使用国家土地覆盖数据库作为灌木-干草原栖息地的指标:将两块大型美国联邦土地与周边地区进行比较。

IF 2.3 4区 医学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part A-Current Issues Pub Date : 2025-01-02 Epub Date: 2024-10-13 DOI:10.1080/15287394.2024.2412659
Joanna Burger, Michael Gochfeld, Kevin G Brown, Monica Cortes, Kelly Ng, David Kosson
{"title":"使用国家土地覆盖数据库作为灌木-干草原栖息地的指标:将两块大型美国联邦土地与周边地区进行比较。","authors":"Joanna Burger, Michael Gochfeld, Kevin G Brown, Monica Cortes, Kelly Ng, David Kosson","doi":"10.1080/15287394.2024.2412659","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There is a need to assess whether ecological resources are being protected on large, federal lands. The aim of this study was to present a methodology which consistently and transparently determines whether two large Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) facilities have protected valuable ecological lands on their sites compared to the surrounding region. The National Land Cover Database (2019) was used to examine the % shrub-scrub (shrub-steppe) and other habitats on the DOE's Hanford Site (HS, Washington) and on the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), compared to a 10-km and 30-km diameter band of land surrounding each site. On both sites, over 95% is in shrub-scrub or grassland, compared to the surrounding region. Approximately 70% of 10 km and 30-km bands around INL, and less than 50% of land surrounding HS is located in these two habitat types. INL has preserved a significantly higher % shrub/scrub habitat than HS, but INL allows grazing on 60% of its land. HS has preserved a significantly higher % grassland than INL but no grazing on site is present. The methodology presented may be used to compare key ecological habitat types such as grasslands, forest, and desert among sites in different parts of the country. This methodology enables managers, resource trustees, and the public to (1) make remediation decisions that protect resources, (2) assess whether landowners and managers have adequately characterized and protected environmental resources on their sites, and (3) whether landowners and managers have protected the integrity of that land as well as its climax vegetation.</p>","PeriodicalId":54758,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part A-Current Issues","volume":" ","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using the National Land Cover Database as an indicator of shrub-steppe habitat: comparing two large United States federal lands with surrounding regions.\",\"authors\":\"Joanna Burger, Michael Gochfeld, Kevin G Brown, Monica Cortes, Kelly Ng, David Kosson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15287394.2024.2412659\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>There is a need to assess whether ecological resources are being protected on large, federal lands. The aim of this study was to present a methodology which consistently and transparently determines whether two large Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) facilities have protected valuable ecological lands on their sites compared to the surrounding region. The National Land Cover Database (2019) was used to examine the % shrub-scrub (shrub-steppe) and other habitats on the DOE's Hanford Site (HS, Washington) and on the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), compared to a 10-km and 30-km diameter band of land surrounding each site. On both sites, over 95% is in shrub-scrub or grassland, compared to the surrounding region. Approximately 70% of 10 km and 30-km bands around INL, and less than 50% of land surrounding HS is located in these two habitat types. INL has preserved a significantly higher % shrub/scrub habitat than HS, but INL allows grazing on 60% of its land. HS has preserved a significantly higher % grassland than INL but no grazing on site is present. The methodology presented may be used to compare key ecological habitat types such as grasslands, forest, and desert among sites in different parts of the country. This methodology enables managers, resource trustees, and the public to (1) make remediation decisions that protect resources, (2) assess whether landowners and managers have adequately characterized and protected environmental resources on their sites, and (3) whether landowners and managers have protected the integrity of that land as well as its climax vegetation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part A-Current Issues\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part A-Current Issues\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15287394.2024.2412659\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part A-Current Issues","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15287394.2024.2412659","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

有必要对大型联邦土地上的生态资源是否受到保护进行评估。本研究旨在提出一种方法,以一致、透明的方式确定美国能源部(DOE)的两个大型设施与周边地区相比,是否保护了其场地上宝贵的生态用地。利用国家土地覆被数据库(2019 年),对能源部汉福德场址(华盛顿州 HS)和爱达荷国家实验室(INL)的灌木丛(灌木-干草原)和其他栖息地的百分比进行了研究,并与每个场址周围 10 公里和 30 公里直径范围内的土地进行了比较。与周围地区相比,这两个地点 95% 以上的区域都是灌木丛或草地。在 INL 周围 10 公里和 30 公里范围内,约有 70% 的土地属于这两种生境类型,而在 HS 周围,只有不到 50% 的土地属于这两种生境类型。INL 保存的灌木/灌丛栖息地比例明显高于 HS,但 INL 允许在其 60% 的土地上放牧。HS 保存的草地比例明显高于 INL,但 INL 没有放牧。所介绍的方法可用于比较全国不同地点的主要生态栖息地类型,如草原、森林和沙漠。这种方法使管理者、资源受托人和公众能够:(1) 做出保护资源的补救决定;(2) 评估土地所有者和管理者是否充分描述和保护了其场地上的环境资源;(3) 土地所有者和管理者是否保护了土地的完整性及其最高植被。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Using the National Land Cover Database as an indicator of shrub-steppe habitat: comparing two large United States federal lands with surrounding regions.

There is a need to assess whether ecological resources are being protected on large, federal lands. The aim of this study was to present a methodology which consistently and transparently determines whether two large Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) facilities have protected valuable ecological lands on their sites compared to the surrounding region. The National Land Cover Database (2019) was used to examine the % shrub-scrub (shrub-steppe) and other habitats on the DOE's Hanford Site (HS, Washington) and on the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), compared to a 10-km and 30-km diameter band of land surrounding each site. On both sites, over 95% is in shrub-scrub or grassland, compared to the surrounding region. Approximately 70% of 10 km and 30-km bands around INL, and less than 50% of land surrounding HS is located in these two habitat types. INL has preserved a significantly higher % shrub/scrub habitat than HS, but INL allows grazing on 60% of its land. HS has preserved a significantly higher % grassland than INL but no grazing on site is present. The methodology presented may be used to compare key ecological habitat types such as grasslands, forest, and desert among sites in different parts of the country. This methodology enables managers, resource trustees, and the public to (1) make remediation decisions that protect resources, (2) assess whether landowners and managers have adequately characterized and protected environmental resources on their sites, and (3) whether landowners and managers have protected the integrity of that land as well as its climax vegetation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
19.20%
发文量
46
审稿时长
8-16 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A , Current Issues is an authoritative journal that features strictly refereed original research in the field of environmental sciences, public and occupational health, and toxicology.
期刊最新文献
Association between long-term exposure to fine particulate air pollution and risk of death attributed to esophageal cancer in Taiwan. Using the National Land Cover Database as an indicator of shrub-steppe habitat: comparing two large United States federal lands with surrounding regions. Increasing coil temperature of a third-generation e-cigarette device modulates C57BL/6 mouse lung immune cell composition and cytokine milieu independently of aerosol dose. Aluminum and UV-C light on seed germination and initial growth of white oats. Effects of anthranilic diamide insecticides on metamorphosis in the common toad Rhinella arenarum (Hensel, 1867) at concentrations found in aquatic environments.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1