Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Robert Newman

Publications and source records attributed to Robert Newman.

5 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2023

Reimagining large river management using the Resist–Accept–Direct (RAD) framework in the Upper Mississippi River

Background Large-river decision-makers are charged with maintaining diverse ecosystem services through unprecedented social-ecological transformations as climate change and other global stressors intensify. The interconnected, dendritic habitats of rivers, which often demarcate jurisdictional boundaries, generate complex management challenges. Here, we explore how the Resist–Accept–Direct (RAD) framework may enhance large-river management by promoting coordinated and deliberate responses to social-ecological trajectories of change. The RAD framework identifies the full decision space of potential management approaches, wherein managers may resist change to maintain historical conditions, accept change toward different conditions, or direct change to a specified future with novel conditions. In the Upper Mississippi River System, managers are facing social-ecological transformations from more frequent and extreme high-water events. We illustrate how RAD-informed basin-, reach-, and site-scale decisions could: (1) provide cross-spatial scale framing; (2) open the entire decision space of potential management approaches; and (3) enhance coordinated inter-jurisdictional management in response to the trajectory of the Upper Mississippi River hydrograph. Results The RAD framework helps identify plausible long-term trajectories in different reaches (or subbasins) of the river and how the associated social-ecological transformations could be managed by altering site-scale conditions. Strategic reach-scale objectives may reprioritize how, where, and when site conditions could be altered to contribute to the basin goal, given the basin’s plausible trajectories of change (e.g., by coordinating action across sites to alter habitat connectivity, diversity, and redundancy in the river mosaic). Conclusions When faced with long-term systemic transformations (e.g., > 50 years), the RAD framework helps explicitly consider whether or when the basin vision or goals may no longer be achievable, and direct options may open yet unconsidered potential for the basin. Embedding the RAD framework in hierarchical decision-making clarifies that the selection of actions in space and time should be derived from basin-wide goals and reach-scale objectives to ensure that site-scale actions contribute effectively to the larger river habitat mosaic. Embedding the RAD framework in large-river decisions can provide the necessary conduit to link flexibility and innovation at the site scale with stability at larger scales for adaptive governance of changing social-ecological systems.

Upper Mississippi River↗
USGS2022

Voluntary Guidance for States to Incorporate Climate Adaptation in State Wildlife Action Plans and Other Management Plans

The Voluntary Guidance for States to Incorporate Climate Adaptation into State Wildlife Actions Plans and other Management Plans aims to help state fish and wildlife agencies incorporate climate change adaptation for fish and wildlife and their habitats into State Wildlife Action Plans (SWAPs) and other natural resource management plans. This update to the original 2009 Voluntary Guidance reflects the advancements in climate science and in our understanding and implementation of climate adaptation developed over the past 13 years. The document provides principles and tools that can be used to plan for and implement climate change adaptation, voluntary guidance for incorporating climate change into the existing required elements of SWAPs, and case studies to demonstrate adaptation strategies deployed by states in their management efforts. Climate change continues to be a significant issue for wildlife and natural systems and for the people who rely on the ecosystem services they provide. There is now a well-established and growing scientific literature on the impacts of climate change on wildlife and their habitats, including climate-driven range shifts, population changes, and even species extinctions. At the same time, efforts to address climate change impacts can be made in cooperation with efforts to address other threats, including habitat loss/fragmentation from development, introduction of invasive species, water pollution, and wildlife diseases, many of which may be exacerbated by climate change. Since climate change is a complex and often politically charged issue, it is understood that the decision to revise SWAPs, or other plans, to address climate change rests solely with each state fish and wildlife agency. All states are required to update their SWAPs by 2025 to qualify for federal funding. Although consideration of climate change is not a requirement for this revision of SWAPs, assessing the impacts of climate change and identifying species and habitats vulnerable to those impacts can help states meet the required eight elements for the revision and prepare for funding opportunities that can support climate adaptation efforts. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 and the Recovering America’s Wildlife Act, if passed by the Senate, would provide billions of dollars to states to implement SWAPs, including addressing climate change impacts on fish and wildlife. The Voluntary Guidance Document introduces and explains seven overarching principles for incorporating climate adaptation into SWAPs. These principles (found in Chapter 2) are: 1. Fully integrate climate change into SWAPs 2. Adopt forward-looking goals 3. Explicitly link actions to climate vulnerabilities 4. Manage for change, not just persistence 5. Consider broader landscapes and longer timeframes 6. Address uncertainty by considering future scenarios and use of adaptive management 7. Engage diverse partners with climate experience and expertise

Report↗
USGS2021

Managing for RADical ecosystem change: Applying the Resist-Accept-Direct (RAD) framework

Ecosystem transformation involves the emergence of persistent ecological or social–ecological systems that diverge, dramatically and irreversibly, from prior ecosystem structure and function. Such transformations are occurring at increasing rates across the planet in response to changes in climate, land use, and other factors. Consequently, a dynamic view of ecosystem processes that accommodates rapid, irreversible change will be critical for effectively conserving fish, wildlife, and other natural resources, and maintaining ecosystem services. However, managing ecosystems toward states with novel structure and function is an inherently unpredictable and difficult task. Managers navigating ecosystem transformation can benefit from considering broader objectives, beyond a traditional focus on resisting ecosystem change, by also considering whether accepting inevitable change or directing it along some desirable pathway is more feasible (that is, practical and appropriate) under some circumstances (the RAD framework). By explicitly acknowledging transformation and implementing an iterative RAD approach, natural resource managers can be deliberate and strategic in addressing profound ecosystem change.

Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment↗
USGS2019

Seasonal home ranges and habitat selection of three elk (Cervus elaphus) herds in North Dakota

Changes in land use have resulted in range shifts of many wildlife species, including those entering novel environments, resulting in the critical need to understand their spatial ecology to inform ecosystem effects and management decisions. Dispersing elk ( Cervus elaphus ) were colonizing areas of suitable habitat in the Northern Great Plains, USA, resulting in crop depredation complaints in these areas. Although state resource managers had little information on these elk herds, limited evidence suggested temporal movements into Canada. We collected and analyzed essential information on home range and habitat selection for 3 elk herds residing in North Dakota. We captured 5 adult female elk in each study area, affixed global positioning system collars, and monitored them for 1 year (2016–2017). We estimated diel period, seasonal, and hunting season home ranges using Brownian Bridge Movement Models for each individual. We analyzed habitat selection using multinomial logit models to test for differences in use of land classes, and for departures from proportionate use based on random sampling; our predictor variables included individual elk, diel period, and season. Home ranges differed between the 3 herds, seasons, and diel period; gun and winter season home ranges were both larger than in summer, as was night when compared with day. Female elk generally restricted themselves to cover during the day and entered open areas at night and during winter months. Our results also suggest that elk in our study areas tended to seek more cover, and in the case of our Turtle Mountain study area, some cross into Canada during gun season. Our study provides a better understanding of the spatial ecology of elk in the Northern Great Plains while highlighting the need for enhanced international cooperative management efforts.

North Dakota↗