Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Ecosystem Services”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 811 records · Page 45Linked to original sources
USGS2020

Biological soil crusts in ecological restoration: Emerging research and perspectives

Drylands encompass over 40% of terrestrial ecosystems and face significant anthropogenic degradation causing a loss of ecosystem integrity, services, and deterioration of social‐ecological systems. To combat this degradation, some dryland restoration efforts have focused on the use of biological soil crusts (biocrusts): complex communities of cyanobacteria, algae, lichens, bryophytes, and other organisms living in association with the top millimeters of soil. Biocrusts are common in many ecosystems and especially drylands. They perform a suite of ecosystem functions: stabilizing soil surfaces to prevent erosion, contributing carbon through photosynthesis, fixing nitrogen, and mediating the hydrological cycle in drylands. Biocrusts have emerged as a potential tool in restoration; developing methods to implement effective biocrust restoration has the potential to return many ecosystem functions and services. Although culture‐based approaches have allowed researchers to learn about the biology, physiology, and cultivation of biocrusts, transferring this knowledge to field implementation has been more challenging. A large amount of research has amassed to improve our understanding of biocrust restoration, leaving us at an opportune time to learn from one another and to join approaches for maximum efficacy. The articles in this special issue improve the state of our current knowledge in biocrust restoration, highlighting efforts to effectively restore biocrusts through a variety of different ecosystems, across scales and utilizing a variety of lab and field methods. This collective work provides a useful resource for the scientific community as well as land managers.

Restoration Ecology↗
USGS2013

An integrated multi-criteria scenario evaluation web tool for participatory land-use planning in urbanized areas: The Ecosystem Portfolio Model

Land-use land-cover change is one of the most important and direct drivers of changes in ecosystem functions and services. Given the complexity of the decision-making, there is a need for Internet-based decision support systems with scenario evaluation capabilities to help planners, resource managers and communities visualize, compare and consider trade-offs among the many values at stake in land use planning. This article presents details on an Ecosystem Portfolio Model (EPM) prototype that integrates ecological, socio-economic information and associated values of relevance to decision-makers and stakeholders. The EPM uses a multi-criteria scenario evaluation framework, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysis and spatially-explicit land-use/land-cover change-sensitive models to characterize changes in important land-cover related ecosystem values related to ecosystem services and functions, land parcel prices, and community quality-of-life (QoL) metrics. Parameters in the underlying models can be modified through the interface, allowing users in a facilitated group setting to explore simultaneously issues of scientific uncertainty and divergence in the preferences of stakeholders. One application of the South Florida EPM prototype reported in this article shows the modeled changes (which are significant) in aggregate ecological value, landscape patterns and fragmentation, biodiversity potential and ecological restoration potential for current land uses compared to the 2050 land-use scenario. Ongoing refinements to EPM, and future work especially in regard to modifiable sea level rise scenarios are also discussed.

Environmental Modelling and Software↗
USGS2024

Climate change

Amphibian ecology and distribution are strongly correlated with climate. Regional patterns of amphibian biodiversity are intimately linked to temperature, evapotranspiration rate, and clines in humidity. While amphibians are and will continue to be adversely affected by recent and projected changes in climate, research suggests that adaptation may happen more slowly than the expected rate of environmental shifts. Here, we review conservation-relevant aspects of both realised and potential impacts of climate change, and outline options for amphibian conservation planning and management. Recent advances in our understanding of climate change impacts on amphibians have primarily stemmed from ecological modelling and direct assessment of climatic tolerances and dispersal capacities through physiological assays, landscape genetics, and dispersal tracking. Anthropogenic climate change has already altered amphibian assemblages and their impacts on ecosystem functioning and services. Because of known and hypothesised ecological tolerances, many amphibians might have reached or exceeded most limits in their ability to adapt to or tolerate further climate change, however the uncertainties are substantial. Implementation of conservation planning and action can help to forestall severe impacts of environmental shifts. Scientific research and science-based decision-making and policy development have already lagged; the current pace of conservation planning and action may not allow for effective identification of threats and mitigation. An increased response rate could help to avert further loss of amphibian biodiversity and decay of ecosystem services. The lack of basic field research in natural habitats continues to be an underlying challenge. We suggest priority areas of research to include the development of biologically realistic predictive models of amphibian response to climate change, field verification of model estimates and key parameters, population monitoring across multiple sites and taxa, and a combination of efforts within and across ecosystems to understand how impacts of climate change can be better mitigated.

Book chapter↗
USGS2026

Understanding the links between functional performance and environment in cold desert ecosystems through the flagship biocrust forming moss Syntrichia caninervis

Background and aims Biocrust communities shape the soil surface in drylands, regulating important ecosystem properties. Despite this, few works address key functional attributes in these poikilohydric photosynthetic communities, including the length of metabolic activity in the field and its relationship with microclimate. We aim to disentangle the links between functional performance of a keystone biocrust species and environment in drylands, in order to better understand ecosystem functioning and services provided to the soil by these organisms. Methods We developed a 23 months monitoring experiment using very high resolution measurements of chlorophyll a fluorescence and microclimate in the field, comparing habitats with soils of different particle size composition and microclimatic conditions for the flagship biocrust moss Syntrichia caninervis on the Colorado Plateau, Utah, USA. Results While growing in soils of different composition did not impair the functional performance of the species, the sun/shade plasticity did affect key physiological attributes. Our results quantified a strategy based on avoidance of the most extreme environmental conditions, where metabolic activity only occur during 19.9% of the total time monitored. Relative humidity was the best microclimatic predictor of metabolic activity, and the annual length of metabolically active periods showed strong convergences with other drylands of the world. Conclusions These results collectively suggest a strong control of the environment over the ecosystem services provided by biocrusts. Our results include evidence for an improved understanding of the plasticity of S. caninervis to its variety of habitats, and its response to potential threats under different climate change scenarios.

Utah↗
USGS2015

Management applications of discontinuity theory

Human impacts on the environment are multifaceted and can occur across distinct spatiotemporal scales. Ecological responses to environmental change are therefore difficult to predict, and entail large degrees of uncertainty. Such uncertainty requires robust tools for management to sustain ecosystem goods and services and maintain resilient ecosystems. We propose an approach based on discontinuity theory that accounts for patterns and processes at distinct spatial and temporal scales, an inherent property of ecological systems. Discontinuity theory has not been applied in natural resource management and could therefore improve ecosystem management because it explicitly accounts for ecological complexity. Synthesis and applications . We highlight the application of discontinuity approaches for meeting management goals. Specifically, discontinuity approaches have significant potential to measure and thus understand the resilience of ecosystems, to objectively identify critical scales of space and time in ecological systems at which human impact might be most severe, to provide warning indicators of regime change, to help predict and understand biological invasions and extinctions and to focus monitoring efforts. Discontinuity theory can complement current approaches, providing a broader paradigm for ecological management and conservation.

Journal of Applied Ecology↗
USGS2015

Beyond just sea-level rise: Considering macroclimatic drivers within coastal wetland vulnerability assessments to climate change

Due to their position at the land-sea interface, coastal wetlands are vulnerable to many aspects of climate change. However, climate change vulnerability assessments for coastal wetlands generally focus solely on sea-level rise without considering the effects of other facets of climate change. Across the globe and in all ecosystems, macroclimatic drivers (e.g., temperature and rainfall regimes) greatly influence ecosystem structure and function. Macroclimatic drivers have been the focus of climate-change related threat evaluations for terrestrial ecosystems, but largely ignored for coastal wetlands. In some coastal wetlands, changing macroclimatic conditions are expected to result in foundation plant species replacement, which would affect the supply of certain ecosystem goods and services and could affect ecosystem resilience. As examples, we highlight several ecological transition zones where small changes in macroclimatic conditions would result in comparatively large changes in coastal wetland ecosystem structure and function. Our intent in this communication is not to minimize the importance of sea-level rise. Rather, our overarching aim is to illustrate the need to also consider macroclimatic drivers within vulnerability assessments for coastal wetlands.

Global Change Biology↗
USGS2023

Enhancing the predictability of ecology in a changing world: A call for an organism-based approach

Ecology is usually very good in making descriptive explanations of what is observed, but is often unable to make predictions of the response of ecosystems to change. This has implications in a human-dominated world where a suite of anthropogenic stresses are threatening the resilience and functioning of ecosystems that sustain mankind through a range of critical regulating and supporting services. In ecosystems, cause-and-effect relationships are difficult to elucidate because of complex networks of negative and positive feedbacks. Therefore, being able to effectively predict when and where ecosystems could pass into different (and potentially unstable) new states is vitally important under rapid global change. Here, we argue that such better predictions may be reached if we focus on organisms instead of species, because organisms are the principal biotic agents in ecosystems that react directly on changes in their environment. Several studies show that changes in ecosystems may be accurately described as the result of changes in organisms and their interactions. Organism-based theories are available that are simple and derived from first principles, but allow many predictions. Of these we discuss Trait-based Ecology, Agent Based Models, and Maximum Entropy Theory of Ecology and show that together they form a logical sequence of approaches that allow organism-based studies of ecological communities. Combining and extending them makes it possible to predict the spatiotemporal distribution of groups of organisms in terms of how metabolic energy is distributed over areas, time, and resources. We expect that this “Organism-based Ecology” (OE) ultimately will improve our ability to predict ecosystem dynamics.

Frontiers in Applied Mathematics and Statistics↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey ecosystems science strategy—Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Executive Summary Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policymakers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, regional, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and nonrenewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decisionmaking is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and wellbeing of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decisionmakers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decisionmakers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge, and it integrates ecosystem science and decisionmaking, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. We envision the USGS as a leader in integrating scientific information into decisionmaking processes that affect the Nation’s natural resources and human well-being. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play a pivotal role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the Bureau can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the Department of the Interior (DOI) and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and applying the results. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected components that reinforce our vision of the USGS providing science that is at the forefront of decisionmaking: Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decisionmaking about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. Support decisionmaking. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the four strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific USGS activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role in guiding sound decisionmaking during the next decade by advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Circular↗
USGS2012

The U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystem Science Strategy, 2012-2022 - Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policy-makers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, state, tribal, territorial, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and non-renewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decision-making is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and well-being of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decision-makers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that USGS scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decision-makers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge. The strategy integrates ecosystem science and decision-making, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play an important role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the agency can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the DOI and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and its application. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework and vision for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected and reinforcing components: • Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. • Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. • Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. • Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decision-making about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. • Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: • Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. • Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. • Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. • Support decision-making. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct both discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role over the next decade in advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2015

Guidelines for evaluating performance of oyster habitat restoration

Restoration of degraded ecosystems is an important societal goal, yet inadequate monitoring and the absence of clear performance metrics are common criticisms of many habitat restoration projects. Funding limitations can prevent adequate monitoring, but we suggest that the lack of accepted metrics to address the diversity of restoration objectives also presents a serious challenge to the monitoring of restoration projects. A working group with experience in designing and monitoring oyster reef projects was used to develop standardized monitoring metrics, units, and performance criteria that would allow for comparison among restoration sites and projects of various construction types. A set of four universal metrics (reef areal dimensions, reef height, oyster density, and oyster size–frequency distribution) and a set of three universal environmental variables (water temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen) are recommended to be monitored for all oyster habitat restoration projects regardless of their goal(s). In addition, restoration goal-based metrics specific to four commonly cited ecosystem service-based restoration goals are recommended, along with an optional set of seven supplemental ancillary metrics that could provide information useful to the interpretation of prerestoration and postrestoration monitoring data. Widespread adoption of a common set of metrics with standardized techniques and units to assess well-defined goals not only allows practitioners to gauge the performance of their own projects but also allows for comparison among projects, which is both essential to the advancement of the field of oyster restoration and can provide new knowledge about the structure and ecological function of oyster reef ecosystems.

Restoration Ecology↗
USGS2019

Modeling effects of crop production, energy development and conservation-grassland loss on avian habitat

Birds are essential components of most ecosystems and provide many services valued by society. However, many populations have undergone striking declines as their habitats have been lost or degraded by human activities. Terrestrial grasslands are vital habitat for birds in the North American Prairie Pothole Region (PPR), but grassland conversion and fragmentation from agriculture and energy-production activities have destroyed or degraded millions of hectares. Conservation grasslands can provide alternate habitat. In the United States, the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is the largest program maintaining conservation grasslands on agricultural lands, but conservation grasslands in the PPR have declined by over 1 million ha since the program’s zenith in 2007. We used an ecosystem-services model (InVEST) parameterized for the PPR to quantify grassland-bird habitat remaining in 2014 and to assess the degradation status of the remaining grassland-bird habitat as influenced by crop and energy (i.e., oil, natural gas, and wind) production. We compared our resultant habitat-quality ratings to grassland-bird abundance data from the North American Breeding Bird Survey to confirm that ratings were related to grassland-bird abundance. Of the grassland-bird habitat remaining in 2014, about 19% was degraded by crop production that occurred within 0.1 km of grassland habitats, whereas energy production degraded an additional 16%. We further quantified the changes in availability of grassland-bird habitat under various land-cover scenarios representing incremental losses (10%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100%) of CRP grasslands from 2014 levels. Our model identified 1 million ha (9%) of remaining grassland-bird habitat in the PPR that would be lost or degraded if all CRP conservation grasslands were returned to crop production. Grassland regions world-wide face similar challenges in maintaining avian habitat in the face of increasing commodity and energy production to sate the food and energy needs of a growing world population. Identifying ways to model the impacts of the tradeoff between food and energy production and wildlife production is an important step in creating solutions.

Prairie Pothole Region↗
USGS2013

Biodiversity losses and conservation trade-offs: Assessing future urban growth scenarios for a North American trade corridor

The Sonoran Desert and Apache Highlands ecoregions of North America are areas of exceptionally high plant and vertebrate biodiversity. However, much of the vertebrate biodiversity is supported by only a few vegetation types with limited distributions, some of which are increasingly threatened by changing land uses. We assessed the impacts of two future urban growth scenarios on biodiversity in a binational watershed in Arizona, USA and Sonora, Mexico. We quantified and mapped terrestrial vertebrate species richness using Wildlife Habitat Relation models and validated the results with data from National Park Service biological inventories. Future urban growth, based on historical trends, was projected to the year 2050 for 1) a “Current Trends” scenario and, 2) a “Megalopolis” scenario that represented a transnational growth corridor with open-space conservation attributes. Based on Current Trends, 45% of existing riparian woodland (267 of 451species), and 34% of semi-desert grasslands (215 of 451 species) will be lost, whereas, in the Megalopolis scenario, these types would decline by 44% and 24% respectively. Outcomes of the two models suggest a trade-off at the taxonomic class level: Current Trends would reduce and fragment mammal and herpetofauna habitat, while Megalopolis would result in loss of avian-rich riparian habitat.

International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Eco↗
USGS2023

Hydrogeomorphic changes along mid-Atlantic coastal plain rivers transitioning from non-tidal to tidal: Implications for a rising sea level

Sea level rise is affecting reaches of coastal rivers by increasing water levels and propagating tides inland. The transition of river systems into tidal estuaries has been neglected in hydrogeomorphic studies. A better understanding of transitioning reaches is critical to understanding ecosystem dynamics, services, and developing predictive capabilities of change as sea levels rise. We hypothesized that river-floodplain morphology changes from fluvial to tidally dominated regimes, changing suspended sediment concentrations (SSC), sediment deposition, vegetation, and landforms. We tested this using lidar, satellite imagery, and SSC and conductivity measurements along two Coastal Plain rivers of Virginia, USA. Geomorphic channel and floodplain parameters indicated breakpoints into three regimes: fluvial, mixed, and tidal. Maximum channel width occurred with minimum floodplain widths in the mixed regime. Tidal freshwater forests had considerable elevational overlap with marshes but typically were 9.5 cm higher. SSC increased with shoal width through the mixed reaches, with maxima in the tidal reaches where estuarine influences increased. Channel erosion rates indicated that modern sediment loads and hydrology produce slow changes to channel planform and geomorphology that may not be apparent from visual comparisons. Our findings indicated that tidal floodplain forests and marshes in the mixed and tidal reaches are expected to convert to marshes or open water as sea levels rise as limited gradual sloping area exists between the active floodplain and terraces. Tidal floodplain surfaces along mixed hydrology reaches, inland of the estuarine turbidity maximum may be expected to convert to open water while inland sloping floodplains could support tidal wetland migration.

Virginia↗
USGS2018

Improving confidence by embracing uncertainty: A meta-analysis of U.S. hunting values for benefit transfer

Recreational hunting in the United States has traditional and cultural importance, and generates substantial economic benefits to individual hunters themselves. This paper conducts a meta-analysis of existing nonmarket valuation estimates for hunting in the United States to explore sources and implications of variation and uncertainty in these estimates. A multi-level meta-regression model is estimated to forecast point estimates for different hunting contexts, as well as to construct bounds of uncertainty around these estimates. The results and discussion provide insight to practitioners who need to conduct or understand benefit transfer, as well as those particularly interested in the value of hunting in the U.S.

Ecosystem Services↗
USGS2020

Accounting for land in the United States: Integrating physical land cover, land use, and monetary valuation

Land plays a critical role in both economic and environmental accounting. As an asset, it occupies a unique position at the intersection of the System of National Accounts (SNA), the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting Central Framework (SEEA-CF), and (as a spatial unit) SEEA Experimental Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA-EEA), making land a natural starting point for developing natural capital accounts more generally. We develop a pilot set of national and subnational land accounts for the United States that are consistent with the SEEA-CF and SNA principles, quantified in both physical and monetary terms. The physical accounts utilize detailed land use (National Land Use Database) and land cover (National Land Cover Database) datasets, which provide insights into how land cover in the U.S. is changing over time. To provide aggregate estimates of land values, we use a hedonic approach that exploits fine-grain microdata (“big data” from Zillow) that contains detailed information from hundreds of millions of property transactions and their corresponding physical characteristics covering much of the U.S. Methodologically, we show that it is feasible to produce monetary accounts for land that can be directly linked to and integrated with physical land cover/use. Overall, U.S. land cover has shown declines in forests, cropland, and pasture with increases in barren, scrub/shrub, and developed classes, which are particularly concentrated in the U.S. Southeast. Nominal land values in the U.S. fell about 28% ($7 trillion) from the boom to bust periods in the prior decade, albeit with substantial regional variation, and have subsequently experienced a nearly full recovery in recent years. We estimate private land in the contiguous 48 states to be worth approximately $25.1 trillion in 2016.

Ecosystem Services↗
USGS2025

The Benefits Knowledges Learning Framework: A tool for learning across diverse knowledge systems in ecosystem valuation

Sustainable and just environmental management depends on meaningful consideration of the plural values of nature, as they arise in association with diverse worldviews and understandings of well-being. To achieve value pluralism in decision-making, we must also attend to knowledge pluralism, in terms of recognizing the validity and decision relevance of a broader suite of knowledge forms that convey diverse understandings of well-being and benefit. In this article, we outline a social learning tool – the Benefits Knowledges Learning Framework – that supports expanded thinking about decision-relevant, actionable knowledge, and the associated spectrum of available opportunities to learn from these diverse knowledge forms across phases of decision-making. It does so through: 1) cultivation of reflexivity and mutual learning about the knowledge systems of diverse actors involved in the decision process; 2) identification of diverse benefits knowledge forms that are available to inform decision-making; and 3) identification of opportunities to learn from these knowledge forms. Diverse forms of benefits knowledge include both knowledge products (documentation) and knowledge practices (lived and embodied). The framework can be applied to retrospective case analysis to understand and learn from constraints and enabling factors in past decision processes. It can also be applied to assess on-going decision-making and identify current opportunities for improvement. The framework begins with a start-up phase that encourages those applying the framework to address any concerns raised by stakeholders and rightsholders and determine whether framework application is appropriate in a particular context.

Washington↗
USGS2024

Potential 2050 distributions of World Terrestrial Ecosystems from projections of changes in World Climate Regions and Global Land Cover

The urgency to address ecosystem loss is paramount, as both land use change and climate change will continue to rapidly alter and degrade natural ecosystems and reduce the many services they provide. To support conservation actions that mitigate impacts from these dual threats, we have developed potential World Terrestrial Ecosystem (WTE) distributions for 2050 following IPCC best practice guidelines. This projection of ecosystem distributions builds on the previously released 2015 WTEs, a snapshot of the distribution and conservation status of 431 terrestrial ecosystem types defined as distinct combinations of 18 global climate regions, 4 global landform classes, and 8 global vegetation/land cover classes. Extending that work herein, we modeled the potential 2050 WTE distributions based on projections of five CMIP6 general circulation models (GCMs) and one global land cover change model, determined for three shared socioeconomic pathway (SSP) scenarios. The climate region modeling included projections for 2050 for both mean annual temperature and mean annual aridity. Model agreement for changes to WTEs was generally high, particularly for temperature projections. Widespread changes in ecosystem classes due to shifts in climate settings and/or land cover between 2015 and 2050 were projected, with both the magnitude and specific geography of projected change largely governed by the SSP scenario. For the three SSP scenarios (sustainable development, regional rivalry, and fossil-fueled development), geographic changes in climate setting (temperature, aridity, or both) and/or changes in vegetation/land cover are projected for 29 %, 36 %, and 39 % of Earth’s terrestrial surface, respectively. These changes occur in areas where 31 %, 36 %, and 41 % of the global population lives. Projected changes in ecosystem distributions related to temperature change are approximately an order of magnitude greater than for aridity change. By offering insight into potential ecosystem changes, this new resource is intended to facilitate conservation planning and priority setting aimed at improved conservation of biodiversity and ecosystem services.

Global Ecology and Conservation↗