|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
Ecological
Knowledge and
Environmental
Problem-Solving
CONCEPTS AND CASE STUDIES
Committee on the Applications of Ecological
Theory to Environmental Problems
Commission on Life Sciences
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C. 1986
OCR for page R2
S661 Mead Burled EMS
1661 ~etUqad SUnUIld Ed
6861 laqoloo '8urlwd qlloodeanaury Jo sales pal!un an U! PalU!ld
gg61 laqopo `8u.rlwd piC-Sb9£0-606-0 NtISI
9861 llo~eW .Su~wd resoldL18-98 L t9£ 9861 98n-SLH()
suIalqold ~uouIuonAuR ol ~oall.L
ea~°1°~° suopoa!lddy uo aaUIunuo~ saoua!oS ail uo uo!ss~o~ ( S n) I!ouno~ Was
-an reUo!~eN I ASOIO~ b saps ashy saamos31 pemlBU JO UO!~UAJOSUO~ ·t so!
inns ashy uo!loa~old Is~uouIuollAug z saps ashy-UOI~AJ3SUOO amlEN ·1
d :A~do3So!lq!tI
saps asca pug s~daouo~ :8u!AIos-rualqo~d ~uouIuo~Aua pug aSpalh~ou~ lua!8
Bled uo!l83!lqnd-u!-8u!8oleleD ssoaSuo~ JO iae~q
palIa~u! aq plno~s ~uaruaslopua 1r!a~o ou puc Aoua8
a~ ~o sh~a!A aq~ 1oa~al A1llessaaou ~ou AgLU ~uarunoop s!~ U! uo1~o~u1 aq~ 'la~a~o~
·S90U9!3S 10 /(uIaproV IcU°!~cN alll ol O-10-Eb61 18-X~ °N 1uouIaal8y aoums!ssy lapun
A~uas~ uol~a~o~d l~uauluOIlAu~ S n aq~ Aq ~ed U! pa~oddns sc~ oslu Apn~s aq~L
s~uaruh~opua Sullaou!8ug ~o Acua
-P83V 1~U°!~N alll puc SaoUa!aS Jo AUIape3~ l~uo1.1cN a~ pu~ ',ua~uoo lco!8olouq~a~ q~!A~
sanss! Ao!1od a!1qnd ~!~ pu~ /8o1ougoa~ puc aoua!as S n ~o q~l~aq aq~ ll~!~ paulaouoa
ale ~cq~ sa!u~druoo UIOl~ suo!~nq~uoa l~nuur s~aos lla!llAs 'uIeldold ~snpuI Aruap~ aq~
'uol.~epuno~ urolS d pag1y aq1 pur ~uo1~epuno~ lalla~a~ao~ a~ 'uo!~puno~ uol1ay~
h~alpuy a~ 'uo!~upuno~ m~y~ ~L auna~ pur a u~lor aq~ ~uo!~upuno~ ual~aH clo~
pur ure!ll!,~ a~ 'uo!~opuno~ ladadln~ ~ sal~ ~ a~ ~qlo~ A~aN ~o uol~lodlo~ a!8aule~
a~ Su!pnloul ~suol~puno~ a~eAT~d ~o um!llosuoo ~ ~Uol~ suo!~nq~uoa ~o s~s!suoa pun~
~N aq~L ·Ai~UeoI.~!uS!S am~l.~ ASoloullaa~ puc aoua!os llo!ll~ U! sanss! lnuo!lcu ~o sa!pn~s
pal~!1!u!-AuIapeay ~o uIelSold e 1loddns o~ pasn S! ~cq~ spun~ l~lapa~uou '~euo!~alas!p
'a~AIld ~o lood ~ ~pun~ l!auno~ llaleasa~ louo!~eN all~ Aq pa~oddns uaaq s~q Apn~s s!~
saoual0S
Jo AuIaproy louo!~N aq] Jo lapeqo aq] lapun 'AlaA!laDdsal 'OL61 puc b961 U! poils!lq~1s3
alah~ au!~!pay~ Jo a~nl!lsuI aq] puP gunDau!8u] Jo AuIapPay louo!~N aq~L, au!olpayg Jo
a~nl!lsuI aq] pue sa!LuapUa~ q~oq Aq Al~ulor pal3~s!u!uIpc S! ~I sal~!unu~oo Sullaoul~ua puP
al.~l~ua!os aq] puP 'a!lqnd aq] 'luou~aAog aq] Ol saD!Alas llaq] Jo ~anpuoD aq] U! ~ullaDu!8u]
Jo AuIapPa~ ~UOI]EN aq] puP saDua!aS Jo AuIapUoy ~uo!~UN aq] q~oq Jo Aaua8U gu!~Ulado
~d!oulld aq] auloDaq sEq llauno~ qoreasa~ aq~L uo!~UlodloD d!qslaqulaul ~ululaAo8-]las
'11.}OldUOU 'a~AIld ~ sU ituapPay aq] saqs!lqe~sa qa!qh~ '~981 ~° lapeq~ l~uo!ssal~uoa s~l ~o
A]lloqlnc aq} 1apun [uIapea~ aq] Aq paumualap salo!lod IrlauaS ql!M aouPploaDE U! sa]ula
-do l!auno~ qaleasa~ aq~L luounuaAoS ~lapa~ aq1 SU!S!Apc ~o puo aSpal~ou~ Suuaq~n~
~o sasodmd S`AtuapU3v aq1 ql!h~ ASolouqaa1 pUE aoua!as,~o Al!ununuoo p~olq aq1 alulaossr
°1 9161 U! saouaTaS ~0 Atuapeay reUo!loN aq1 Aq paqs!lq~sa sr~ l!ouno~ q~easa~ aq~L
au!a!pay~ ~o alnlllsuI aq1 pur '8uuaoul~u~ ~o AuIapeay lcuo!leN aq1 'saoua!aS ~o
Au~ap~y ~euoll~N aq1 ~o slaqruaru ~o SUIis!suoo aaU!u~rno~ h~a!Aa~ ~Toda~ ~ Aq paAoldde
sampa~old °1 ~u!plo~ac sloqlne aq1 u~q1 laqlo dno~ ~ Aq pa~a!Aal uaaq s~q 1lodal s!q,L
aousl~q aleudoldde lo~ p~e~al ql!~ puc saoualadu~oa 1~!oads llaq~
o~ uasoq~ alah~ ~oda1 aq1 lo~ alq!suodsal aaU!unuoa aq1 ~o slaq~uouI aq~L au!~!pa~ ~o
alnl!lsuI aq1 pu~ '8uucau!8u~ ~o AtU0pBO~ ~uol.leN aq1 'saoua!oS 10 Aruap~ay IBUO!1UN aq
}0 Sl!OUl103 aq1 [UOI] UA\Blp a~ slaqruaru asoq~ ~I!auno~ qa~asa~ lcuol.leN aq1 ~o p~o~
Su!ulaAo~ aq1 Aq paAolddc se~ ~oda1 S!ql Jo 1oaCqns aq1 S! l~ql 1oatold aql ::I::)IlON
81~0Z oa 'U°~U!NseAt MN ' aAV U°!lnI!lSU°O IOIZ Ssaa~d £tuspeay leuo!,eN
OCR for page R3
Committee on the Applications of Ecological
Theory to Environmental Problems
GORDON H. ORIANS, Chairman, Institute for Environmental Studies,
University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
JOHN BUCKLEY, P.O. Box 263, Whitney Point, New York
WILLIAM CLARK, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis,
Laxenburg, Austria
MICHAEL E. GILPIN, Department of Biology, University of California at
San Diego, La Jolla, California
CARL F. JORDAN, Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens,
Georgia
JOHN T. LEHMAN, Division of Biological Science, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
ROBERT M. MAY, Department of Biology, Princeton University,
Princeton, New Jersey
GORDON A. ROBILLIARD, Entrix Inc., Concord, California
DANIEL S. SIMBERLOFF, Department of Biological Science, The Florida
State University, Tallahassee, Florida
Consultant
W. JAMES ERCKMANN, Institute for Environmental Studies, University
of Washington, Seattle, Washington
National Research Council Stay
DAVID POLICANSKY, Staff Officer
NORMAN GROSSBLATT, Editor
AGNES GASKIN, Secretary
. . .
111
OCR for page R4
OCR for page R5
Preface
This report is the product of the recognition by the Board on Basic
Biology of the National Research Council's Commission on Life Sciences
that it should be concerned with the basic biology of ecosystems. The
first aspect of ecology to receive attention by the Board was the current
status of ecological theory and concepts and their applicability to specific
environmental problems. A workshop on this topic had been held Sep-
tember 22-23, 1979, at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington,
D.C. The 15 participants represented diverse approaches to ecology and
had extensive experiences in marine, freshwater, and terrestrial environ-
ments. Discussion during the workshop made it clear that various ap-
proaches to ecology could profitably be evaluated from the point of view
of the data needed to test them, the difficulty of obtaining those data, the
domain over which models can be presumed to be applicable, and special
precautions in the use of results. The group also recognized that further
exploration of models and concepts would be more productive if it were
done in the context of potential applications to environmental problem-
solving.
The deliberations of this workshop laid the groundwork for the estab-
lishment of the Committee on Applications of Ecological Theory to En-
vironmental Problems, which consists of persons with varied backgrounds
in basic ecology, environmental management, and problem-solving. The
chief basis of the activities of the committee was the perception that,
whereas much about the functioning of ecological systems remains poorly
OCR for page R6
V1
PREFACE
understood, we commonly fail to use even available information when
attempting to solve environmental problems. This failure has many causes,
among which are the difficulty of determining which components of eco-
logical knowledge might be most usefully applied to particular environ-
mental problems and the difficulty of finding the relevant information.
Those difficulties in turn are partly a result of the failure of academic
ecologists to attempt to determine where and how their knowledge might
be applied and of a lack of communication among generators and users
of new knowledge.
The committee recognized that it could not attempt to cover all aspects
of ecology without producing a report of unacceptable length. Therefore,
we concentrated our attention on ecological knowledge broadly con-
ceived to include theories, models, data, and concepts and left methods
and techniques of data analysis to be considered in detail elsewhere. This
concentration should not be construed as a belief that methods and tech-
niques are unimportant. The committee fully recognizes that such methods
as satellite imaging and the use of powerful computers permit analyses of
ecological systems on scales of space and time that were previously im-
possible. These methods are more than just "tools." Nonetheless, the
most powerful analytical systems are not substitutes for biological insights
or imaginative questioning and hypothesizing. It is to these issues that the
committee directed the bulk of its efforts.
The committee also recognized that a report dominated by abstract
considerations of ecological knowledge would fail to convey vividly and
convincingly how ecological knowledge might improve environmental
problem-solving. Therefore, we decided to develop a set of case histories
that would illustrate in concrete ways how ecological information has been
used and how it has influenced the ways in which problems have been
conceived and solutions approached. Because the manifold problems with
the quality of assessments of environmental effects of projects have been
well noted and thoroughly discussed by others, the committee decided to
use examples of the creative use of ecological information, believing that
a good example is more instructive than a bad one.
The committee carried out its tasks by means of a series of meetings
in which the major format of the report was decided on. Once the plan
of the report was determined, subgroups were formed to draft the various
chapters of Part I. Another subgroup had the specific task of finding a
series of acceptable cases for study, choosing the best ones from among
a long list, and selecting persons to write the case studies. The cases were
selected to illustrate the use of ecological information in dealing with a
wide variety of environmental problems, from management of single spe
OCR for page R7
PREFACE
. .
V11
cies to issues involving complete ecosystems over broad areas. Some of
the case studies were written by persons actively involved in the projects
themselves. Others were written by members of the committee who had
familiarity with the examples and who could therefore write about them
with some depth of understanding. To make the case studies more infor-
mative, the committee prepared an evaluation of each one, pointing out
how the use of ecological information had been particularly effective and
how even better use of ecological knowledge could have been made. We
hope that those comments will help to improve future studies of similar
types.
The work of the committee was supported largely by the National
Research Council Fund. Additional support was received from the Office
of Research and Development of the Environmental Protection Agency
for preparing material on biological monitoring (Chapter 7~. The Office
of Federal Activities of the Environmental Protection Agency and the
Office of Environmental Analysis of the Department of Energy provided
support for a joint U.S.-Canadian workshop on cumulative environmental
effects. The workshop provided much of the basis of the chapter on
cumulative environmental effects (Chapter 9~.
A project of this magnitude depends on the cooperation and efforts of
many persons in addition to those serving on the committee. In our attempts
to find good case studies, we contacted many ecologists in North America
and Europe. We give special thanks to the authors of the case studies,
who labored so hard to provide us with documents that followed the basic
format we had established for them and who were also able to convince
us that it was sometimes inappropriate to follow those guidelines slavishly.
The report has been vastly improved by the devoted efforts of the
National Research Council staff under the guidance of David Policansky.
Dr. Policansky not only provided a valuable interface between the com-
mittee and the Research Council, but also contributed extensively to the
conceptual development of the project and to the writing of the report,
including a case study. He was the person who consistently and insistently
reminded the committee members of their duties and responsibilities,
thereby preventing the report from appearing even later than it has. Sim-
ilarly, W. James Erckmann, who assisted in production of the report,
played a key role in the writing of the chapters of Part I and in the
development of the project and the case studies. We are deeply indebted
to Norman Grossblatt of the Commission on Life Sciences for his thought-
ful, careful editing; he has immeasurably improved the clarity and style
of the report. The report has also benefited from the patient and insightful
clerical support of Agnes Gaskin of the Board on Basic Biology and
OCR for page R8
V111
PREFACE
Jeanette Pederson of the Institute for Environmental Studies, as well as
from the comments of several reviewers. Without support of such quality
and quantity, our report could not have achieved the quality we now believe
it possesses.
GORDON H. ORIANS
Chairman
Committee on Applications of
Ecological Theory to Environmental
Problems
OCR for page R9
Contents
Introduction ..................
Kinds of Ecological Knowledge and.
Their Applications
1. Individuals and Single Populations
23
2. Population Interactions 38
3. Community Ecology
4. Materials and Energy
5. Scales in Space and Time
.................... 47
................................. 68
6. Analog, Generic, and Pilot Studies and Treatment of a
Project as an Experiment 75
7. Indicator Species and Biological Monitoring
8. Dealing with Uncertainty
...........
1X
............ 81
....................... 88
OCR for page R10
x
9. The Special Problem of Cumulative Effects
10. A Scientific Framework for Environmental
Problem-Solving ............................
I. References ...........
I} Selected Case Studies
12. North Pacific Halibut Fishery Management
Case Study by David Policansky
13. Vampire Bat Control in Latin America
Case Study by G. Clay Mitchell
14. Biological Control of California Red Scale
Case Study by Robert F. Luck
15. Experimental Control of Malaria in West Africa
Case Study by Robert M. May
16. Protecting Caribou During Hytiroelectric Development
in Newfoundland
Case Study by David I. Kiev, Edwarc! L. Hill, and
Shane P. Mahoney
CONTENTS
............. 93
104
.................................. 116
.............. 137
................... 151
.............. 165
........ 190
................................ 205
17. Conserving a Regional Spotted Owl Population
Case Study by Hal Salwasser
18. Restoring Derelict Lands in Great Britain
Case Study by Peter Wathern
19. Optimizing Timber Yields in New Brunswick Forests
Case Study by Thom A. Erdie and Gordon L.
Baskervitle
......... 227
................ 248
OCR for page R11
CONTENTS
20. Control of Eutrophication in Lake Washington
Case Study by John T. Lehman
21.
Raising the Level of a Subarctic Lake
Case Study by John T. Lehman
22. Ecological Effects of Nuclear Radiation
Case Study by Car! F. Jordan
23. Ecological Effects of Forest Clearcutting
Case Study by Car! F. Jordan
24. Environmental Effects of DDT
Case Study by John Buckley
Index .........
X1
.......... 301
.................. 317
.................. 331
................ 345
............................ 358
.............. 375
OCR for page R12
