USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70123888

Maintaining and restoring sustainable ecosystems in southern Nevada

Abstract

Managers in southern Nevada are challenge with determining appropriate goals and objectives and developing viable approaches for maintaining and restoring sustainable ecosystems in a time of rapid socio-ecological and environmental change. Sustainable or "healthy" ecosystems supply clean air, water and habitat for a diverse array of plants and animals. As described in Chapter 1, sustainable ecosystems retain characteristic processes like hydrological flux and storage, geomorphic processes, biogeochemical cycling and storage, biological activity and productivity, and population regeneration and reproduction over the normal cycle of disturbance events (modified from Chapin and others 1996 and Christensen and others 1996). Ecological restoration of stressed or disturbed ecosystems in an integral part of managing for sustainable ecosystems. The Society of Ecological Restoration International (SERI) defines ecological restoration as the process of assisting the recovery of an ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed (SERI 2004). Many of the southern Nevada's ecosystems are being subjected to anthropogenic stressors that span global, regional, and local scales (Chapter 2)., and are crossing ecological thresholds to new alternative states (Chapter 4 and Chapter 5). These alternative states often represent novel communities with disturbance regimes that differ significantly from historic conditions. Past management and restoration goals often focused on returning ecosystems to pre-disturbance conditions (Harris and others 2006). This approach assumes stable or equilibrium conditions and ignores changes in ecosystems processes due to land uses, increases in CO 2 concentrations, and climate change. A more realistic approach is to base management and restoration goals on the current potential of an ecosystem to support a given set of ecological conditions, and on the likelihood of future change due to warming climate (Harris and others 2006). This approach requires understanding ecosystem resilience to anthropogenic disturbance and climate change, the alternative states that exist for ecosystems, and the factors that result in threshold crossing (Bestelmeyer and others 2009; Hobbs and Harris 2001; Stingham and others 2003; Whisemnant 1999). It also requires the ability to predict how climate is likely to influence ecosystems in the future (Harris and others 2006). This chapter addresses the restoration aspects of Sub-goal 1.3 in the SNAP Science Research Strategy which is to restore and sustain proper function of southern Nevada's watersheds and landscapes (able 1.3; Turner and others 2009). The effects of global, regional and local stresses on southern Nevada ecosystems are presented in Chapter 2. Here, we discuss appropriate objectives and develop guidelines for maintaining and restoring southern Nevada ecosystems. We then discuss the differences in ecological resilience to stress and disturbance and resistance to invasive species in southern Nevada ecosystems and describe restoration and management approaches for the different ecosystem types. We conclude with knowledge gaps and management implications.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 35.02392827573823° to 39.64524306073176° latitude; -120.09127846963423° to -113.99956682074821° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jeanne C. Chambers, Burton K. Pendleton, Donald W. Sada, Steven M. Ostoja, Matthew L. Brooks. 2013. Maintaining and restoring sustainable ecosystems in southern Nevada. https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70123888

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Avoiding common pitfalls in the implementation of adaptive forest wildlife management

Forest management planning requires the evaluation of tradeoffs in proposed management actions to meet multiple objectives, including providing the habitat required to sustain wildlife populations. However, various species-specific life history strategies and ecological uncertainties complicate our understanding of the responses of wildlife to disturbances, such as wildfires and forest management. We believe that adaptive management processes, applied through the close collaboration of researchers and managers (e.g., coproduction), will be valuable in this effort. Although adaptive management programs have been touted in the past, we stress that many of these programs have fallen short of the requisite steps to complete the learning cycles of this process (i.e., single- and double-loop learning). Thus, we provide guidance on what we believe to be the missing components of these efforts in hopes to guide future coordination of local and regional adaptive management programs for forest wildlife.

General Technical Report

Chapter 6: Climate change, wildlife, and wildlife habitats in the Oregon Coast Range

Climate change is likely to have profound effects on wildlife species within the Oregon Coast Adaptation Partnership (OCAP) assessment area, although the direction and magnitude of effects are likely to vary across species. Increased mean and extreme temperatures, especially during summer, may cause shifts in plant and animal species ranges, reduce habitat for some temperature-sensitive wildlife, alter plant phenology and the timing of available food resources, and affect species interactions (e.g., predation, competition). Altered timing of precipitation, summer drought, loss of fog, increased flooding events, earlier snowmelt, and rising sea level may reduce plant productivity, increase tree mortality, shift plant species composition, and lead to reduced wildlife habitat and habitat quality for some forests, riparian areas, wetlands, meadows, estuaries, and beaches. In addition, increasing frequency and extent of wildfire and insect outbreaks may reduce the extent of late-successional forest, reduce habitat connectivity, and increase the spread of invasive species. The biggest change expected for the assessment area is an increase in area where climatic conditions favor coastal mixed forest and a large reduction in area favoring montane conifer forest. Although actual changes in forest types may not necessarily occur by the end of the 21st century, climate change may add physiological and behavioral stress to wildlife. Some wildlife species will be able to persist in place and adapt to new conditions; some may be able to migrate to find suitable habitat; and some may be greatly reduced or extirpated from the assessment area or even go extinct. Shifts in major tree and shrub species will play a major role in food, den, and cover availability for wildlife. Rising sea level will reduce low-elevation habitats along the coast. An increase in the frequency of high-severity weather events will increase frequency and magnitude of flooding, including debris flow events. Coupled with increased temperatures during summer, this may reduce or fragment important ecosystems for aquatic and semi-aquatic species. Evaluation of the vulnerabilities of nine wildlife species based on literature reviews suggests that each species has life-history attributes that can lead to resilience or vulnerability to climate change effects. Depending on long-term objectives, several broad adaptation strategies focus on protecting refugia, establishing redundant wildlife strongholds with large-scale connectivity, and promoting structural and biological complexity.

Oregon