Pub Date : 2024-10-15DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.002
Elissa M. Olimpi , Tina Mozelewski , Josh Gage , Alexander V. Kumar , Caitlin Littlefield , Kevin Doherty
Conservation efforts for the sagebrush biome in the western United States have been significant, but habitat loss and degradation are currently outpacing collective conservation efforts. The Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD), cocreated by scientists and managers working across the biome, issues an urgent call to action to radically reprioritize conservation efforts to save the biome. At the heart of SCD is the “defend and grow the core” strategy, which means prioritizing conservation in intact sagebrush areas with native understories and low levels of threats, as opposed to the business-as-usual approach of treating all threats or focusing on areas with the most severe threats. However, SCD applications are limited by the capacity of land managers to integrate maps of rangeland conditions and threats into planning processes for their management area. To increase the integration of spatial data and help managers and planners step down SCD to local-scale conservation planning, we developed a web application that provides a user-friendly interface. Here, we lay out a guide for web application users, which we hope will empower land managers to make strategic conservation decisions that best protect the sagebrush biome.
{"title":"An Interactive Tool to Promote Stepping Down the Sagebrush Conservation Design to Local Conservation Planning","authors":"Elissa M. Olimpi , Tina Mozelewski , Josh Gage , Alexander V. Kumar , Caitlin Littlefield , Kevin Doherty","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.002","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Conservation efforts for the sagebrush biome in the western United States have been significant, but habitat loss and degradation are currently outpacing collective conservation efforts. The Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD), cocreated by scientists and managers working across the biome, issues an urgent call to action to radically reprioritize conservation efforts to save the biome. At the heart of SCD is the “defend and grow the core” strategy, which means prioritizing conservation in intact sagebrush areas with native understories and low levels of threats, as opposed to the business-as-usual approach of treating all threats or focusing on areas with the most severe threats. However, SCD applications are limited by the capacity of land managers to integrate maps of rangeland conditions and threats into planning processes for their management area. To increase the integration of spatial data and help managers and planners step down SCD to local-scale conservation planning, we developed a web application that provides a user-friendly interface. Here, we lay out a guide for web application users, which we hope will empower land managers to make strategic conservation decisions that best protect the sagebrush biome.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 107-114"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437976","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-15DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.010
Joseph T. Smith , Andrew R. Kleinhesselink , Jeremy D. Maestas , Scott L. Morford , David E. Naugle , Connor D. White
Woody encroachment into grasslands and shrublands disrupts ecosystem processes and reduces biodiversity. Tree removal is a widespread strategy to restore ecosystem services and biodiversity in impacted landscapes. However, tree removal can also increase the risk of invasion by exotic annual grasses. In western North America, juniper (Juniperus spp.) encroachment threatens the ecological integrity of intact sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) shrublands. We used remote sensing to track vegetation changes following juniper removals on 288 parcels totaling 106 333 ha in southern Idaho, USA. We also analyzed vegetation changes following 64 wildfires that burned 152 611 ha of nearby rangeland during the same period. We matched areas within removals and wildfires to similar undisturbed areas, and then used causal impact analysis to estimate the effects of the disturbances. Juniper removals resulted in sustained reduction of tree cover and increased perennial forb and grass cover across nearly all sites, achieving key management goals. Based on the metrics evaluated, juniper removal was more effective than wildfire in delivering long-term restoration in this sagebrush system. However, juniper treatments also stimulated temporary undesirable increases in annual grasses and forbs, indicating the need for additional management to achieve durable conservation outcomes. Intensive mechanical methods initially reduced shrub cover in some treatments, but shrubs recovered to near pre-treatment levels within 7 years. Using a recently-developed metric of ecological integrity for sagebrush ecosystems, we show that these large, long-term projects halted or reversed degradation attributed to juniper expansion, demonstrating that restoration can improve the trajectory of ecosystems when implemented at scale.
{"title":"Using Satellite Remote Sensing to Assess Shrubland Vegetation Responses to Large-Scale Juniper Removal in the Northern Great Basin","authors":"Joseph T. Smith , Andrew R. Kleinhesselink , Jeremy D. Maestas , Scott L. Morford , David E. Naugle , Connor D. White","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.010","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.010","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Woody encroachment into grasslands and shrublands disrupts ecosystem processes and reduces biodiversity. Tree removal is a widespread strategy to restore ecosystem services and biodiversity in impacted landscapes. However, tree removal can also increase the risk of invasion by exotic annual grasses. In western North America, juniper (<em>Juniperus spp.</em>) encroachment threatens the ecological integrity of intact sagebrush (<em>Artemisia tridentata</em>) shrublands. We used remote sensing to track vegetation changes following juniper removals on 288 parcels totaling 106 333 ha in southern Idaho, USA. We also analyzed vegetation changes following 64 wildfires that burned 152 611 ha of nearby rangeland during the same period. We matched areas within removals and wildfires to similar undisturbed areas, and then used causal impact analysis to estimate the effects of the disturbances. Juniper removals resulted in sustained reduction of tree cover and increased perennial forb and grass cover across nearly all sites, achieving key management goals. Based on the metrics evaluated, juniper removal was more effective than wildfire in delivering long-term restoration in this sagebrush system. However, juniper treatments also stimulated temporary undesirable increases in annual grasses and forbs, indicating the need for additional management to achieve durable conservation outcomes. Intensive mechanical methods initially reduced shrub cover in some treatments, but shrubs recovered to near pre-treatment levels within 7 years. Using a recently-developed metric of ecological integrity for sagebrush ecosystems, we show that these large, long-term projects halted or reversed degradation attributed to juniper expansion, demonstrating that restoration can improve the trajectory of ecosystems when implemented at scale.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 123-134"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142438042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-15DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.007
Peter S. Coates , Brian G. Prochazka , Sarah C. Webster , Cali L. Weise , Cameron L. Aldridge , Michael S. O'Donnell , Lief Wiechman , Kevin E. Doherty , John C. Tull
Developing a robust monitoring framework that integrates efficacy assessments of cooperative conservation and restoration actions in relation to population viability is critical for successful long-term recovery of target ecosystems and species. However, often it is difficult to quantify conservation action efficacy because of the complex, dynamic nature of ecosystem processes and practical limitations associated with assessing target species’ population dynamics. Here, we present an analytical framework that allows for quantification of conservation action efficacy using greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; hereafter, sage-grouse) within the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment which spans the border of Nevada and California. This framework utilizes a web-based repository of conservation efforts carried out in sagebrush ecosystems and readily fits within contemporary sagebrush conservation design strategies. We employed a state-space model within a Bayesian framework to estimate abundance (N) as inputs for a progressive change before-after-control-impact paired series (BACIPS) design. Although sage-grouse populations continue to decline in the Bi-State, count data from 57 leks (monitored between 2003–2021) coupled with 85 unique actions (initiated between 2012–2019) provided clear evidence that conservation efforts increased population abundance, on average, by 4.4% annually, resulting in a predicted population abundance that was 37.4% greater than if no actions had occurred, since 2012. Population gains varied by the type of conservation action and according to the number of lag years following its implementation.
{"title":"Cooperative Conservation Actions Improve Sage-Grouse Population Performance Within the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment","authors":"Peter S. Coates , Brian G. Prochazka , Sarah C. Webster , Cali L. Weise , Cameron L. Aldridge , Michael S. O'Donnell , Lief Wiechman , Kevin E. Doherty , John C. Tull","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.007","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.007","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Developing a robust monitoring framework that integrates efficacy assessments of cooperative conservation and restoration actions in relation to population viability is critical for successful long-term recovery of target ecosystems and species. However, often it is difficult to quantify conservation action efficacy because of the complex, dynamic nature of ecosystem processes and practical limitations associated with assessing target species’ population dynamics. Here, we present an analytical framework that allows for quantification of conservation action efficacy using greater sage-grouse (<em>Centrocercus urophasianus</em>; hereafter, sage-grouse) within the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment which spans the border of Nevada and California. This framework utilizes a web-based repository of conservation efforts carried out in sagebrush ecosystems and readily fits within contemporary sagebrush conservation design strategies. We employed a state-space model within a Bayesian framework to estimate abundance (<em>N</em>) as inputs for a progressive change before-after-control-impact paired series (BACIPS) design. Although sage-grouse populations continue to decline in the Bi-State, count data from 57 leks (monitored between 2003–2021) coupled with 85 unique actions (initiated between 2012–2019) provided clear evidence that conservation efforts increased population abundance, on average, by 4.4% annually, resulting in a predicted population abundance that was 37.4% greater than if no actions had occurred, since 2012. Population gains varied by the type of conservation action and according to the number of lag years following its implementation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 135-145"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142438040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-15DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.004
Matthew Cahill
This is not a typical journal article in tone or style. As part of a special issue focused on the Sagebrush Conservation Design and Strategic Conservation, this paper highlights how we need to change our management of the sagebrush biome with a perspective of why that change matters. Sagebrush ecosystems are in steep decline, losing more than 1 million acres annually for decades from biome-altering threats of invasive annual grasses, conifer expansion, catastrophic wildfire, and climate change. As illustrated by the other papers in this special issue, management of the sagebrush biome needs to drastically change, focusing prevention and restoration on intact landscapes while accepting we cannot bring back the biome where it is already lost. Imbedded in this choice to change how we manage the biome is why that change matters. In this paper I include a series of personal anecdotes, observations, and connections that I hope helps you, the reader, understand the content of this special issue not only as an integrated body of science, but also an embrace of how we relate to the future of the biome. I embrace that future by applying the Defend and Grow the Core framework around Sagebrush Conservation Design Core and Growth Areas, and by layering in the tenants of the Resist, Accept, Direct model. The biggest gaps for ecosystem management are not from lack of knowledge, but from lack of clear administration priorities and funding, and robust social capacity to restore and steward our last geographies of hope. By using both a pessimist's and optimist's perspective on the plight of the range, I hope you deeply sense the opportunity and the urgency we face, making hard choices of what we do and where, building a long-term commitment to a restoration economy, and supporting people to save the sagebrush sea.
{"title":"There Is No Hope Without Change: A Perspective on How We Conserve the Sagebrush Biome","authors":"Matthew Cahill","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.004","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.004","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This is not a typical journal article in tone or style. As part of a special issue focused on the Sagebrush Conservation Design and Strategic Conservation, this paper highlights how we need to change our management of the sagebrush biome with a perspective of why that change matters. Sagebrush ecosystems are in steep decline, losing more than 1 million acres annually for decades from biome-altering threats of invasive annual grasses, conifer expansion, catastrophic wildfire, and climate change. As illustrated by the other papers in this special issue, management of the sagebrush biome needs to drastically change, focusing prevention and restoration on intact landscapes while accepting we cannot bring back the biome where it is already lost. Imbedded in this choice to change how we manage the biome is why that change matters. In this paper I include a series of personal anecdotes, observations, and connections that I hope helps you, the reader, understand the content of this special issue not only as an integrated body of science, but also an embrace of how we relate to the future of the biome. I embrace that future by applying the Defend and Grow the Core framework around Sagebrush Conservation Design Core and Growth Areas, and by layering in the tenants of the Resist, Accept, Direct model. The biggest gaps for ecosystem management are not from lack of knowledge, but from lack of clear administration priorities and funding, and robust social capacity to restore and steward our last geographies of hope. By using both a pessimist's and optimist's perspective on the plight of the range, I hope you deeply sense the opportunity and the urgency we face, making hard choices of what we do and where, building a long-term commitment to a restoration economy, and supporting people to save the sagebrush sea.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 209-214"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437892","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-15DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.016
Tina G. Mozelewski , Patrick T. Freeman , Alexander V. Kumar , David E. Naugle , Elissa M. Olimpi , Scott L. Morford , Michelle I. Jeffries , David S. Pilliod , Caitlin E. Littlefield , Sarah E. McCord , Lief A. Wiechman , Emily J. Kachergis , Kevin E. Doherty
Core sagebrush areas (CSAs), patches of high sagebrush ecological integrity, continue to decline despite significant conservation and restoration investments across the sagebrush biome. Historically, conservation decisions in the biome have been driven by wildlife species-specific demands, but increasing recognition of the scale of threats and the pace of ecosystem degradation has compelled a shift towards threat-based ecosystem management. Therefore, there is a need to evaluate the scale of conservation implementation relative to the rate of degradation or loss from specific threats to the biome to assess whether a conservation deficit exists. To this end, we: 1) quantified and compared the average hectares of conservation practices implemented annually relative to the hectares of CSA loss attributed to each threat; 2) evaluated the relative amount of conservation actions in core sagebrush areas, growth opportunity areas, and other rangeland areas; and 3) assessed how much additional conservation may be needed to stop CSA declines. We then quantified how better spatial targeting and enhanced coordination might reduce the total additional amount of future conservation needed, and evaluated how an influx of resources can close the conservation gap, or the deficit between the conservation needed to offset annual loss and degradation and the capacity for conservation implementation. We found that current rates of conservation (e.g., hectares treated annually) are markedly lower than rates of CSA loss (∼10% of average annual loss). Furthermore, most conservation actions, ∼90% for some treatment types, occurred outside of CSAs likely reducing the efficacy of these conservation actions at retaining and restoring intact sagebrush rangelands. Additionally, we found that conservation efforts will need to increase by more than an order of magnitude (at least 10x) annually to halt CSA declines. However, through better spatial targeting of conservation actions, the increase in conservation needed to stop CSA loss could be reduced by 70% or more. This analysis demonstrates the divergent futures that may await the sagebrush biome pending key decisions regarding conservation targeting, stakeholder cooperation, and the strategic addition of resources.
{"title":"Closing the Conservation Gap: Spatial Targeting and Coordination are Needed for Conservation to Keep Pace with Sagebrush Losses","authors":"Tina G. Mozelewski , Patrick T. Freeman , Alexander V. Kumar , David E. Naugle , Elissa M. Olimpi , Scott L. Morford , Michelle I. Jeffries , David S. Pilliod , Caitlin E. Littlefield , Sarah E. McCord , Lief A. Wiechman , Emily J. Kachergis , Kevin E. Doherty","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.016","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.016","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Core sagebrush areas (CSAs), patches of high sagebrush ecological integrity, continue to decline despite significant conservation and restoration investments across the sagebrush biome. Historically, conservation decisions in the biome have been driven by wildlife species-specific demands, but increasing recognition of the scale of threats and the pace of ecosystem degradation has compelled a shift towards threat-based ecosystem management. Therefore, there is a need to evaluate the scale of conservation implementation relative to the rate of degradation or loss from specific threats to the biome to assess whether a conservation deficit exists. To this end, we: 1) quantified and compared the average hectares of conservation practices implemented annually relative to the hectares of CSA loss attributed to each threat; 2) evaluated the relative amount of conservation actions in core sagebrush areas, growth opportunity areas, and other rangeland areas; and 3) assessed how much additional conservation may be needed to stop CSA declines. We then quantified how better spatial targeting and enhanced coordination might reduce the total additional amount of future conservation needed, and evaluated how an influx of resources can close the conservation gap, or the deficit between the conservation needed to offset annual loss and degradation and the capacity for conservation implementation. We found that current rates of conservation (e.g., hectares treated annually) are markedly lower than rates of CSA loss (∼10% of average annual loss). Furthermore, most conservation actions, ∼90% for some treatment types, occurred outside of CSAs likely reducing the efficacy of these conservation actions at retaining and restoring intact sagebrush rangelands. Additionally, we found that conservation efforts will need to increase by more than an order of magnitude (at least 10x) annually to halt CSA declines. However, through better spatial targeting of conservation actions, the increase in conservation needed to stop CSA loss could be reduced by 70% or more. This analysis demonstrates the divergent futures that may await the sagebrush biome pending key decisions regarding conservation targeting, stakeholder cooperation, and the strategic addition of resources.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 12-24"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-15DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.020
David M. Theobald , Alexander V. Kumar , Kevin Doherty , Katherine A. Zeller , Todd B. Cross
Conservation of species’ mobility and ecological integrity is necessary for the productivity of the sagebrush biome in the western United States. Building on the recently developed Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD) that mapped sagebrush ecological integrity (SEI)—defined as the higher cover of sagebrush and perennial grass and reduced threats due to invasive annual grass, tree encroachment, and human disturbance—we modeled the structural connectivity of sagebrush ecosystems to better incorporate the role of landscape-level processes into assessments of integrity. Because integrity can vary spatially, as well as temporally, we quantified both interannual variability and trends in variability in SEI from 2001–2021. We used the resultant map to identify areas with high structural landscape connectivity (i.e., “well-connected cores”), then determined the coincident core sagebrush areas (CSAs) that represent functioning sagebrush ecosystem with few landscape threats, and growth opportunity areas (GOAs) that represent functioning systems impacted by one or more threats as originally defined and mapped in the SCD. We found that CSAs were located in areas with higher landscape connectivity, and the biome-wide average of SEI declined by 30% from 2001 to 2021, although the structural connectivity biome-wide declined one-third less (by 20%). CSAs located in areas with high connectivity had 25% higher SEI values on average than those with low connectivity, and the trend in declining SEI values was slower. Our datasets of landscape connectivity can be combined with other SCD products to provide a broader ecosystem context—both spatially and temporally. Our results can be used to inform, refine, focus, and prioritize conservation and management efforts to those CSAs and GOAs we identified as particularly well connected and which may be more resilient to recently altered dynamics and declines—those that will serve to anchor efforts to conserve the sagebrush biome in light of changing land use and climate.
保护物种的流动性和生态完整性对于提高美国西部鼠尾草生物群落的生产力十分必要。最近开发的 "鼠尾草保护设计"（Sagebrush Conservation Design，SCD）绘制了鼠尾草生态完整性（SEI）图，将其定义为较高的鼠尾草和多年生禾本科植物覆盖率，以及因入侵的一年生禾本科植物、树木侵占和人为干扰而减少的威胁。由于完整性在空间和时间上都会发生变化，因此我们对 2001-2021 年期间 SEI 的年际变化和变化趋势进行了量化。我们利用绘制的地图确定了具有高度结构景观连通性的区域（即 "连通性良好的核心"），然后确定了代表功能正常且景观威胁较少的鼠尾草生态系统的重合核心鼠尾草区（CSA），以及代表功能正常且受到 SCD 最初定义和绘制的一种或多种威胁影响的增长机会区（GOAs）。我们发现，CSA 位于景观连通性较高的区域，整个生物群落的 SEI 平均值从 2001 年到 2021 年下降了 30%，尽管整个生物群落的结构连通性下降了三分之一（20%）。位于高连通性区域的 CSA 的 SEI 值平均比低连通性区域的 CSA 高 25%，而且 SEI 值的下降趋势较慢。我们的景观连通性数据集可与其他 SCD 产品相结合，以提供更广泛的生态系统背景（包括空间和时间方面）。我们的研究结果可用于为那些我们认为连接性特别好、对最近发生的动态变化和衰退具有更强复原力的生态系统服务区和全球海洋观测区提供信息、进行改进、突出重点并优先考虑保护和管理工作--这些生态系统服务区和全球海洋观测区将在不断变化的土地利用和气候条件下成为保护鼠尾草生物群落的支柱。
{"title":"Well-Connected Core Areas Retain Ecological Integrity of Sagebrush Ecosystems Amidst Overall Declines From 2001–2021","authors":"David M. Theobald , Alexander V. Kumar , Kevin Doherty , Katherine A. Zeller , Todd B. Cross","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.020","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.020","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Conservation of species’ mobility and ecological integrity is necessary for the productivity of the sagebrush biome in the western United States. Building on the recently developed Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD) that mapped sagebrush ecological integrity (SEI)—defined as the higher cover of sagebrush and perennial grass and reduced threats due to invasive annual grass, tree encroachment, and human disturbance—we modeled the structural connectivity of sagebrush ecosystems to better incorporate the role of landscape-level processes into assessments of integrity. Because integrity can vary spatially, as well as temporally, we quantified both interannual variability and trends in variability in SEI from 2001–2021. We used the resultant map to identify areas with high structural landscape connectivity (i.e., “well-connected cores”), then determined the coincident core sagebrush areas (CSAs) that represent functioning sagebrush ecosystem with few landscape threats, and growth opportunity areas (GOAs) that represent functioning systems impacted by one or more threats as originally defined and mapped in the SCD. We found that CSAs were located in areas with higher landscape connectivity, and the biome-wide average of SEI declined by 30% from 2001 to 2021, although the structural connectivity biome-wide declined one-third less (by 20%). CSAs located in areas with high connectivity had 25% higher SEI values on average than those with low connectivity, and the trend in declining SEI values was slower. Our datasets of landscape connectivity can be combined with other SCD products to provide a broader ecosystem context—both spatially and temporally. Our results can be used to inform, refine, focus, and prioritize conservation and management efforts to those CSAs and GOAs we identified as particularly well connected and which may be more resilient to recently altered dynamics and declines—those that will serve to anchor efforts to conserve the sagebrush biome in light of changing land use and climate.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 41-50"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437970","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-15DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.018
Alexander V. Kumar , Jason D. Tack , Kevin E. Doherty , Joseph T. Smith , Beth E. Ross , Geoffrey Bedrosian
Population declines among sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) reliant birds mirror the larger deterioration of the sagebrush ecosystem. To combat this biome decline, western partners have unified around a common vision for sagebrush conservation by developing the Sagebrush Conservation Design, which identified high-priority areas, designated as “core sagebrush areas” (CSAs), to anchor conservation actions throughout the biome. While this conservation design did not explicitly consider the distribution or abundance of focal species, an underlying assumption has been that sagebrush-associated wildlife will benefit from actions targeting threats to the sagebrush biome. Herein, we explicitly test whether sagebrush ecological integrity (SEI), the metric used to quantify CSAs, is associated with sagebrush songbird abundance and population trends, such that CSAs provide an effective umbrella for wildlife conservation. Because species likely vary in their response to different ecological factors, we further examined the relative importance of the five components of SEI: sagebrush cover, tree cover, perennial grass cover, annual grass cover, and human modification, in structuring sagebrush songbird populations. We found substantial increases in population counts associated with increased values of SEI across three species examined: sagebrush sparrow (Artemisiospiza nevadensis), Brewer's sparrow (Spizella breweri), and sage thrasher (Oreoscoptes montanus). Specifically, models supported 10 times (sage thrasher), six times (Brewer's sparrow), and three times (sagebrush sparrow) higher median relative abundances in CSAs compared with surrounding areas. Further, we found strong evidence of large population declines as areas transitioned out of CSAs. Finally, although we found some species-specific differences in the relative importance of the five SEI components, generally, sagebrush cover and tree cover were more important than grass cover in influencing bird populations. We show that conservation actions designed to preserve or grow CSAs will likely benefit sagebrush-obligate songbird populations and other focal wildlife, especially if consideration is given to which component(s) of SEI are targeted.
依赖灌木丛（蒿属）的鸟类数量下降反映了灌木丛生态系统的整体恶化。为了应对这一生物群落的衰退，西部合作伙伴通过制定 "灌木丛保护设计"（Sagebrush Conservation Design），团结在灌木丛保护的共同愿景周围，该设计确定了被称为 "灌木丛核心区"（CSA）的高度优先区域，以支持整个生物群落的保护行动。虽然这一保护设计并没有明确考虑重点物种的分布或丰度，但其基本假设是，与鼠尾草相关的野生动物将从针对鼠尾草生物群落威胁的行动中受益。在此，我们明确检验了用于量化 CSA 的指标--鼠尾草生态完整性（SEI）是否与鼠尾草鸣禽的丰度和种群趋势相关，从而使 CSA 成为保护野生动物的有效保护伞。由于物种对不同生态因素的反应可能不同，我们进一步研究了 SEI 的五个组成部分：灌木丛覆盖率、树木覆盖率、多年生草地覆盖率、一年生草地覆盖率和人类活动对灌木丛鸣禽种群结构的相对重要性。我们发现，在所考察的三个物种中，鼠尾草麻雀（Artemisiospiza nevadensis）、布鲁尔麻雀（Spizella breweri）和鼠尾草鸫（Oreoscoptes montanus）的种群数量随着 SEI 值的增加而大幅增加。具体来说，模型支持 CSA 中的相对丰度中值比周边地区高 10 倍（鼠尾草鸫）、6 倍（布鲁尔麻雀）和 3 倍（鼠尾草麻雀）。此外，我们还发现，有确凿证据表明，在脱离 CSA 的地区，种群数量会大幅下降。最后，尽管我们发现在五个 SEI 要素的相对重要性方面存在一些物种特异性差异，但总体而言，在影响鸟类种群数量方面，鼠尾草覆盖和树木覆盖比草地覆盖更为重要。我们的研究表明，旨在保护或增加 CSA 的保护行动很可能会使依赖鼠尾草的鸣禽种群和其他重点野生动物受益，特别是如果考虑到针对 SEI 的哪个（些）组成部分的话。
{"title":"Defend and Grow the Core for Birds: How a Sagebrush Conservation Strategy Benefits Rangeland Birds","authors":"Alexander V. Kumar , Jason D. Tack , Kevin E. Doherty , Joseph T. Smith , Beth E. Ross , Geoffrey Bedrosian","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.018","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.018","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Population declines among sagebrush (<em>Artemisia</em> spp.) reliant birds mirror the larger deterioration of the sagebrush ecosystem. To combat this biome decline, western partners have unified around a common vision for sagebrush conservation by developing the Sagebrush Conservation Design, which identified high-priority areas, designated as “core sagebrush areas” (CSAs), to anchor conservation actions throughout the biome. While this conservation design did not explicitly consider the distribution or abundance of focal species, an underlying assumption has been that sagebrush-associated wildlife will benefit from actions targeting threats to the sagebrush biome. Herein, we explicitly test whether sagebrush ecological integrity (SEI), the metric used to quantify CSAs, is associated with sagebrush songbird abundance and population trends, such that CSAs provide an effective umbrella for wildlife conservation. Because species likely vary in their response to different ecological factors, we further examined the relative importance of the five components of SEI: sagebrush cover, tree cover, perennial grass cover, annual grass cover, and human modification, in structuring sagebrush songbird populations. We found substantial increases in population counts associated with increased values of SEI across three species examined: sagebrush sparrow (<em>Artemisiospiza nevadensis</em>), Brewer's sparrow (<em>Spizella breweri</em>), and sage thrasher (<em>Oreoscoptes montanus</em>). Specifically, models supported 10 times (sage thrasher), six times (Brewer's sparrow), and three times (sagebrush sparrow) higher median relative abundances in CSAs compared with surrounding areas. Further, we found strong evidence of large population declines as areas transitioned out of CSAs. Finally, although we found some species-specific differences in the relative importance of the five SEI components, generally, sagebrush cover and tree cover were more important than grass cover in influencing bird populations. We show that conservation actions designed to preserve or grow CSAs will likely benefit sagebrush-obligate songbird populations and other focal wildlife, especially if consideration is given to which component(s) of SEI are targeted.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 160-168"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437887","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-15DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.013
Katherine Wollstein , Dustin Johnson , Chad Boyd
The sagebrush biome is rapidly deteriorating largely due to the ecosystem threats of conifer expansion, more frequent and larger wildfires, and proliferation of invasive annual grasses. Reversing the impacts of these threats is a formidable challenge. The Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD) emphasized that limited conservation resources should first be used to maintain Core Sagebrush Areas (CSA), and then to grow such areas where possible. The SCD heightens the ecological importance of maintaining and strategically growing CSAs. However, the fact that these areas have been identified does not mean that conservation is immediately possible or will be effective. Strategic conservation in the sagebrush biome does not only involve working in ecologically important areas; it is an approach that must explicitly acknowledge the social and administrative conditions in which individuals and organizations are making decisions. We accordingly propose that strategic, durable work can only occur in geographies of “conservation readiness,” that is, where ecological importance, social capacity, and conducive administrative conditions intersect. We offer a framework for assessing conservation readiness that functions as both an inventory and diagnostic tool, highlighting current assets while shining a light on needs and the types of activities that will create or sustain conservation readiness. We demonstrate the utility of the Conservation Readiness Framework for identifying the different roles and activities that must occur at local, mid, and regional levels to nurture conservation readiness over time. In practice, this approach contrasts with management driven solely by ecological importance and illustrates that effective conservation must also involve targeted efforts that curate both social and administrative conditions.
{"title":"Assessing Conservation Readiness: The Where, Who, and How of Strategic onservation in the Sagebrush Biome","authors":"Katherine Wollstein , Dustin Johnson , Chad Boyd","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.013","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.013","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The sagebrush biome is rapidly deteriorating largely due to the ecosystem threats of conifer expansion, more frequent and larger wildfires, and proliferation of invasive annual grasses. Reversing the impacts of these threats is a formidable challenge. The Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD) emphasized that limited conservation resources should first be used to maintain Core Sagebrush Areas (CSA), and then to grow such areas where possible. The SCD heightens the ecological importance of maintaining and strategically growing CSAs. However, the fact that these areas have been identified does not mean that conservation is immediately possible or will be effective. Strategic conservation in the sagebrush biome does not only involve working in ecologically important areas; it is an approach that must explicitly acknowledge the social and administrative conditions in which individuals and organizations are making decisions. We accordingly propose that strategic, durable work can only occur in geographies of “conservation readiness,” that is, where ecological importance, social capacity, and conducive administrative conditions intersect. We offer a framework for assessing conservation readiness that functions as both an inventory and diagnostic tool, highlighting current assets while shining a light on needs and the types of activities that will create or sustain conservation readiness. We demonstrate the utility of the Conservation Readiness Framework for identifying the different roles and activities that must occur at local, mid, and regional levels to nurture conservation readiness over time. In practice, this approach contrasts with management driven solely by ecological importance and illustrates that effective conservation must also involve targeted efforts that curate both social and administrative conditions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 187-199"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-15DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.003
Martin C. Holdrege , Kyle A. Palmquist , Daniel R. Schlaepfer , William K. Lauenroth , Chad S. Boyd , Megan K. Creutzburg , Michele R. Crist , Kevin E. Doherty , Thomas E. Remington , John C. Tull , Lief A. Wiechman , John B. Bradford
Understanding how climate change will contribute to ongoing declines in sagebrush ecological integrity is critical for informing natural resource management, yet complicated by interactions with wildfire and biological invasions. We assessed potential future changes in sagebrush ecological integrity under a range of scenarios using an individual plant-based simulation model, integrated with remotely sensed estimates of current sagebrush ecological integrity. The simulation model allowed us to estimate how climate change, wildfire, and invasive annuals interact to alter the potential abundance of key plant functional types that influence sagebrush ecological integrity: sagebrush, perennial grasses, and annual grasses. Our results suggest that climate driven reductions in sagebrush ecological integrity may occur over broader areas than increases in sagebrush ecological integrity. Declines in sagebrush ecological integrity were most likely in hot and dry regions while increases were more likely in cool and wet regions. The most common projected transitions of sagebrush ecological integrity classes were declines from Core Sagebrush Area to Growth Opportunity Area and from Growth Opportunity Area to Other Rangeland Area. Responses varied considerably across projections from different global climate models, highlighting the importance of climate uncertainty. However, our projections tended to be robust in areas that currently have the highest sagebrush ecological integrity. Our results provide a long-term perspective on the vulnerability of sagebrush ecosystems to climate change and may inform geographic prioritization of conservation and restoration investments. The results also suggest that ongoing threats, such as the continued invasion by annual grasses and increased wildfire frequency, are likely to be amplified by climate change, and imply that the current imbalance between capacity for conservation to address threats to sagebrush will grow as the climate warms.
{"title":"Climate Change Amplifies Ongoing Declines in Sagebrush Ecological Integrity","authors":"Martin C. Holdrege , Kyle A. Palmquist , Daniel R. Schlaepfer , William K. Lauenroth , Chad S. Boyd , Megan K. Creutzburg , Michele R. Crist , Kevin E. Doherty , Thomas E. Remington , John C. Tull , Lief A. Wiechman , John B. Bradford","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.003","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.003","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Understanding how climate change will contribute to ongoing declines in sagebrush ecological integrity is critical for informing natural resource management, yet complicated by interactions with wildfire and biological invasions. We assessed potential future changes in sagebrush ecological integrity under a range of scenarios using an individual plant-based simulation model, integrated with remotely sensed estimates of current sagebrush ecological integrity. The simulation model allowed us to estimate how climate change, wildfire, and invasive annuals interact to alter the potential abundance of key plant functional types that influence sagebrush ecological integrity: sagebrush, perennial grasses, and annual grasses. Our results suggest that climate driven reductions in sagebrush ecological integrity may occur over broader areas than increases in sagebrush ecological integrity. Declines in sagebrush ecological integrity were most likely in hot and dry regions while increases were more likely in cool and wet regions. The most common projected transitions of sagebrush ecological integrity classes were declines from Core Sagebrush Area to Growth Opportunity Area and from Growth Opportunity Area to Other Rangeland Area. Responses varied considerably across projections from different global climate models, highlighting the importance of climate uncertainty. However, our projections tended to be robust in areas that currently have the highest sagebrush ecological integrity. Our results provide a long-term perspective on the vulnerability of sagebrush ecosystems to climate change and may inform geographic prioritization of conservation and restoration investments. The results also suggest that ongoing threats, such as the continued invasion by annual grasses and increased wildfire frequency, are likely to be amplified by climate change, and imply that the current imbalance between capacity for conservation to address threats to sagebrush will grow as the climate warms.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 25-40"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437969","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-10-15DOI: 10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.019
Chad S. Boyd , Megan K. Creutzburg , Alexander V. Kumar , Joseph T. Smith , Kevin E. Doherty , Brian A. Mealor , John B. Bradford , Matthew Cahill , Stella M. Copeland , Cameron A. Duquette , Lindy Garner , Martin C. Holdrege , Bill Sparklin , Todd B. Cross
In the last 20 years, the North American sagebrush biome has lost over 500 000 ha of intact and largely intact sagebrush plant communities on an annual basis. Much of this loss has been associated with expansion and infilling of invasive annual grasses (IAGs). These species are highly competitive against native perennial grasses in disturbed environments, and create fuel conditions that increase both the likelihood of fire ignition and the ease of wildfire spread across large landscapes. Given the current rate of IAG expansion in both burned and unburned rangelands, we propose a range-wide paradigm shift from opportunistic and reactive management, to a framework that spatially prioritizes maintenance of largely intact, uninvaded areas and improvement of invaded habitats in strategic locations. We created a framework accompanied by biome-wide priority maps using geospatial overlays that target areas to MAINTAIN large, uninvaded areas as natural resource anchors through activities to prevent IAGs, IMPROVE areas where management success in restoring large, intact landscapes is most likely, and CONTAIN IAG infestations where necessary. We then offer three case studies to illustrate the use of these concepts and map products at multiple scales. Our map products operate at the biome scale using regional data sources and additional data sources will be needed to inform local conservation planning. However, the basic strategic management principles of (1) maintaining the intact and uninvaded areas that we can least afford to lose to IAGs, (2) improving areas where we have a reasonable likelihood of restoration success, and (3) containing problems where we must, are timely, relevant, and scalable from the biome to local levels.
{"title":"A Strategic and Science-Based Framework for Management of Invasive Annual Grasses in the Sagebrush Biome","authors":"Chad S. Boyd , Megan K. Creutzburg , Alexander V. Kumar , Joseph T. Smith , Kevin E. Doherty , Brian A. Mealor , John B. Bradford , Matthew Cahill , Stella M. Copeland , Cameron A. Duquette , Lindy Garner , Martin C. Holdrege , Bill Sparklin , Todd B. Cross","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.019","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.019","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In the last 20 years, the North American sagebrush biome has lost over 500 000 ha of intact and largely intact sagebrush plant communities on an annual basis. Much of this loss has been associated with expansion and infilling of invasive annual grasses (IAGs). These species are highly competitive against native perennial grasses in disturbed environments, and create fuel conditions that increase both the likelihood of fire ignition and the ease of wildfire spread across large landscapes. Given the current rate of IAG expansion in both burned and unburned rangelands, we propose a range-wide paradigm shift from opportunistic and reactive management, to a framework that spatially prioritizes maintenance of largely intact, uninvaded areas and improvement of invaded habitats in strategic locations. We created a framework accompanied by biome-wide priority maps using geospatial overlays that target areas to <strong>MAINTAIN</strong> large, uninvaded areas as natural resource anchors through activities to prevent IAGs, <strong>IMPROVE</strong> areas where management success in restoring large, intact landscapes is most likely, and <strong>CONTAIN</strong> IAG infestations where necessary. We then offer three case studies to illustrate the use of these concepts and map products at multiple scales. Our map products operate at the biome scale using regional data sources and additional data sources will be needed to inform local conservation planning. However, the basic strategic management principles of (1) maintaining the intact and uninvaded areas that we can least afford to lose to IAGs, (2) improving areas where we have a reasonable likelihood of restoration success, and (3) containing problems where we must, are timely, relevant, and scalable from the biome to local levels.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 61-72"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437972","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号