Geology topics

Karen L. Prentice

Publications and source records attributed to Karen L. Prentice.

7 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Scientific opportunities in the National Landscape Conservation System

The National Landscape Conservation System consists of unique and beautiful places across America’s landscapes where identified resources and values are protected and science is highlighted. The mission of the National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS), which is managed by the Bureau of Land Management and is often referred to as the agency’s National Conservation Lands, is to conserve, protect, and restore nationally significant landscapes for their cultural, ecological, and scientific values. This clear inclusion of science in the NLCS mission sets the stage for individual units to serve as places of learning, teaching, discovery, and innovation. Science is an integral part of managing the National Conservation Lands, and science conducted within and across the more than 900 units that make up the NLCS can inform and influence conservation and public land management well beyond its boundaries. Here, we highlight seven core aspects of National Conservation Lands that present valuable science opportunities: (1) the scientific values for which individual units are designated; (2) the many other resources, objects, and values within units; (3) the value of units as “control” sites for understanding the effects of activities such as mineral extraction that commonly occur elsewhere on multiple-use public lands but are often prohibited within National Conservation Lands; (4) the value of units for studying the effects of activities such as recreation that regularly occur and may be intensified on National Conservation Lands; (5) the high visibility of units, which draws strong interest and engagement from scientists, partners, and the public; (6) the functioning of the units as a network managed for a common purpose, which provides an opportunity to explore cross-cutting science questions across widely varying contexts and geographies; and (7) the opportunities units provide to promote and apply Indigenous Knowledge to scientific research to manage natural and cultural resources. Because of all of these characteristics, National Conservation Lands can serve as hubs for basic and applied science that can inform management of all public lands and resources into the future. We highlight these science opportunities through examples from existing units and suggest two actions that could help further science activities and impact on National Conservation Lands.

Parks Stewardship Forum↗

USGS2022

A sagebrush conservation design to proactively restore America’s sagebrush biome

A working group of experts with diverse professional backgrounds and disciplinary expertise was assembled to conceptualize a spatially explicit conservation design to support and inform the Sagebrush Conservation Strategy Part 2. The goal was to leverage recent advancements in remotely sensed landcover products to develop spatially and temporally explicit maps of sagebrush rangeland condition and landscape threats. In addition, the group sought to provide a common basis for understanding the state of sagebrush rangelands through time. First, the study team developed a spatially explicit model to assess geographic patterns in sagebrush ecological integrity and used this model to identify core sagebrush areas (CSAs), growth opportunity areas (GOAs), and other rangeland areas (ORAs) across the biome. Among the identified rangelands, 33.4 million acres were classified as CSAs; 84.3 million acres as GOAs; and 127.2 million acres as ORAs as of 2020. Second, the team sought to demonstrate the ecological relevance of the identified CSAs and GOAs by comparing these data with independent datasets for sagebrush obligate species of conservation concern. Geographical patterns in sagebrush ecological integrity were strongly associated with the occurrence of high-priority species and also displayed clear links to population performance for greater sage-grouse. Third, the team parsed out the type, location, and acres of primary threats within the different categories (CSAs, GOAs, and ORAs) to help focus active management by identifying places where multiagency and organization efforts can protect CSAs and GOAs that have higher levels of integrity with lower cumulative threats. The assessment of the condition of the sagebrush biome (that is, the location, amount, and conservation status) indicated that complex ecosystem function problems are driving ~73 percent of the demonstrated threats within the CSAs and GOAs (rather than point-source problems, such as human development). Fourth, the team developed trend estimates for the identified CSAs and GOAs and three selected primary threats (invasive annual grasses, conifer encroachment, and human modification) to the sagebrush biome from 2001 to 2020. Results showed that an average of 1.3 million acres per year have transitioned to ORAs at an annual rate of −1.34 percent. Fifth, the team developed an approach to integrate climate change effects into the threat-based landscape conservation design and conducted an initial assessment on the magnitude of near-term climate effects in the context of observed historical trends. The team’s analysis suggests that climate change alone is unlikely to be the dominant threat to sagebrush ecological integrity in the next few decades, although interactions of climate with wildfire and invasive annual grasses may be an important threat, especially in the longer term. A spatial overlap analysis was performed and highlighted 45.8 million acres of shared priorities among existing conservation frameworks to help anchor and guide collaborative landscape-scale conservation of areas that still have no to low threats. This information is critical to provide context for decisions about the volume and nature of conservation actions and funding requirements.

western United States↗

USGS2020

Ecological forecasting—21st century science for 21st century management

Natural resource managers are coping with rapid changes in both environmental conditions and ecosystems. Enabled by recent advances in data collection and assimilation, short-term ecological forecasting may be a powerful tool to help resource managers anticipate impending near-term changes in ecosystem conditions or dynamics. Managers may use the information in forecasts to minimize the adverse effects of ecological stressors and optimize the effectiveness of management actions. To explore the potential for ecological forecasting to enhance natural resource management, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) convened a workshop titled "Building Capacity for Applied Short-Term Ecological Forecasting" on May 29—31, 2019, with participants from several Federal agencies, including the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration as well as all mission areas within the USGS. Participants broadly agreed that short-term ecological forecasting—on the order of days to years into the future—has tremendous potential to improve the quality and timeliness of information available to guide resource management decisions. Participants considered how ecological forecasting could directly affect their agency missions and specified numerous critical tools for addressing natural resource management concerns in the 21st century that could be enhanced by ecological forecasting. Given this breadth of possible applications for forecast products, participants developed a repeatable framework for evaluating potential value of a forecast product for enhancing resource management. Applying that process to a large list of forecast ideas that were developed in a brainstorming session, participants identified a small set of promising forecast products that illustrate the value of ecological forecasting for informing resource management. Workshop outcomes also include insights about important likely obstacles and next steps. In particular, reliable production and delivery of operational ecological forecasts will require a sustained commitment by research agencies, in partnership with resource management agencies, to maintain and improve forecasting tools and capabilities.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2020

Bridging the research-management gap: Landscape ecology in practice on public lands in the western United States

The field of landscape ecology has grown and matured in recent decades, but incorporating landscape science into land management decisions remains challenging. Many lands in the western United States are federally owned and managed for multiple uses, including recreation, conservation, and energy development. We argue for stronger integration of landscape science into the management of these public lands. We open by outlining the relevance of landscape science for public land planning, management, and environmental effects analysis, including pertinent laws and policies. We identify challenges to integrating landscape science into public land management, including the multijurisdictional nature and complicated spatial pattern of public lands, the capacity of agencies to identify and fill landscape science needs, and public perceptions about the meaning of landscape approaches to management. We provide several recent examples related to landscape monitoring, restoration, reclamation, and conservation in which landscape science products were developed specifically to support decision-making. We close by highlighting three actions - elevating the importance of science-management partnerships dedicated to coproducing actionable landscape science products, identifying where landscape science could foster efficiencies in the land-use planning process, and developing scenario-based landscape models for shrublands - that could improve landscape science support for public land planners and managers.

Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New↗

USGS2018

Greater sage-grouse science (2015–17)—Synthesis and potential management implications

Executive Summary The greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ; hereafter called “sage-grouse”), a species that requires sagebrush (Artemisia spp.), has experienced range-wide declines in its distribution and abundance. These declines have prompted substantial research and management investments to improve the understanding of sage-grouse and its habitats and reverse declines in distribution and population numbers. Over the past two decades, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has responded to eight petitions to list the sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, with the completion of the most recent listing determination in September 2015. At that time, the USFWS determined that the sage-grouse did not warrant a listing, primarily because of the large scale science-based conservation and planning efforts completed or started by Federal, State, local agencies, private landowners, and other entities across the range. The planning efforts culminated in the development of the 2015 Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service Land Use Plan Amendments, which provided regulatory certainty and commitment from Federal land-management agencies to limit, mitigate, and track anthropogenic disturbance and implement other sage-grouse conservation measures. After these policy decisions, the scientific community has continued to refine and expand the knowledge available to inform implementation of management actions, increase the efficiency and effectiveness of those actions, and continue developing an overall understanding of sage-grouse populations, habitat requirements, and their response to human activity and other habitat changes. The development of science has been driven by multiple prioritization documents including the “Greater Sage-Grouse National Research Strategy” (Hanser and Manier, 2013) and, most recently, the “Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy Actionable Science Plan” (Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy Actionable Science Plan Team, 2016). In October 2017, after a review of the 2015 Federal plans relative to State sage-grouse plans, in accordance with Secretarial Order 3353, the BLM issued a notice of intent to consider whether to amend some, all, or none of the 2015 land use plans. At that time, the BLM requested the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to inform this effort through the development of an annotated bibliography of sage-grouse science published since January 2015 and a report that synthesized and outlined the potential management implications of this new science. Development of the annotated bibliography resulted in the identification and summarization of 169 peer-reviewed scientific publications and reports. The USGS then convened an interagency team (hereafter referred to as the “team”) to develop this report that focuses on the primary topics of importance to the ongoing management of sage-grouse and their habitats. The team developed this report in a three-step process. First, the team identified six primary topic areas for discussion based on the members’ collective knowledge regarding sage-grouse, their habitats, and threats to either or both. Second, the team reviewed all the material in the “Annotated Bibliography of Scientific Research on Greater Sage-Grouse Published since January 2015” to identify the science that addressed the topics. Third, team members discussed the science related to each topic, evaluated the consistency of the science with existing knowledge before 2015, and summarized the potential management implications of this science. The six primary topics identified by the team were: Multiscale habitat suitability and mapping tools Discrete anthropogenic activities Diffuse activities Fire and invasive species Restoration effectiveness Population estimation and genetics

Open-File Report↗

USGS2017

Science framework for conservation and restoration of the sagebrush biome: Linking the Department of the Interior’s Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy to long-term strategic conservation actions, Part 1. Science basis and applications

The Science Framework is intended to link the Department of the Interior’s Integrated Rangeland Fire Management Strategy with long-term strategic conservation actions in the sagebrush biome. The Science Framework provides a multiscale approach for prioritizing areas for management and determining effective management strategies within the sagebrush biome. The emphasis is on sagebrush (Artemisia spp.) ecosystems and Greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus). The approach provided in the Science Framework links sagebrush ecosystem resilience to disturbance and resistance to nonnative, invasive plant species to species habitat information based on the distribution and abundance of focal species. A geospatial process is presented that overlays information on ecosystem resilience and resistance, species habitats, and predominant threats and that can be used at the mid-scale to prioritize areas for management. A resilience and resistance habitat matrix is provided that can help decisionmakers evaluate risks and determine appropriate management strategies. Prioritized areas and management strategies can be refined by managers and stakeholders at the local scale based on higher resolution data and local knowledge. Decision tools are discussed for determining appropriate management actions for areas that are prioritized for management. Geospatial data, maps, and models are provided through the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) ScienceBase and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Landscape Approach Data Portal. The Science Framework is intended to be adaptive and will be updated as additional data become available on other values and species at risk. It is anticipated that the Science Framework will be widely used to: (1) inform emerging strategies to conserve sagebrush ecosystems, sagebrush dependent species, and human uses of the sagebrush system, and (2) assist managers in prioritizing and planning on-the-ground restoration and mitigation actions across the sagebrush biome.

California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oreg↗

USGS2016

Science framework for the conservation and restoration strategy of DOI secretarial order 3336: Utilizing resilience and resistance concepts to assess threats to sagebrush ecosystems and greater sage-grouse, prioritize conservation and restoration actions, and inform management strategies

The Science Framework for the Conservation and Restoration Strategy of the Department of the Interior, Secretarial Order 3336 (SO 3336), Rangeland Fire Prevention, Management and Restoration, provides a strategic, multiscale approach for prioritizing areas for management and determining effective management strategies across the sagebrush biome. The emphasis of this version is on sagebrush ecosystems and greater sage-grouse. The Science Framework uses a six step process in which sagebrush ecosystem resilience to disturbance and resistance to nonnative, invasive annual grasses is linked to species habitat information based on the distribution and abundance of focal species. The predominant ecosystem and anthropogenic threats are assessed, and a habitat matrix is developed that helps decision makers evaluate risks and determine appropriate management strategies at regional and local scales. Areas are prioritized for management action using a geospatial approach that overlays resilience and resistance, species habitat information, and predominant threats. Decision tools are discussed for determining the suitability of priority areas for management and the most appropriate management actions at regional to local scales. The Science Framework and geospatial crosscut are intended to complement the mitigation strategies associated with the Greater Sage-Grouse Land Use Plan amendments for the Department of the Interior Bureaus, such as the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Forest Service.

Report↗