Literature DB >> 16514478

Great Basin land management planning using ecological modeling.

Tara A Forbis1, Louis Provencher, Leonardo Frid, Gary Medlyn.   

Abstract

This report describes a land management modeling effort that analyzed potential impacts of proposed actions under an updated Bureau of Land Management Resource Management Plan that will guide management for 20 years on 4.6 million hectares in the Great Basin ecoregion of the United States. State-and-transition models that included vegetation data, fire histories, and many parameters (i.e., rates of succession, fire return intervals, outcomes of management actions, and invasion rates of native and nonnative invasive species) were developed through workshops with scientific experts and range management specialists. Alternative restoration scenarios included continuation of current management, full fire suppression, wildfire use in designated fire use zones, wildfire use in resilient vegetation types only, restoration with a tenfold budget increase, no restoration treatments, and no livestock grazing. Under all the scenarios, cover of vegetation states with native perennial understory declined and was replaced by tree-invaded and weed-dominated states. The greatest differences among alternative management scenarios resulted from the use of fire as a tool to maintain native understory. Among restoration scenarios, only the scenario assuming a tenfold budget increase had a more desirable outcome than the current management scenario. Removal of livestock alone had little effect on vegetation resilience. Rather, active restoration was required. The predictive power of the model was limited by current understanding of Great Basin vegetation dynamics and data needs including statistically valid monitoring of restoration treatments, invasiveness and invasibility, and fire histories. The authors suggest that such computer models can be useful tools for systematic analysis of potential impacts in land use planning. However, for a modeling effort to be productive, the management situation must be conducive to open communication among land management agencies and partner entities, including nonprofit organizations.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16514478     DOI: 10.1007/s00267-005-0089-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Manage        ISSN: 0364-152X            Impact factor:   3.266


  2 in total

1.  Land management in the American southwest: a state-and-transition approach to ecosystem complexity.

Authors:  Brandon T Bestelmeyer; Jeffrey E Herrick; Joel R Brown; David A Trujillo; Kris M Havstad
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2004-05-28       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Soil water exploitation after fire: competition between Bromus tectorum (cheatgrass) and two native species.

Authors:  Graciela Melgoza; Robert S Nowak; Robin J Tausch
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  1990-05       Impact factor: 3.225

  2 in total
  3 in total

1.  Climate change and land management in the rangelands of central Oregon.

Authors:  Megan K Creutzburg; Jessica E Halofsky; Joshua S Halofsky; Treg A Christopher
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2014-09-13       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Mining communities from a resilience perspective: managing disturbance and vulnerability in Itabira, Brazil.

Authors:  Joseph Wasylycia-Leis; Patricia Fitzpatrick; Alberto Fonseca
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 3.266

3.  Mammals of Australia's tropical savannas: a conceptual model of assemblage structure and regulatory factors in the Kimberley region.

Authors:  Ian J Radford; Christopher R Dickman; Antony N Start; Carol Palmer; Karin Carnes; Corrin Everitt; Richard Fairman; Gordon Graham; Thalie Partridge; Allan Thomson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.