Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wtssw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-14T15:16:53.087Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

COMMENTARY: Using Tiered Assessments to Focus Land Use Plans and Management Investments on the Highest Priorities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2007

Jerry Magee  and
Patricia Carroll
Jerry Magee
Affiliation:
US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Portland, Oregon
Patricia Carroll
Affiliation:
US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Portland, Oregon
Get access

Abstract

As broad-scale cumulative effects become increasingly evident across certain landscapes, science points to the need for broader understanding of ecosystem processes, functions, and interrelationships upon which to base our management strategies. The resultant shift to ecosystem-based management has led to landscape assessments much larger in geographic scope than traditional planning efforts. Broad-scale assessments not only provide context for establishing relative priorities within large geographic areas but also provide for stepping down their science findings through finer-scaled assessments that inform equivalent levels of planning and decision making. A systematic step-down process, such as one that was formalized for an innovative regional ecosystem project, allows managers to put local needs into broader perspective, ensuring more efficient investment of limited funding and personnel. This article provides a novel overview of the benefits of a step-down analysis and decision-making approach, describing a tiered assessment strategy linked to existing federal land use planning and decision hierarchies. Two particular assessment tools are summarized—one for mid-scale, or subbasin, assessments (400,000 to 1,000,000 hectares) and one for fine-scale, or watershed, assessments (5,000 to 50,000 hectares)—followed by an example of the use of tiered assessments to focus subsequent management attention.

Type
FEATURES & REVIEWS
Information
Environmental Practice , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , December 2006 , pp. 218 - 227
Copyright
© 2006 National Association of Environmental Professionals

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, T. F. H., and T. W. Hoekstra. 1992. Toward a Unified Ecology. Columbia University Press, New York, 384 pp.
Bryce, S. A., J. M. Omernik, and D. P. Larsen. 1999. Ecoregions: A Geographic Framework to Guide Risk Characterization and Ecosystem Management. Environmental Practice 1(3):141–155.Google Scholar
Forest Ecosystem Management Assessment Team. 1993. Forest Ecosystem Management: An Ecological, Economic, and Social Assessment. US Department of Agriculture and US Department of Interior, Portland, OR.
Frissell, C. A., W. J. Liss, C. E. Warren, and M. D. Hurley. 1986. A Hierarchical Framework for Stream Habitat Classification: Viewing Streams in a Watershed Context. Environmental Management 10:199–214.Google Scholar
Groves, C. 2003. Drafting a Conservation Blueprint: A Practitioner's Guide to Planning for Biodiversity. Island Press, Washington, DC, 404 pp.
Haynes, R. W., R. T. Graham, and T. M. Quigley, tech. eds. 1996. A Framework for Ecosystem Management in the Interior Columbia Basin Including Portions of the Klamath and Great Basins. PNW-GTR-374. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 66 pp.
Hessburg, P. F., B. G. Smith, S. D. Kreiter, C. A. Miller, R. B. Salter, C. H. McNicoll, and W. J. Hann. 1999. Historical and Current Forest and Range Landscapes in the Interior Columbia River Basin and Portions of the Klamath and Great Basins: Part 1—Linking Vegetation Patterns and Landscape Vulnerability to Potential Insect and Pathogen Disturbances. PNW-GTR-458. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, 357 pp.
McElhany, P., M. H. Ruckelshaus, M. J. Ford, T. C. Wainwright, and E. P. Bjorkstedt. 2000. Viable Salmonid Populations and the Recovery of Evolutionarily Significant Units. US Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NWFSC-42, 156 pp. Also available at http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/publications/techmemos/tm42/tm42.pdf.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Multiscale Assessments. Washington, DC, Island Press, 515 pp.
O'Neill, R. V., and D. L. DeAngelis; G. E. Allen, ed. 1986. A Hierarchical Concept of Ecosystems. Monographs in Population Biology Series (MPB 23). Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 253 pp.
Quigley, T. M., and S. J. Arbelbide, tech. eds. 1997. An Assessment of Ecosystem Components in the Interior Columbia Basin and Portions of the Klamath and Great Basins. PNW-GTR-405. US Department of Agriculture and US Department of the Interior, Portland, OR, 4 volumes.
Quigley, T. M., and H. B. Cole. 1997. Highlighted Scientific Findings of the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project. PNW-GTR-404. US Department of Agriculture and US Department of the Interior, Portland, OR, 34 pp.
Urban, D. L. 1994. Landscape Ecology and Ecosystem Management. In Sustainable Ecological Systems: Implementing an Ecological Approach to Land Management, W. W. Covington and L. F. DeBano, tech. coords. General Technical Report RM-247. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO, 127–136.
US Department of Agriculture. 1998. Little Salmon River Pilot Subbasin Review. Payette and Nez Perce National Forests, McCall, ID, 240 pp. (out of print).
US Department of Agriculture and US Department of the Interior. 1995. Ecosystem Analysis at the Watershed Scale: Federal Guide for Watershed Analysis. Portland, OR, 32 pp. Also available at http://www.reo.gov/library/reports/watershd.pdf.
US Department of Agriculture and US Department of the Interior. 2000a. Ecosystem Review at the Subbasin Scale (Subbasin Review): A Guide for Mid-scale Inquiry. Portland, OR, 64 pp. Also available at http://www.icbemp.gov/implement/subbas.shtml.
US Department of Agriculture and US Department of the Interior. 2000b. Interior Columbia Basin Final Environmental Impact Statement and Proposed Decision. Portland, OR, 2 volumes.