DOCSLIB.ORG

Threat-Based Land Management in the Northern Great Basin

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Threat-Based Land Management in the Northern Great Basin 23. Understanding Threats Threat-Based Land Juniper Juniper Expansion Threat Dual Management in the • Generally above 5,500 ft. • Enough moisture for juniper Dual Threat • Cool enough to suppress invasive IAG annual grasses • Generally 4,000 - 5,000 ft. Northern Great Basin: • Mountain big sagebrush is the • Enough moisture for juniper dominant shrub • Warm enough to risk invasion by invasive annual grasses Exotic Annual Grass • Mountain and Wyoming sagebrush are Invasion Threat the dominant shrubs • Generally below 4,000 ft. A Field Guide • Too dry for juniper • High risk of invasion by invasive annual grasses • Wyoming big sagebrush is the dominant shrub Juniper Exp ansion T hreat Ex oti c A nnu al G rass In vasion Threat 32. Understand States: See Back 42. Choose Map Unit Scale & Delineate States Now it’s time to delineate states. Use the back of this guide to determine states and the examples in this panel to help decide at which scale to map. The appropriate scale for mapping states depends on your management objectives – there is no perfect answer. Map units should be small enough to feasibly manage, and large enough for management to matter in meeting objectives. A Tale of Two Pastures: An Example Comparing Management and Mapping Identify States Pasture 1 Objective: Manage pasture for Pasture 2 Objective: Improve maximum forage yield by containing pasture for sage-grouse habitat Managing a complex world at juniper and aggressively controlling annual by removing encroaching grasses. Maintaining sagebrush cover is a juniper and maintaining secondary priority to improving forage. sagebrush cover. feasible, relevant scales Address Consider Objectives Scale Mapping is an iterative process. Consider Juniper objectives, site and scale collectively. Use remote sensing to estimate map units and dedicate field time to important or Pasture 1: Only the densest stand of juniper ambiguous units. is mapped as State C-Dual because diffuse juniper are not currently impacting forage quality. Pasture 2: A much larger State C-Dual unit is mapped to include all diffuse juniper, as any juniper is a problem for C-Dual sage-grouse. Invasive Pasture 1 Annual Grasses C-Dual Before Using this Guide You Should Know A Pasture 1: Small stands of State D-IAG are mapped within a State A matrix. The high-priority D-IAG Sagebrush ecosystems in the Northern Great With this method, users map simplified ecological A placed on controlling annuals justifies Basin face existential threats from invasive states and estimate future trend. Broad ranges of Pasture 2 the time and effort to map small units. annual grasses and expanding conifers. Land vegetation and environmental conditions can be managers need to work at large spatial scales to mapped with the same state if faced with similar C-IAG Pasture 2: As in the other pasture there are small annual grass patches, but they are address these two ecological threats, but have threats. Understanding plant communities and included together in a larger State C-IAG limited resources to do so. tracking true change over time requires detailed and because sage-grouse can tolerate small areas repeated monitoring. of annual grasses if most of the habitat is This guide provides a framework for land otherwise suitable. managers to efficiently identify, discuss and This decision-support system directly supports address landscape-level threats. This guide is a management objectives. Establishing your objectives decision-support system. It is not an instruction is the first step to using this guide. manual. 54. Determine Apparent Trend Steps for State Classification and Management Use these factors collectively to determine the apparent trend of a site. Apparent trend will help you determine what monitoring or actions are needed, if any. Decide if the trend is Upward, Stable, Downward, or Unclear. Unclear trends will likely require addition monitoring. Establish your management objectives: Do this Understand states: Use the decision tree, 0 before using this guide, all other steps follow photographs, and illustrations on the back of this from your objectives. Clearly stated objectives 3 guide to understand and differentiate states. will help you make key scale and management Recognize that reality will be more complex than Indicators Indicators Estimating Apparent Trend Apparent decisions. the detail used in this framework. of of Stable (Consider all factors together downward Downward Management objectives specify the overall Choose the appropriate scale and delineate or Upward to determine trend) trend Trend desired outcome achieved by addressing a 4 states: Mapping is difficult and subjective. The Trend threat. The Bureau of Land Management size of an individual map unit depends on the provides a good resource to begin writing total scale of your specific landscape and on your management objectives - a QR link is at the management objectives. Choose map units that Factor 1 bottom right of this guide. are large enough to matter, but small enough to Large perennial If shrubs are present, what Invasive annual manage. There is no perfect answer. bunchgrasses grasses Familiarize yourself with functional groups: functional group occupies the 1 This guide uses plant functional groups and Determine apparent trend: Assess the apparent shrub interspaces? simplified vegetation patterns to identify states. 5 trend of each state as upward, downward, stable OR or unclear. Consider all factors together. Apparent Understand threats and states: Environmental trend is a snapshot estimate of how the plant If shrubs are largely absent, Invasive annual factors drive juniper encroachment and annual community may change in the future. Bare ground, litter, what occupies the interspaces 2 grasses grass invasion. The resistance and resilience of desired forbs between bunchgrasses? a site will change how threats are expressed. Identify management actions: Assign management actions to each state based on its 6 apparent trend. Be sure to describe how management actions will achieve management Factor 2 objectives. No Are juniper seedlings present? Yes (If juniper threat is present) 1 Factor 3 1. Relevant Ecology Assess apparent recruitment: Yes Are multiple age classes of No desired vegetation present? Using functional groups improves monitoring efficiency, reduces observer error and eases sampling timing. Functional groups make visually evaluating vegetation state and apparent trend feasible over large areas. We include seven functional groups in our models based on southeastern Oregon, but these groupings may vary across the range of this Factor 4 vast biome. Assess potential bunchgrass No wildfire mortality: Are most LPBG Yes underneath shrub canopies? Large Perennial Small Perennial Bunchgrasses Bunchgrasses (LPBG) are the (SPBG) primarily refers to Factor 5 glue that holds the western Yes – Forage demand No – Forage demand Sandberg’s bluegrass, a low-stat- Does timing, intensity and sagebrush steppe together. ured and early-growing species is in balance with consistently duration of grazing promote LPBG root masses bind soil in common across the western supply exceeding supply desirable vegetation? place, effectively compete with sagebrush steppe. SPBG can annual grasses and provide dominate in harsh, shallow soil forage and habitat for wildlife. sites or where heavy continuous Key species include bluebunch grazing has reduced other wheatgrass, Idaho fescue, bunchgrasses. Despite often needlegrasses and squirreltail. occurring at high densities, SPBG have shallow root systems and do 6 not compete as effectively with 5. Management Actions annual grasses. Annual Forbs (AF) are generally small-statured plants with highly Select and prioritize management actions for each site based on the state, apparent trend, and management objectives. variable productivity depending on The example below shows how a user might manage for increasing the resistance and resilience of a site. year and site conditions. Common Perennial Forbs (PF) are a large, species include blue-eyed Mary diverse and variable group and (Collinsia sp.) and alyssum are important for wildlife habitat (Alyssum sp.). Large amounts of and forage. The aster family, as AF, especially of introduced well as lupines and paintbrushes A B B C C D E species can indicate a depleted are particularly abundant. understory. This category does not Stable Upward Downward Stable Downward Downward Downward include weeds such as yellow star-thistle which should be mapped and managed on a Prioritized for Recovery is very difficult Sagebrush includes several species-specific basis. Protection and and may require multiple species and subspecies. Two subspecies of big sagebrush are Maintenance and repeated actions the most abundant - Wyoming and mountain. Identifying Invasive Annual Grasses (IAG), subspecies of sagebrush can Protect and maintain bunchgrasses including cheatgrass, help understand site potential, medusahead and ventenata, are resilience and restoration species that can fundamentally practices. Other shrub species alter vegetation communities by can help identify past land use Prevent fire replacing native grasses, history and site potential. For dramatically increasing fire example, a high proportion of frequency and leading to a loss of rabbitbrush may indicate past sagebrush and perennial cover. disturbance, or greasewood may Address improper grazing indicate saline soil conditions. Conifers include tree species that Revegetate are encroaching on historically sagebrush treeless sagebrush steppe.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Great Basin Landscape Conservation Cooperative
    September 2010 The Great Basin Landscape Conservation Cooperative What is a Landscape Conservation The Great Basin Landscape Cooperative? Conservation Cooperative Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) are applied science and management partnerships between Interior Department bureaus and others involved in natural resource management and What is the Great Basin LCC? conservation. Secretarial Order No. 3289, issued on Sept. 14, 2009 The Great Basin LCC will be a self-directed partnership. The by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, calls for the establishment of 21 Great Basin LCC will provide a range of scientific and technical LCCs nationwide to better integrate science and management to support tools for landscape-scale conservation design to a wide address climate change and related issues array of managers. These tools will help managers identify and target biological objectives for native species and habitats in the What will the Great Basin LCC do? face of climate change and other stressors. Open public access to In broad terms, the Great Basin LCC will help link and integrate Great Basin LCC products will promote acceptance and use of Interior’s proposed Climate Science Centers with resource managers the science in regional conservation strategies. This effort is being and science users; will bring additional Interior resources to bear on coordinated with other regional partnerships and will be set up in landscape-scale issues and opportunities; and will help in applying a manner that will facilitate coordination and the identification science and facilitating coordination on a wide range of efforts of needs, capacities and gaps. We will link our efforts to bring to respond to climate change, invasive species, wildfires, human additional science capacity to improve conservation strategies development and other change agents across the Great Basin.
    [Show full text]
  • The Diffusion of Maize to the Southwestern United States and Its Impact
    PERSPECTIVE The diffusion of maize to the southwestern United States and its impact William L. Merrilla, Robert J. Hardb,1, Jonathan B. Mabryc, Gayle J. Fritzd, Karen R. Adamse, John R. Roneyf, and A. C. MacWilliamsg aDepartment of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, P.O. Box 37102, Washington, DC 20013-7012; bDepartment of Anthropology, One UTSA Circle, University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX 78249; cHistoric Preservation Office, City of Tucson, P.O. Box 27210, Tucson, AZ 85726; dDepartment of Anthropology, Campus Box 1114, One Brookings Drive, Washington University, St. Louis, MO 63130; eCrow Canyon Archaeological Center, 23390 Road K, Cortez, CO 81321; fColinas Cultural Resource Consulting, 6100 North 4th Street, Private Mailbox #300, Albuquerque, NM 87107; and gDepartment of Archaeology, 2500 University Drive Northwest, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4 Edited by Linda S. Cordell, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, and approved October 30, 2009 (received for review June 22, 2009) Our understanding of the initial period of agriculture in the southwestern United States has been transformed by recent discoveries that establish the presence of maize there by 2100 cal. B.C. (calibrated calendrical years before the Christian era) and document the processes by which it was integrated into local foraging economies. Here we review archaeological, paleoecological, linguistic, and genetic data to evaluate the hypothesis that Proto-Uto-Aztecan (PUA) farmers migrating from a homeland in Mesoamerica intro- duced maize agriculture to the region. We conclude that this hypothesis is untenable and that the available data indicate instead a Great Basin homeland for the PUA, the breakup of this speech community into northern and southern divisions Ϸ6900 cal.
    [Show full text]
  • Eocene–Early Miocene Paleotopography of the Sierra Nevada–Great Basin–Nevadaplano Based on Widespread Ash-Flow Tuffs and P
    Origin and Evolution of the Sierra Nevada and Walker Lane themed issue Eocene–Early Miocene paleotopography of the Sierra Nevada–Great Basin–Nevadaplano based on widespread ash-fl ow tuffs and paleovalleys Christopher D. Henry1, Nicholas H. Hinz1, James E. Faulds1, Joseph P. Colgan2, David A. John2, Elwood R. Brooks3, Elizabeth J. Cassel4, Larry J. Garside1, David A. Davis1, and Steven B. Castor1 1Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada 89557, USA 2U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California 94025, USA 3California State University, Hayward, California 94542, USA 4Department of Earth and Environment, Franklin & Marshall College, Lancaster, Pennsylvania 17604, USA ABSTRACT the great volume of erupted tuff and its erup- eruption fl owed similar distances as the mid- tion after ~3 Ma of nearly continuous, major Cenozoic tuffs at average gradients of ~2.5–8 The distribution of Cenozoic ash-fl ow tuffs pyroclastic eruptions near its caldera that m/km. Extrapolated 200–300 km (pre-exten- in the Great Basin and the Sierra Nevada of probably fi lled in nearby topography. sion) from the Pacifi c Ocean to the central eastern California (United States) demon- Distribution of the tuff of Campbell Creek Nevada caldera belt, the lower gradient strates that the region, commonly referred and other ash-fl ow tuffs and continuity of would require elevations of only 0.5 km for to as the Nevadaplano, was an erosional paleovalleys demonstrates that (1) the Basin valley fl oors and 1.5 km for interfl uves. The highland that was drained by major west- and Range–Sierra Nevada structural and great eastward, upvalley fl ow is consistent and east-trending rivers, with a north-south topographic boundary did not exist before with recent stable isotope data that indicate paleodivide through eastern Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Salt Lake FAQ June 2013 Natural History Museum of Utah
    Great Salt Lake FAQ June 2013 Natural History Museum of Utah What is the origin of the Great Salt Lake? o After the Lake Bonneville flood, the Great Basin gradually became warmer and drier. Lake Bonneville began to shrink due to increased evaporation. Today's Great Salt Lake is a large remnant of Lake Bonneville, and occupies the lowest depression in the Great Basin. Who discovered Great Salt Lake? o The Spanish missionary explorers Dominguez and Escalante learned of Great Salt Lake from the Native Americans in 1776, but they never actually saw it. The first white person known to have visited the lake was Jim Bridger in 1825. Other fur trappers, such as Etienne Provost, may have beaten Bridger to its shores, but there is no proof of this. The first scientific examination of the lake was undertaken in 1843 by John C. Fremont; this expedition included the legendary Kit Carson. A cross, carved into a rock near the summit of Fremont Island, reportedly by Carson, can still be seen today. Why is the Great Salt Lake salty? o Much of the salt now contained in the Great Salt Lake was originally in the water of Lake Bonneville. Even though Lake Bonneville was fairly fresh, it contained salt that concentrated as its water evaporated. A small amount of dissolved salts, leached from the soil and rocks, is deposited in Great Salt Lake every year by rivers that flow into the lake. About two million tons of dissolved salts enter the lake each year by this means. Where does the Great Salt Lake get its water, and where does the water go? o Great Salt Lake receives water from four main rivers and numerous small streams (66 percent), direct precipitation into the lake (31 percent), and from ground water (3 percent).
    [Show full text]
  • Central Basin and Range Ecoregion
    Status and Trends of Land Change in the Western United States—1973 to 2000 Edited by Benjamin M. Sleeter, Tamara S. Wilson, and William Acevedo U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1794–A, 2012 Chapter 20 Central Basin and Range Ecoregion By Christopher E. Soulard This chapter has been modified from original material Wasatch and Uinta Mountains Ecoregion, on the north by the published in Soulard (2006), entitled “Land-cover trends of Northern Basin and Range and the Snake River Basin Ecore- the Central Basin and Range Ecoregion” (U.S. Geological gions, and on the south by the Mojave Basin and Range and Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5288). the Colorado Plateaus Ecoregions (fig. 1). Most of the Central Basin and Range Ecoregion is located in Nevada (65.4 percent) and Utah (25.1 percent), but small segments are also located Ecoregion Description in Idaho (5.6 percent), California (3.7 percent), and Oregon (0.2 percent). Basin-and-range topography characterizes the The Central Basin and Range Ecoregion (Omernik, 1987; Central Basin and Range Ecoregion: wide desert valleys are U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997) encompasses bordered by parallel mountain ranges generally oriented north- approximately 343,169 km² (132,498 mi2) of land bordered on south. There are more than 33 peaks within the Central Basin the west by the Sierra Nevada Ecoregion, on the east by the and Range Ecoregion that have summits higher than 3,000 m 120° 118° 116° 114° 112° EXPLANATION 42° Land-use/land-cover class Northern Basin ECSF Snake River Basin Water Forest and Range Developed Grassland/Shrubland Transitional Agriculture Mining Wetland MRK Barren Ice/Snow Ecoregion boundary 40° WB Sample block (10 x 10 km) 0 50 100 150 MILES 0 50 100 150 KILOMETERS WUM OREGON IDAHO bo um ld 38° H t R iver Ogden Sparks Reno 80 Sierra Truckee River Lockwood GREAT Tooele Nevada Salt Carson River Lake Walker RiverBASIN City Walker Lake SIERRA NEVADA CCV Mojave DESERT UTAH Basin and Range Colorado NEVADA 36° SCCCOW Plateaus SCM ANMP CALIFORNIA Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Sierra Front-Northwestern Great Basin Resource Advisory Council
    Sierra Front-Northwestern Great Basin Resource Advisory Council Meeting Minutes March 5, 2019 ATTENDANCE BLM Jon Raby, Nevada State Director (By phone) Ester McCullough, Winnemucca District Manager Colleen Dulin, Carson City District Manager Heather O’Hanlan, Winnemucca Public Affairs Specialist Lisa Ross, Carson City Public Affairs Specialist and RAC Coordinator RAC Members: (Name, Employer, Representing, Notes) Matthew Gingerich, NV Energy, Transportation and Rights-of-Way (ROWs), RAC Chair Tim Dufurrena, Livestock Permittee, Grazing, returning RAC member Ben Veach, Civil Engineer, Environmental, transferred from Forest Service RAC Robert Jones, NDOW, State Agency Kyle Snyder, Ormat, Energy & Mineral Ron Kyle, (retired Forest Service), Public at Large Ken Tipton, Humboldt County Commissioner, Recreation Paul Scott, Sprint, ROWs John Ugalde, Livestock Permittee, Dispersed Recreation Pat Irwin, Public at Large (By phone) Jeanne Herman, Washoe County Commissioner, Elected Official (By phone) Non- RAC Members Present: Donovan Walker, Winnemucca District Fire Managing Officer David Kampwerth, Humboldt River Field Office Manager Mark Hall, Black Rock Field Office Manager James (Andy) Boerigter, Black Rock Field Office Assistant Field Manager Derek Messmer, Winnemucca District Fire Fuels Manager Garrett Swisher, Black Rock Field Office Wild Horse and Burro Specialist CALL TO ORDER 8:03 a.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS • Greg Hendricks, former WHB RAC member, shared information regarding Virginia Range fertility control program. They are finishing up the first year of this program and have applied fertility control to approximately 3,000 wild horses. This is the biggest fertility control program in the world. There is be a mini-documentary filming about the project at Patagonia Outlet Store in Reno on March 12, 2020, 7:00 pm.
    [Show full text]
  • Ongoing Paleoclimatic Studies in the Northern Great Basin," Reno, Nevada, May 1993
    CIRC. 1119 U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 1119 Proceedings of the Workshop "Ongoing Paleoclimatic Studies in the Northern Great Basin," Reno, Nevada, May 1993 Proceedings of the Workshop "Ongoing Paleoclimatic Studies in the Northern Great Basin," Reno, Nevada, May 1993 Edited by Larry V. Benson U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR· 1119 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Gordon P. Eaton, Director The use of firm, trade, and brand names in this report is for identification purposes only and does not constitute endorsement by the U.S. Government U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1996 Free on application to the U.S. Geological Survey Information Services Box 25286 Federal Center Denver, CO 80225 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Workshop "Ongoing Paleoclimatic Studies in the Northern Great Basin" (1993: Reno, Nev.) Proceedings of the Workshop "Ongoing Paleoclimatic Studies in the Northern Great Basin," Reno, Nevada, May 1993/ edited by Larry V. Benson. p. em.- (U.S. Geological Survey circular; 1119) Includes index. 1. Paleoclimatology-Great Basin-congresses. 2. Great Basin-climate-Congresses. I. Benson, Larry V. II. Title. Ill. Series QC884.W67 1993 96-29329 551.6979-dc20 CIP PREFACE The workshop "'Ongoing Paleoclimatic Studies in the Northern Great Basin" was jointly sponsored by the U.S. Geological Smvey (USGS), the University ofNevada-Reno (UNR), and the Quaternary Sciences Center (QSC) of the Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada. W. Berry Lyons, chairman of the Hydrology Program (UNR), and Dale Ritter, head of the QSC, chaired the presentations. On May 16, Joseph Smoot, of the USGS, led a field trip along the Truckee River Canyon downstream from Wadsworth, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamental Concepts of Recharge in the Desert Southwest: A
    Water Sci. and Appl. Groundwater Recharge in a Desert Environment: The Southwestern United States Vol. 9 FundamentalConcepts of Rechargein the Desert Southwest: A RegionalModeling Perspective Alan L. Flint, LorraineE. Flint, and JosephA. Hevesi U.S. GeologicalSurvey, Sacramento, California JoanB. Blainey U.S. GeologicalSurvey, Tucson, Arizona Rechargein arid basinsdoes not occur in all years or at all locationswithin a basin.In the desertSouthwest potential evapotranspiration exceeds precipitation on an averageannual basis and, in many basins,on an averagemonthly basis. Groundwatertravel time from the surfaceto the water table and rechargeto the water table vary temporallyand spatiallyowing to variationsin precipitation,air temperature,root zone and soil propertiesand thickness,faults and fractures,and hydrologicproperties of geologicstrata in the unsaturatedzone. To highlightthe fundamentalconcepts controlling recharge in the Southwest,and addressthe tem- poral and spatial variability of recharge, a basin characterizationmodel was developedusing a straightforwardwater balanceapproach to estimatepotential rechargeand runoff and allow for determinationof the locationof rechargewith- in a basin.It providesa meansfor interbasincomparison of the mechanismsand processesthat result in rechargeand calculatesthe potential for rechargeunder current,wetter, and drier climates.Model estimatesof rechargecompare favor- ably with othermethods estimating recharge in the Great Basin. Resultsindicate that net infiltration occursin less than 5 percentof
    [Show full text]
  • Floristic Analysis of the Southwestern United States
    Great Basin Naturalist Volume 46 Number 1 Article 5 1-31-1986 Floristic analysis of the southwestern United States Steven P. McLaughlin University of Arizona, Tucson Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn Recommended Citation McLaughlin, Steven P. (1986) "Floristic analysis of the southwestern United States," Great Basin Naturalist: Vol. 46 : No. 1 , Article 5. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/gbn/vol46/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Western North American Naturalist Publications at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Great Basin Naturalist by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. FLORISTIC ANALYSIS OF THE SOUTHWESTERN UNITED STATES Steven P. McLaughlin' Abstract. —A study was made of the distributions of native, terrestrial, \aseular plants occurring in 50 local floras from throughout the Basin and Range and Colorado Plateau physiographic provinces of the southwestern United States. The objectives of the study were to objectively define and describe the floristic elements —assemblages of species with roughly coincident geographic distribution —occurring in the southwestern United States and to deter- mine what such assemblages reveal about the floristic history of the region. The total flora (native, terrestrial species only) of the Southwest is estimated at 5,458 species, 77% of which were recorded in 1 or more of the local floras. Nearly 22% of these species are endemic to the study region. A majority of the species were found to be relatively rare. The average range of a species included only 4 floras, and 90% of the species were recorded from 11 or fewer floras; only 81 species (1.5%) were recorded from 50% or more of the floras.
    [Show full text]
  • Decline of the World's Saline Lakes
    PERSPECTIVE PUBLISHED ONLINE: 23 OCTOBER 2017 | DOI: 10.1038/NGEO3052 Decline of the world’s saline lakes Wayne A. Wurtsbaugh1*, Craig Miller2, Sarah E. Null1, R. Justin DeRose3, Peter Wilcock1, Maura Hahnenberger4, Frank Howe5 and Johnnie Moore6 Many of the world’s saline lakes are shrinking at alarming rates, reducing waterbird habitat and economic benefits while threatening human health. Saline lakes are long-term basin-wide integrators of climatic conditions that shrink and grow with natural climatic variation. In contrast, water withdrawals for human use exert a sustained reduction in lake inflows and levels. Quantifying the relative contributions of natural variability and human impacts to lake inflows is needed to preserve these lakes. With a credible water balance, causes of lake decline from water diversions or climate variability can be identified and the inflow needed to maintain lake health can be defined. Without a water balance, natural variability can be an excuse for inaction. Here we describe the decline of several of the world’s large saline lakes and use a water balance for Great Salt Lake (USA) to demonstrate that consumptive water use rather than long-term climate change has greatly reduced its size. The inflow needed to maintain bird habitat, support lake-related industries and prevent dust storms that threaten human health and agriculture can be identified and provides the information to evaluate the difficult tradeoffs between direct benefits of consumptive water use and ecosystem services provided by saline lakes. arge saline lakes represent 44% of the volume and 23% of the of migratory shorebirds and waterfowl utilize saline lakes for nest- area of all lakes on Earth1.
    [Show full text]
  • Growth Response of Great Basin Limber Pine Populations to Climate Variability Over the Past 4002 Years
    Quaternary Research (2021), 1–22 doi:10.1017/qua.2020.128 Research Article Growth response of Great Basin limber pine populations to climate variability over the past 4002 years Constance I. Millar1* , Diane L. Delany1, John C. King2 and Robert D. Westfall1 1Pacific Southwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 800 Buchanan St., Albany, CA 94710, USA and 2Lone Pine Research, 2604 Westridge Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715, USA Abstract Tree-rings representing annual dates from live and deadwood Pinus flexilis at ten sites across the central Great Basin (∼38°N) yielded a cumulative record across 4002 years (1983 BC–AD 2019). Individual site chronologies ranged in length from 861–4002 years; all were con- tinuous over their sample depths. Correlations of growth with climate were positive for water relations and mostly negative for summer temperatures. Growth was generally correlated across sites, with the central Nevada stands most distinct. Although growth was low during the Late Holocene Dry Period, variability marked this interval, suggesting that it was not pervasively dry. All sites had low growth during the first half of the Medieval Climate Anomaly, high growth during the mid-interval pluvial, and low growth subsequently. Little synchrony occurred across sites for the early Little Ice Age. After AD 1650, growth was depressed until the early twentieth century. Growth at all sites declined markedly ca. AD 1985, was similar to the lowest growth period of the full records, and indicative of recent severe droughts. A small rebound in growth occurred after ca. AD 2010. A strong signal for Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) occurred in growth response at most sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Date 06/10/2021 14:34:02
    Native American Cultural Resource Studies at Yucca Mountain, Nevada (Monograph) Item Type Monograph Authors Stoffle, Richard W.; Halmo, David; Olmsted, John; Evans, Michael Publisher Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan Download date 06/10/2021 14:34:02 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/271453 Native American Cultural Resource Studies at Yucca Mountain, Nevada Richard W. Stoffle David B. Halmo John E. Olmsted Michael J. Evans The Research Report Series of the Institute for Social Research is composed of significant reports published at the completion of a research project. These reports are generally prepared by the principal research investigators and are directed to selected users of this information. Research Reports are intended as technical documents which provide rapid dissemination of new knowledge resulting from ISR research. Native American Cultural Resource Studies at Yucca Mountain, Nevada Richard W. Stoffle David B. Halmo John E. Olmsted Michael J. Evans Institute for Social Research The University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan 1990 This volume was originally prepared for Science Applications International Corporation of Las Vegas, Nevada (work performed under Contract No. DE- AC08- 87NV10576). Disclaimer: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Department of Energy, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, mark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the Unites States Government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]