Geology topics

Jenifer Dugan

Publications and source records attributed to Jenifer Dugan.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2021

Multiple climate change-driven tipping points for coastal systems

As the climate evolves over the next century, the interaction of accelerating sea level rise (SLR) and storms, combined with confining development and infrastructure, will place greater stresses on physical, ecological, and human systems along the ocean-land margin. Many of these valued coastal systems could reach “tipping points,” at which hazard exposure substantially increases and threatens the present-day form, function, and viability of communities, infrastructure, and ecosystems. Determining the timing and nature of these tipping points is essential for effective climate adaptation planning. Here we present a multidisciplinary case study from Santa Barbara, California (USA), to identify potential climate change-related tipping points for various coastal systems. This study integrates numerical and statistical models of the climate, ocean water levels, beach and cliff evolution, and two soft sediment ecosystems, sandy beaches and tidal wetlands. We find that tipping points for beaches and wetlands could be reached with just 0.25 m or less of SLR (~ 2050), with > 50% subsequent habitat loss that would degrade overall biodiversity and ecosystem function. In contrast, the largest projected changes in socioeconomic exposure to flooding for five communities in this region are not anticipated until SLR exceeds 0.75 m for daily flooding and 1.5 m for storm-driven flooding (~ 2100 or later). These changes are less acute relative to community totals and do not qualify as tipping points given the adaptive capacity of communities. Nonetheless, the natural and human built systems are interconnected such that the loss of natural system function could negatively impact the quality of life of residents and disrupt the local economy, resulting in indirect socioeconomic impacts long before built infrastructure is directly impacted by flooding.

California↗

USGS2003

Ecological criteria for evaluating candidate sites for marine reserves

Several schemes have been developed to help select the locations of marine reserves. All of them combine social, economic, and biological criteria, and few offer any guidance as to how to prioritize among the criteria identified. This can imply that the relative weights given to different criteria are unimportant. Where two sites are of equal value ecologically, then socioeconomic criteria should dominate the choice of which should be protected. However, in many cases, socioeconomic criteria are given equal or greater weight than ecological considerations in the choice of sites. This can lead to selection of reserves with little biological value that fail to meet many of the desired objectives. To avoid such a possibility, we develop a series of criteria that allow preliminary evaluation of candidate sites according to their relative biological values in advance of the application of socioeconomic criteria. We include criteria that, while not strictly biological, have a strong influence on the species present or ecological processes. Our scheme enables sites to be assessed according to their biodiversity, the processes which underpin that diversity, and the processes that support fisheries and provide a spectrum of other services important to people. Criteria that capture biodiversity values include biogeographic representation, habitat representation and heterogeneity, and presence of species or populations of special interest (e.g., threatened species). Criteria that capture sustainability of biodiversity and fishery values include the size of reserves necessary to protect viable habitats, presence of exploitable species, vulnerable life stages, connectivity among reserves, links among ecosystems, and provision of ecosystem services to people. Criteria measuring human and natural threats enable candidate sites to be eliminated from consideration if risks are too great, but also help prioritize among sites where threats can be mitigated by protection. While our criteria can be applied to the design of reserve networks, they also enable choice of single reserves to be made in the context of the attributes of existing protected areas. The overall goal of our scheme is to promote the development of reserve networks that will maintain biodiversity and ecosystem functioning at large scales. The values of ecosystem goods and services for people ultimately depend on meeting this objective.

Ecological Applications↗

USGS2003

Application of ecological criteria in selecting marine reserves and developing reserve networks

Marine reserves are being established worldwide in response to a growing recognition of the conservation crisis that is building in the oceans. However, designation of reserves has been largely opportunistic, or protective measures have been implemented (often overlapping and sometimes in conflict) by different entities seeking to achieve different ends. This has created confusion among both users and enforcers, and the proliferation of different measures provides a false sense of protection where little is offered. This paper sets out a procedure grounded in current understanding of ecological processes, that allows the evaluation and selection of reserve sites in order to develop functional, interconnected networks of fully protected reserves that will fulfill multiple objectives. By fully protected we mean permanently closed to fishing and other resource extraction. We provide a framework that unifies the central aims of conservation and fishery management, while also meeting other human needs such as the provision of ecosystem services (e.g., maintenance of coastal water quality, shoreline protection, and recreational opportunities). In our scheme, candidate sites for reserves are evaluated against 12 criteria focused toward sustaining the biological integrity and productivity of marine systems at both local and regional scales. While a limited number of sites will be indispensable in a network, many will be of similar value as reserves, allowing the design of numerous alternative, biologically adequate networks. Devising multiple network designs will help ensure that ecological functionality is preserved throughout the socioeconomic evaluation process. Too often, socioeconomic criteria have dominated the process of reserve selection, potentially undermining their efficacy. We argue that application of biological criteria must precede and inform socioeconomic evaluation, since maintenance of ecosystem functioning is essential for meeting all of the goals for reserves. It is critical that stakeholders are fully involved throughout this process. Application of the proposed criteria will lead to networks whose multifunctionality will help unite the objectives of different management entities, so accelerating progress toward improved stewardship of the oceans.

Ecological Applications↗