for the region, the Park sought the development of an elk and bison ecological carrying capacity model to provide guidance to resource managers.

Colorado↗

USGS2025

Determining low-flow conditions at select streams to Barnegat Bay-Little Egg Harbor as the first step towards the development of ecological-flow targets

Maintaining streamflow to support human water needs and ecosystem services requires a fundamental understanding of the relations between changes in streamflow processes and ecosystem responses. Changes in the natural patterns in flow, geology, and topography alter the habitats that aquatic organisms rely on for food, shelter, and reproduction. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) implemented an ecological-flow framework that encapsulates the basic principles of the Ecological Limits of Hydrologic Alteration (ELOHA) to compare the relations between hydrologic metrics and stream conditions and estimate ecological flow needs in the Barnegat Bay-Little Egg Harbor watershed. As a first step in the ELOHA process, streamflow from two historical time periods (occurring between 1933 and 1988) was compared to streamflow for a recent time period (from 2004-2020) for four major streams in the Barnegat Bay-Little Egg Harbor watershed (North Branch Metedeconk River, Toms River, Cedar Creek, and Westecunk Creek), to evaluate if there were statistically significant differences in streamflow metrics. Analysis of monthly, seasonal, and annual low-flow metrics; patterns in the streamflow record; and general land-use changes were used to develop a better understanding of flow conditions in the watershed. The comparative streamflow analysis indicated that notable changes in flow processes for the study streams occurred between the three periods of record (PORs) evaluated in this study: period of record 1 (POR1, from water years 1933–1958), period of record 2 (POR2, from water years 1974–1988), and period of record 3 (POR3, from water years 2004–2020). For example, the mean of the daily streamflow decreased between the historical POR to the current POR in Cedar Creek but increased in North Branch Metedeconk and Toms Rivers. Larger and more significant changes (p-value <0.10) occurred during specific months or were related to the variability or seasonality of flow. North Branch Metedeconk River and Toms River, the two northern and most developed sites, exhibited changes in low-flow metrics and decreases in minimum n-day moving averages. Decreases in the normalized 75th-percentile exceedance flows were evident at three of the four study sub-basins during POR2 and POR3. In comparison, there was little to no evidence of negative changes to low-flow metrics at Westecunk Creek, the southernmost and least developed site, where all low-flow duration metrics increased as well as seasonal minimum consecutive 7-day average flows. Significant increases in monthly minimums (p-value <0.05) at Cedar Creek for spring months (April, May, and June) also were observed. Natural and anthropogenic processes can alter the landscape resulting in concomitant changes in the streamflow regime. There is a need to assess these changes and synthesize the results into a scientifically defensible set of goals and standards that help support the management of environmental flows. This study represents the initial steps in building the hydrologic foundation to inform management and develop future ecological flow targets that balance water availability for human and ecosystem needs in the Barnegat Bay-Little Egg Harbor watershed.

New Jersey↗