Monitoring Vegetation community Health
Putting it All Together
The one-attribute-at-a-time approach may be useful when trying to assess or
monitor very specific vegetation conditions. For example, if one is setting up a
protocol to monitor and determine if a specific targeted grazing practice is effective at
reducing the abundance of yellow starthistle (Centaurea
solstitialis) on a landscape, then a simple
monitoring of starthistle density or frequency would be sufficient.
However, to get at more comprehensive and relevant questions related to land
condition or health, it is necessary to combine individual attributes to assess
emergent qualities of plant communities. Current attempts to find reasonable
ways to assess "land health" have been fueled by dissatisfaction with
long-standing procedures to describe and interpret condition and trend
relative to some perceived "climax" community for a site or habitat type. New
approaches have been proposed to accommodate modern ecological theory and the
demands of multiple-use management.
The newest land assessment protocols focus on the status of a site or
landscape relative to:
A One-Size-Fits-All Protocol?
Many scientists and managers have suggested that a single protocol is needed
to assess land integrity and health. Is is believed that if we had a
unified way to discuss, evaluate, and monitor lands we could make wise decisions
about how to achieve management and sustainability goals. It is true that any
choice of variables to monitor should be underlain by:
- existing ecological theories such as succession and other aspects of
vegetation dynamics
- constraints of soil development and soil erosion
- development and evolution of landscapes
- relationships of biodiversity to production and stability
However, the need for information and assessment of vegetation communities
and landscapes vary greatly depending on the goals and demands of land
stewardship.
On the broadest scale, efforts like the
Roundtable on Sustainable Forests
and the
Sustainable Rangeland Roundtable seek to measure course attributes of
economic, ecological, and social benefits derived from forests and rangelands to
assess if these lands will be "sustainable." In other words, are landscapes and
regions in a condition that will be able to "provide a desired mix of
benefits to the present generation without compromising their ability to provide
benefits for future generations."
On finer scales, land managers need to make daily decisions about how lands
will be managed to meet desired conservation and management goals. Goals for
monitoring may be aimed at profit optimization, landscape maintenance,
compliance with laws and policies (i.e., endangered species act, or required
responses to restoration after fire), or maintaining options for the future
(i.e., weed management or soil maintenance).
The Bottom Line -- the resources that can be potentially produced
on a specific landscape are set by environmental and ecological constructs that
direct and limit options for land management and maintenance. But, there
are many different goals for land stewardship that can occur within
these landscape limitations. Therefore, there
will never be a single, unified, protocol for assessing vegetation
communities and landscapes. |
|