Rangeland health attributes and indicators for qualitative assessment

被引:178
作者
Pyke, DA [1 ]
Herrick, JE
Shaver, P
Pellant, M
机构
[1] US Geol Survey, US Dept Interior, Forest & Rangeland Ecosyst Sci Ctr, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA
[2] USDA ARS, Jornada Expt Range, Las Cruces, NM 88003 USA
[3] Oregon State Univ, Dept Rangeland Resources, Grazing Land Technol Inst, USDA, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA
[4] US Dept Interior, Bur Land Management, Idaho State Off, Boise, ID 83709 USA
来源
JOURNAL OF RANGE MANAGEMENT | 2002年 / 55卷 / 06期
关键词
soil stability; hydrologic function; biological integrity; ecosystem status; erosion; infiltration; inventory;
D O I
10.2307/4004002
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
Panels of experts from the Society for Range Management and the National Research Council proposed that status of rangeland ecosystems could be ascertained by evaluating an ecological site's potential to conserve soil resources and by a series of indicators for ecosystem processes and site stability. Using these recommendations as a starting point, we developed a rapid, qualitative method for assessing a moment-in-time status of rangelands. Evaluators rate 17 indicators to assess 3 ecosystem attributes (soil and site stability, hydrologic function, and biotic integrity) for a given location. Indicators include rills, water flow patterns, pedestals and terracettes, bare ground, gullies, wind scour and depositional areas, litter movement, soil resistance to erosion, soil surface loss or degradation, plant composition relative to infiltration, soil compaction, plant functional/structural groups, plant mortality, litter amount, annual production, invasive plants, and reproductive capability. In this paper, we detail the development and evolution of the technique and introduce a modified ecological reference worksheet that documents the expected presence and amount of each indicator on the ecological site. In addition, we review the intended applications for this technique and clarify the differences between assessment and monitoring that lead us to recommend this technique be used for moment-in-time assessments and not be used for temporal monitoring of rangeland status. Lastly, we propose a mechanism for adapting and modifying this technique to reflect improvements in understanding of ecosystem processes. We support the need for quantitative measures for monitoring rangeland health and propose some measures that we believe may address some of the 17 indicators.
引用
收藏
页码:584 / 597
页数:14
相关论文
共 117 条
[1]   INDICATORS OF SOIL MOVEMENT ON RANGE WATERSHEDS [J].
ANDERSON, EW .
JOURNAL OF RANGE MANAGEMENT, 1974, 27 (03) :244-247
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1983, ENV IMPACTS OFF ROAD
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1994, SPECIAL PUBLICATION, DOI DOI 10.2136/SSSASPECPUB35.C4
[4]  
Barnes K.K., 1971, COMPACTION AGR SOILS
[5]  
BELNAP J, 1993, GREAT BASIN NAT, V53, P40
[6]   Vulnerability of desert biological soil crusts to wind erosion: the influences of crust development, soil texture, and disturbance [J].
Belnap, J ;
Gillette, DA .
JOURNAL OF ARID ENVIRONMENTS, 1998, 39 (02) :133-142
[7]   SOIL LOSS AS AFFECTED BY DIFFERENT COMBINATIONS OF SURFACE LITTER AND ROCK [J].
BENKOBI, L ;
TRLICA, MJ ;
SMITH, JL .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY, 1993, 22 (04) :657-661
[8]  
BLACKBURN WH, 1992, T ASAE, V35, P479, DOI 10.13031/2013.28624
[9]   FACTORS INFLUENCING INFILTRATION AND SEDIMENT PRODUCTION OF SEMIARID RANGELANDS IN NEVADA [J].
BLACKBURN, WH .
WATER RESOURCES RESEARCH, 1975, 11 (06) :929-937
[10]  
BLACKBURN WH, 1994, SSSA SPEC PUBL, P1