SOCIAL–ECOLOGICAL CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF LANDCOVER CHANGE IN LANDSCAPES OF NEBRASKA, U.S.A. by Daniel Robert Uden A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Major: Natural Resource Sciences Under the Supervision of Professor Craig R. Allen Lincoln, Nebraska May, 2017 SOCIAL–ECOLOGICAL CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF LANDCOVER CHANGE IN LANDSCAPES OF NEBRASKA, U.S.A. Daniel R. Uden, Ph.D. University of Nebraska, 2017 Advisor: Craig R. Allen Landcover change is an important global change process affecting social– ecological system(s) (SES) worldwide. Human activities may directly and indirectly drive landcover change, and human populations may be directly and indirectly affected by it. Although uncertainties exist about the future of landcover change, uncertainties can be engaged strategically in the context of SESs thinking. One such means of strategic engagement involves evaluating and comparing case studies of regional human-driven landcover change—past, present, and potential future—in order to obtain a more holistic and place-based understanding of its social–ecological trajectories, causes, and consequences. Improved understanding of these aspects of regional landcover change could inform decisions and actions that increase the resilience of SESs to landcover change and related global change processes. In this dissertation, I assess trajectories, causes, and consequences of past, present, and potential future landcover change in landscapes of Nebraska, U.S.A. in the context of SESs thinking. In these case studies, a variety of methodological approaches—notably historical literature review, statistical modeling, machine learning, graph theory, and cellular automata—are utilized to improve understanding of past, present, and potential future human-driven landcover change in Nebraska landscapes, the direct and indirect relationships between landcover change and people, and the social–ecological tradeoffs associated with alternative landcover change trajectories. Individually, the findings of the chapters of this dissertation are useful for increasing understanding of landscape- and SES-specific landcover change effects and for informing current and future landscape management. In such SES-specific contexts, emphasis on the short- and long-term effects of landcover change for human populations and ecosystems, as well as increasing awareness of their interdependencies, could assist decision-making through the consideration of the social–ecological tradeoffs associated with alternative landcover-based decisions and actions. In a broader sense, the utility of this dissertation’s findings lies in the promotion and illustration of the engagement of social–ecological challenges like landcover change—and uncertainties about them— through the lens of SESs thinking. iv DEDICATION To Annika again and now Samara, too. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are a number of individuals and organizations that deserve thanks for their investment and assistance in the development of this dissertation, and in me. First, thank you to my long-time advisor, Craig Allen, and to my graduate committee members— David Wishart, Kristal Stoner, Zhenghong Tang, Larkin Powell—for their patience and guidance as I gradually collected and put together the pieces of this research. Each of you challenged me and provided guidance, but ultimately gave me the freedom to find my own way. I’m grateful for the time you gave me to learn and adapt. Thanks to Noelle Hart, my fellow student, friend, and summer 2014 fieldwork partner. Your strategic approach and attention to detail saved us time (and probably also injuries), improved the quality of our data and results, and taught me a thing or two about observation and decision-making throughout the oak project. Plus, it was really fun hiking around the woods with you all day. On the note of the woods, a big thank you to Krista Lang, Gerry Steinauer, and Kent Pfeifer for their excellent advice about all things oaks and fieldwork along the Missouri River. Thanks also to Kristal Stoner and Melissa Panella for investing so much time in our project, even joining us for a stormy field day of counting trees. Each of you helped make that short field season one of the highlights of my graduate career. I’m very thankful to the agencies that have funded by doctoral research, which include The Nebraska Natural Legacy Project and the Game and Parks Commission, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Othmer Foundation, and the University of Nebraska- Lincoln IGERT program. Thanks as well to the School of Natural Resources at the vi University of Nebraska-Lincoln for various forms of support over the years. It is an honor to call Hardin Hall my academic home. Thanks, as always, to Andy Bishop, Roger Grosse, and everyone else at the Rainwater Basin Joint Venture for their generous sharing of data and expertise. Thanks as well to Kristal Stoner, Rachel Simpson, Rick Schneider, and Melissa Panella at the Nebraska Game and Parks Commission for their support in data, planning, and for letting me tag along on the annual trip to Chadron. Thank you to the folks at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Holland Computing Center for setting up my account and answering all my questions. Chapters 5 and 7 wouldn’t have happened without you or Crane. Speaking of chapters, Chapter 4 wouldn’t have been the same without the species distribution modeling workshop led by Dr. Tom Edwards Jr. of the Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and organized by T.J. Fontaine of the Nebraska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research unit. The lectures and R examples you provided were excellent, and I know I’ll continue to draw from them in future research endeavors. A special thank you to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Center for Great Plains Studies for their extension of a graduate fellowship to me from 2014–2017. My involvement with the Center has been invaluable for a number of reasons, but I think it has been the friendships and collaborations that I’ve appreciated most. Thanks for teaching me so much I didn’t already know about the region I’ve called home my whole life, and for helping me become a more interdisciplinary thinker. Many thanks to all the great owners and employees of the coffee shops I’ve haunted over the past five years, most notably Panama Coffee and JD’s Coffee Shop in vii Seward and Cultiva East in Lincoln. I honestly don’t know if I could have done this without you. Finally, thank you once again to my family and friends, especially my parents, wife, and daughter. You have not only let me pursue my research interests freely, but have been instrumental along the way in teaching, supporting, and caring for me in ways that have little to do with landcover change, social–ecological systems, or data analysis, and I’m so grateful for that. Any success I experience is simply a return on your long- term investments in me. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................................. xii LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................. xx CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1 DISSERTATION OVERVIEW .............................................................................................. 6 LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................................. 8 TABLES AND FIGURES ..................................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER 2: LANDCOVER, FUEL, AND SOCIAL–ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN NINETEENTH CENTURY LANDSCAPES OF THE AMERICAN GREAT PLAINS ........................................................................................ 17 ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................. 17 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 19 HERBACEOUS BIOMASS .................................................................................................. 21 Utilization .................................................................................................................. 21 Renewability .............................................................................................................. 23 Geographic distribution ............................................................................................. 24 WOODY BIOMASS .............................................................................................................. 28 Utilization .................................................................................................................. 28 Renewability .............................................................................................................. 31 Geographic distribution ............................................................................................. 36 BUFFALO CHIPS .................................................................................................................. 49 Utilization .................................................................................................................. 49 Renewability .............................................................................................................