National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 5 UPDATES TO THE IEF
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 37
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 38
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 39
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 40
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 41
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 42
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 43
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 44
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 45
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 46
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 47
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 48
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 49
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"GLOSSARY." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22423.
×
Page 50

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

35 Baseline conditions: The physical, chemical, biological, social, economic, and cultural setting in which the proposed project is to be located. Baseline conditions indi- cate where local impacts (both positive and negative) might be expected to occur (Shepard 2005). Best available data: Under the Endangered Species Act, the use of best available data is required. The way best available data are determined is subjective and typically done on a case-by-case basis by experts in agencies and organizations. It should involve an evaluation of the currency, completeness, and quality of data needed. Typically the best available data must be acquired from more than one source to achieve the highest level of currency, completeness, and quality. Biological inventory: A process of cataloging plants, animals, and/or habitats occur- ring in an area. Biophysical systems: Any biological process which is studied on a system level. Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404: The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, known as the Clean Water Act, is a comprehensive statute aimed at restoring and main- taining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters. Au- thority for the implementation and enforcement of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act rests with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the discharge of dredged or fi ll material within U.S. waters (33 USC § 1251 et seq.). Compensatory mitigation: The restoration (reestablishment or rehabilitation), estab- lishment (creation), enhancement, and/or in certain circumstances preservation of aquatic resources for the purpose of offsetting unavoidable adverse impacts which remain after all appropriate and practicable avoidance and minimization has been achieved (33 CFR § 332.2). GLOSSARY

36 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Compliance costs: Expenditure of time or money in conforming with government re- quirements such as legislation or regulation. Connectivity (requirements): Connections between habitat patches that support spe- cies viability through a variety of mechanisms such as seasonal migration, seed dispersal, obtaining of food or water in different habitats. Conservation analyses: The complete set of activities involved in creating the Regional Ecological Framework, cumulative effects assessment, and conservation and miti- gation planning. Conservation and mitigation receiving priority areas: Areas identified through advance conservation planning that are important to achieving regional conservation ob- jectives, are currently unprotected and or requiring restoration, and therefore would be priorities for receiving off-site mitigation funds or actions. Conservation area: An area of land that is either being managed, or has a designated protection status, to ensure that natural resources, cultural heritage, or biological processes are being preserved. A conservation area may be a nature preserve, a park, a conservation easement, or other area. Conservation banking: See mitigation (or conservation) bank. Conservation measures: Actions taken or planned to achieve mitigation or conserva- tion objectives. Conservation planning: Identification of a set of conservation objectives for an area, typically with a goal to identify the set of sites that maximizes representation of distinct species and communities while minimizing the area to be protected (modi- fied from Kareiva and Marvier 2011). Conservation requirements: The quantitative and qualitative parameters of what is needed to conserve or maintain a species, ecological system, or other biological re- source within a geography of interest. An example of a conservation requirement is the minimum size of a resource occurrence that is needed for the occurrence to persist. Consultation: The transportation conformity rule requires that agencies—including EPA, U.S. DOT, state DOTs, state and local air quality agencies, and MPOs— collaboratively develop effective interagency consultation procedures (40 CFR §§ 93.105 and 93.112). The interagency consultation process must include the fol- lowing three components as well as conformity criteria and procedures: 1. General factors and specific processes for interagency consultation; 2. Conflict resolution procedures; and 3. Public consultation procedures developed in accordance with the Metropoli- tan Planning regulations (23 CFR § 450, 49 CFR § 613). Corridor (analysis): Used to determine an optimal corridor between two points. For environmental purposes the corridor is often a narrow strip of land connecting

37 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK two larger habitats, and the analysis is done to help conservationists recognize the optimal path between two areas of habitat. Crediting: Providing credit for mitigation or restoration actions, usually involves spec- ifying quantities of individual resources (e.g., acres) tied to quantity of impacts needed for projects. Critical habitat designation: The Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires the federal government to designate critical habitat for any species it lists under the ESA. Critical habitat is defined as, “Specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing, if they contain physical or biological resources essential to conservation, and those resources may require special management considerations or protection; and Specific areas outside the geographical area occu pied by the species if the agency determines that the area itself is essential for conservation” (http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/criticalhabitat.htm). Cumulative effects assessment: A process used to determine cumulative impact. Ac- cording to 40 CFR § 1508.7, cumulative impact is the effect on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (fed- eral or nonfederal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time. Cumulative impact: The impact on the environment which results from the incremen- tal impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably fore- seeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or nonfederal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (40 CFR § 1508.7). Current take: The amount of a resource affected by current (existing and approved) projects. Data gaps: Documented gaps in data or information based on a systematic review of data needs and data availability. Data security and use-limitation agreements: Legal or interagency agreements used to protect species and ecological data from being collected, misused, or misinterpreted. Data sources: Agencies, organizations, or individuals that collect, maintain, and/or manage data. Authoritative data sources are those recognized to have the best data. Development: A general term for anthropogenic structures and activities that includes urbanization, industrialization, transportation, mineral extraction, water develop- ment, or other human activities that occupy or fragment habitats or that develop renewable or nonrenewable resources. Distribution maps: Spatial maps that show the distribution of a species or habitat. Maps can be created using a variety of mapping methods including modeling

38 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK techniques that use species observations and other data, and the use of inductive and/or deductive modeling. Downscaling: The process of transferring information from a coarser resolution to a finer resolution (e.g., from 15 km pixels to 4 km pixels), commonly done to convert global climate model outputs to regional climate change data. Conversely, upscaling is the process of transferring information from a finer resolution to a coarser resolution. Ecological: Characterized by the interdependence of living organisms in an environment. Ecological function and service (also called ecosystem service production function): A description of the relationship between quality-adjusted ecological endpoints and the provision of ecosystem goods and services. This term differs from eco- logical production function because it includes both the biophysical functions and the nonecological assessments that are needed to demonstrate a service. Ecologi- cal function and service evaluate four things: (1) how ecological endpoints com- bine with complementary (nonecological) inputs to generate goods and services; (2) whether the quality of ecological endpoints is sufficient to generate the service; (3) whether required complementary goods and services (trails, roads, homes) are available; and (4) whether demand exists for the service by location. For exam- ple, a quantitative or qualitative description of how a population of watchable birds (the ecological endpoint), when combined with complementary inputs such as transportation infrastructure and demand by birders, produces the ecosystem service of recreational bird watching, is an ecosystem service production function. See also ecological production function (Wainger and Mazzotta 2009; input from J. Boyd). Ecological integrity: The ability of an ecological system to support and maintain a community of organisms that have the species composition, diversity, and func- tional organization comparable to those of natural habitats within the ecoregion. Ecological systems: Recurring groups of biological communities found in similar phys- ical environments and influenced by similar dynamic ecological processes, such as fire or flooding. They are intended to provide a classification unit that is readily mappable, often from remote imagery, and readily identifiable by conservation and resource managers in the field. Ecologically valuable outputs: Quantifiable ecosystem services considered valuable to society. Ecology: The scientific study of the relationship between organisms and their environment. Economic valuation studies: Studies of the economic value of resources based on the services they provide to society. Economies of scale: Reduction in cost per unit resulting from increased production, realized through operational efficiencies. Economies of scale can be accomplished because as production increases, the cost of producing each additional unit falls.

39 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Ecoregion: A geographic area with relative homogeneity in ecosystems. Ecoregions depict areas within which the mosaic of ecosystem components (biotic and abiotic as well as terrestrial and aquatic) differs from those of adjacent regions. Ecosystem: The interactions of communities of native fish, wildlife, and plants with the abiotic or physical environment. Ecosystem-based approach/mitigation: A holistic approach to environmental decision making that takes into account the full array of interactions of the ecosystems and species, as well as anthropogenic activities and influences, present in the area of interest, rather than just the resources in isolation from each other. Ecosystem crediting protocols: Protocols that standardize the operations and manage- ment of ecosystem credit creation. Ecosystem production: The goods and services produced by an ecosystem of value to society. Ecosystem (or ecological) services: Benefits or services that the natural environment provides to society. These benefits or services include ecologically based outputs such as timber and fish production, filtering excess pollutants, providing a range of nutrients from oxygen to soil and plant-based nutrients, reducing flood hazards, absorbing storm surge, and providing unique recreational, scientific, or spiritual opportunities. There are four primary categories of ecosystem services: • Provisioning services are the products obtained from ecosystems, such as food, genetic resources, fiber, and energy. • Regulating services are the benefits obtained from the regulation of ecosystem processes, such as regulation of climate, water, and some human diseases. • Cultural services are the nonmaterial benefits people obtain from ecosystems through spiritual enrichment, cognitive development, reflection, recreation, and aesthetic experience. • Supporting services are ecosystem services that are necessary for the produc- tion of all other ecosystem services. Examples include biomass production, production of atmospheric oxygen, nutrient cycling, water cycling, and provi- sioning of habitat. (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005–2006) Element occurrence: A term used by natural heritage programs to generally delineate the location and extent of a species population or ecological community stand and represent the area of the biological resource that is of conservation or man- agement interest. Element occurrences are documented by voucher specimens (as appropriate) or other forms of observations. A single element occurrence may be documented by multiple specimens or observations taken from different parts of the same population, or from the same population over multiple years. Enhancement areas: Areas that are restored, under mitigation or other projects, to cre- ate or support habitat that has been identified in the IEF as critical to sustain rare and imperiled species and ecosystems.

40 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Environmental conservation strategy: The combination of mapped locations and ac- tions to achieve the conservation objectives for resources. Environmental permitting: Federal and state laws require authorization before taking actions that affect regulated environmental resources. This may include complet- ing consultations or receiving a permit through a regulatory review process with various federal and state agencies. Environmental planning: See conservation planning. ESA Section 7: Under Section 7(a)(1), of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), federal agencies are directed to implement programs that support the conservation of threatened and endangered species. In Section 7(a)(2), the act requires a consulta- tion on federal actions with the secretary of the interior or commerce, as appropri- ate. Federally funded programs at the state and local level, including transporta- tion projects, require a consultation process under Section 7 of the ESA, which includes a biological assessment. These Section 7 consultations are designed to ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Field validate: To confirm the validity of the current status of an ecological resource through an on-site visit. Data for a specific species, site, or habitat are never 100% complete and current since species and habitats are dynamic and constantly chang- ing, especially in response to human-related impacts. The IEF often relies on vari- ous ecological resource data sets, and these data sets are useful when doing re- gional assessments and planning. But once decisions are made to implement a transportation infrastructure, or mitigation project, there is often a need to do an on-site visit to validate the current status of an ecological resource that may be affected. This field validation process can sometimes result in a revision to an as- sessment and/or planning decision or action. Geographic information system (GIS): A computer system designed to collect, man- age, manipulate, analyze, and display spatially referenced data and associated attributes. GIS metadata: A text file describing how a spatial database was created. Metadata files document how the data were created and their content, quality, condition, and other characteristics. Metadata’s purpose is to ensure that a user knows the source and quality of the data to help in evaluating of its usefulness and appropriateness for analyses. The Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) sets content stan- dards for metadata. GIS modeling: The action of generating new information in a geographic information system using existing input data (e.g., modeling the probable distribution of a spe- cies habitat based on information about land cover, soil types, slope, presence of water). Habitat: An ecological or environmental area inhabited by a particular species of animal, plant, or other type of organism; the natural environment in which an

41 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK organism lives or the physical environment that surrounds (influences and is used by) a species population (Franklin Institute 2011). (Retrieved from the Franklin Institute website on June 29, 2011.) Impact avoidance: To avoid a direct, indirect, and/or cumulative impact to the environment. Impact minimization: To minimize a direct, indirect, and/or cumulative impact to the environment. In-kind: Similar in structure or function. To replace in-kind means to replace a lost environmental resource with a resource of similar structural and functional type to the affected resource (33 CFR § 332.2). In-lieu fee mitigation program: A program involving the restoration, establishment, enhancement, and/or preservation of aquatic resources through funds paid to a governmental or nonprofit natural resources management entity to satisfy com- pensatory mitigation requirements for DA permits. Similar to a mitigation bank, an in-lieu fee program sells compensatory mitigation credits to permittees whose obligation to provide compensatory mitigation is then transferred to the in-lieu program sponsor. However, the rules governing the operation and use of in-lieu fee programs are somewhat different from the rules governing operation and use of mitigation banks. The operation and use of an in-lieu fee program are governed by an in-lieu fee program instrument (33 CFR § 332.2). Indicators: Components of a system whose characteristics (e.g., presence or absence, quantity, distribution) are used as an index of an attribute (e.g., land health) that is too difficult, inconvenient, or expensive to measure. Infrastructure: The basic facilities needed for the functioning of a community or so- ciety, such as transportation and communications systems, utilities, and public institutions, including buildings, roads, utilities, equipment, and other structures. In a refuge vulnerability assessment and alternatives or RVAA, infrastructure can be considered both as a resource to preserve as well as a stressor on ecological and cultural resources. Integrated Ecological Framework, or IEF: The IEF is a technical guide that supports transportation planners’ and natural resource specialists’ use of a standardized, science-based approach to the identification of ecological priorities and the inte- gration of those into transportation and infrastructure decision making—as out- lined in Eco-Logical. Integrated planning: The process by which multiple agencies and partners combine planning efforts to understand the ways in which their work intersects and how best to leverage resources to achieve shared goals and priorities. Known species location: An accurately mapped location of a species whose location and (sometimes) condition has been verified in the field by a qualified field bi- ologist. For example, element occurrences (EOs) collected by NatureServe mem- ber programs or natural heritage programs use a standard methodology for data

42 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK collection, mapping, and assessment. An EO is defined as an area of land and/or water in which an element (such as a species or ecological unit) is or was present as demonstrated by verifiable sources of evidence. Land cover data: The (bio)physical material or cover on the surface of the earth. There are two primary methods for capturing information or data on land cover: field survey and analysis of remotely sensed imagery. Often surveys of land cover define similarly named categories of land cover (e.g., forests) in different ways. In the United States, the USGS National Center for Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) is the primary developer of land cover data as part of the USGS Land Cover Characterization Program (LCCP). Land use and management planning: These are terms used for a branch of public policy that encompasses various disciplines seeking to order and regulate land use and planning to prevent land use conflicts. Governments use land use planning to manage the development of land within their jurisdictions. By doing so, the governmental unit can plan for the needs of the community while safeguarding natural resources. To this end, it is the systematic assessment of land and water potential, alternatives for land use, and economic and social conditions in order to select and adopt best land-use options (Young 1993). Long-range transportation plan: A document resulting from regional or statewide col- laboration and consensus on a region or state’s transportation system, and serving as the defining vision for the region’s or state’s transportation systems and services. In metropolitan areas, the plan indicates all of the transportation improvements scheduled for funding over the next 20 years (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/ glossary/glossary_listing.cfm?sort=definition&TitleStart=L). Minimum viable habitat size: Usually estimated as the habitat size necessary to ensure the survival of the species and habitat into the future. The minimum viable habitat size is determined using analyses involving species and habitat experts, data, and sometimes modeling. Mitigation: The Council on Environmental Quality regulations define mitigation as follows: • Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; • Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation; • Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; • Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; and • Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments (http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/tdmmitig2.asp).

43 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Mitigation (or conservation) bank: A site, or suite of sites, where resources (e.g., wet- lands, streams, riparian areas) are restored, established, enhanced, and/or pre- served for the purpose of providing compensatory mitigation for impacts autho- rized by DA permits. In general, a mitigation bank sells compensatory mitigation credits to permittees whose obligation to provide compensatory mitigation is then transferred to the mitigation bank sponsor. The operation and use of a mitigation bank are governed by a mitigation banking instrument (33 CFR § 332.2). Model/modeling: Any representation, whether verbal, diagrammatic, or mathemati- cal, of an object or phenomenon. Natural resource models typically characterize resource systems in terms of their status and change through time. Models in- corporate hypotheses about resource structures and functions, and they generate predictions about the effects of management actions. Natural heritage program: An agency or organization, usually based within a state or provincial natural resource agency, whose mission is to collect, document, and analyze data on the location and condition of biological and other natural re- sources (such as geologic or aquatic resources) of the jurisdiction. These programs typically have particular responsibility for documenting at-risk species and threat- ened ecosystems, and as members of NatureServe, all use consistent standards for collecting and managing the data, allowing information from different programs to be shared and combined regionally, nationally, and internationally. Together the NatureServe network collects and analyzes data about the plants, animals, and ecological communities of the Western Hemisphere. There are 82 member orga- nizations, known as natural heritage programs or conservation data centers, and they operate throughout the United States, Canada, Latin America, and the Ca- ribbean. See www.natureserve.org/visitLocal/index.jsp for additional information. Natural resource planning: See conservation planning. Natural resources: Natural resources can be defined in many ways, but in the context of this report natural resources refer to resources that naturally occur in the envi- ronment such as land, water, air, soil, plants, animals, and so forth. Off-site compensation: Implementation of mitigation at a location not on or immedi- ately adjacent to the site of impacts, but within the same watershed. On-ramp: A starting point for using the IEF. There are several places at which a prac- titioner can begin to use the steps and substeps, thus the term on-ramp describes a starting point for using the IEF. Out-of-kind mitigation: A mitigation project that replaces lost resources with resources that are not similar (e.g., restoring a different type of wetland than the one that was affected). The mitigation project may or may not be in close proximity to the site of impact. Performance measures: Measures that address two IEF components: (1) measures for projects that describe the planned and acceptable impacts to resources and project guidelines to minimize impacts; and (2) measures for mitigation actions, which can

44 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK include resources types, resource area, and other measures of resource viability that must be achieved for successful mitigation. Predicted species locations: See predictive species modeling (or predictive models of priority resources). Predictive species modeling (or predictive models of priority resources): An innovative GIS-based method used to produce maps that predict where elements (i.e., species, ecological community type) are likely to occur and likely not to occur. Preferred alternative: The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Eq- uity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) environmental review process for transportation projects contains a set of requirements that includes the analysis of (route) alternatives and the identification and design of the preferred alterna- tive (route). The goal of the IEF is to provide guidance and analyses that will help transportation and natural resource agencies work together to select, from a com- prehensive list of all alternatives, the preferred alternative which will minimize the environmental impacts while still meeting transportation goals. Programmatic ESA Section 7 consultation: See programmatic implementation and agreements. Programmatic implementation and agreements: A formal, legally binding agreement between a state DOT and other federal and state regulatory agencies, which es- tablishes a process for consultation and project review usually based on a set of agreed on actions. The main objectives of taking a programmatic approach to consultation are to address the effects on listed species resulting from the imple- mentation of a suite of actions as a whole and to provide a strategy, or process, for ESA compliance on the individual activities. Protected lands (protected area): A geographical space designated, through legal or other means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated eco- system services and cultural values. Quantitative assessment: A process that measures the probability and consequences of risks and estimates their implications for project objectives. Regional Ecological Framework or REF: As defined in Eco-Logical, an element of integrated planning that likely consists of an overlay of maps of [natural resource] agencies [and/or environmental organizations] individual plans, accompanied by descriptions of conservation goals in the defined region. Regional Ecological and Infrastructure Development Framework (REIDF): The action- able plan needed to implement ecological and infrastructure projects that minimizes environmental impacts, increases opportunities for environmental restoration and conservation, and supports effective and efficient implementation of transportation plans. This actionable plan is created by overlaying the REF with transportation plans and scenarios, doing an assessment on the impact each has on the other, and making adjustments to achieve the best balance of environmental and transporta- tion outcomes.

45 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK Regional general permit (RGP): One of three types of permits established under CWA Section 404 to regulate the discharge of dredged and fill material into waters of the United States, including wetlands. Responsibility for administering and enforcing Section 404 is shared by the USACE and EPA. Under Section 404(e), general per- mits may be issued by USACE for categories of activities that are similar in nature and would have only minimal individual or cumulative adverse effects on aquatic resources. General permits can be issued on a nationwide (nationwide permit) or regional (regional general permit) basis. A general permit can also be issued on a programmatic basis (programmatic general permit) to avoid duplication of per- mits for state, local, or other federal agency programs. Regional mitigation strategies: Strategies intended to define mitigation needs for a particular scenario that incorporate all significant, foreseeable stressors and their impacts on resources. Regional-scale or context: Referring to assessment and planning conducted within an area characterized by multijurisdictional and/or ecological or watershed boundar- ies. No set size defines a region, but a region is larger than a local planning jurisdic- tion and may encompass an MPO boundary or larger. Regulatory assurance: Acceptance from regulatory agencies of planned actions to miti- gate identified impacts. Resource conservation requirement: Define what resources need to remain viable, such as minimum patch/occurrence size, sensitivity/compatibility with stressors, mini- mum population size, and so forth. Resource requirement: See resource conservation requirement. Restoration: Reestablishment of wetland and/or other aquatic resource characteristics and function(s) at a site where they have ceased to exist, or exist in a substantially degraded state (http://www.wetlands.com/pro/fr21jul99pte.htm). Restoration areas: Locations identified for conducting restoration activities for target resources. Right-of-way: A parcel of land granted by deed or easement for construction and maintenance according to a designated use. This may include highways, streets, canals, ditches, and the areas adjacent to these structures. Scenario-based planning: An approach for developing plausible descriptions and, op- tionally, maps of future conditions incorporating changes in stressors and new stressors. Scenarios: Specific to the IEF, maps that incorporate land use (including conserva- tion), infrastructure, and all other stressors for particular time frames identified for assessment. Scientifically based methods: Methods that employ one or more of the following: (1) a systematic approach to observation or analyses, (2) use of best available data, (3) use of rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the stated hypotheses, (4) measurements or observational methods that provide valid data across multiple

46 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK evaluators and observers and across multiple measurements and observations, and (5) acceptance by a peer-reviewed journal or approval by a panel of independent experts through a comparatively rigorous, objective, and scientific review. Spatial data: Information about the location and shape of, and relationships among, geographic features, usually stored as coordinates and topology within a geo- graphic information system. Species and habitat recovery: The process required by the USFWS and National Ma- rine Fisheries Service (NMFS) of creating an endangered species recovery plan outlining the goals, tasks required, likely costs, and estimated timeline to recover endangered species (i.e., increase their numbers and improve their management to the point that they can be removed from the endangered list). Species location: See known species location. Species observations: The documentation of evidence of the presence or absence of an element at a specified location. Observations document the location of the ele- ment and may include nonspatial information such as abundance, distribution, reproductive status or phenology, ecological associations, and environmental conditions. Species of conservation concern: Any species that is “of concern” because it is vulner- able to extinction due to habitat destruction or other impact that has led to the decline of viable populations of this species or is vulnerable because it inherently has a very limited range of occurrence and therefore is more vulnerable to poten- tial impacts. Such species may or may not have a legal protection status. Species viability: Species are viable if they have the conditions to persist over time. Stakeholder: An individual or group with an interest in the success of an organization in delivering intended results and maintaining the viability of the organization’s products and services. Stakeholders influence programs, products, and services. State wildlife action plan (SWAP): A proactive plan, known technically as a compre- hensive wildlife conservation strategy, that assesses the health of a state’s wildlife and habitats, identifies the problems they face, and outlines the actions needed to conserve them over the long term. Under the Wildlife Conservation and Res- toration Program and the State Wildlife Grants Program, Congress charged each state and territory with developing a wildlife action plan (http://teaming.com/ state-wildlife-action-plans-swaps). Strategic habitat conservation (SHC): A science-based framework for making manage- ment decisions about where and how to deliver conservation efficiently to achieve specific biological outcomes. Strategic habitat conservation incorporates biological planning and conservation design, delivery, monitoring, and research in a frame- work that allows change (adaptive) and repetition (iterative) (http://training.fws. gov/BART/resources/SHC/SHC_fact_sheet.htm). Streamline/streamlining: The process of several agencies working together to estab- lish realistic time frames, adhere to those time frames, and effectively coordinate

47 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK time and resources to complete a transportation process as efficiently as possible. Section 1309 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) mandated environmental streamlining, which it defined as the timely delivery of transportation projects while protecting and enhancing the environment. A key element of environmental streamlining is communication with and gathering of input from the public and stakeholders (http://www.transportationforcommuni- ties.com/shrpc01/glossary). Stressor: Any feature, action, or phenomenon capable of negatively affecting a re- source. Factors causing such impacts may or may not have anthropogenic origins. Note that a stressor for one resource may not be a stressor for another one. Systematic conservation planning: An approach to assessing and planning for conser- vation that is based on certain concepts, such as coarse and fine filters for select- ing surrogates for biodiversity and establishing quantitative goals for representing biodiversity in a region (see Groves 2003). Target resources: Resources that are the objective of particular actions in a plan or location (e.g., the resources requiring mitigation under a particular plan or for a particular location to receive mitigation action). Transaction costs: The cost associated with the exchange of goods or services. Trans- action costs cover a wide range, but in the context of transportation and natural resources planning and management, some of these costs include cost of commu- nication and consultation, fees and costs associated with creating easements, costs associated with obtaining data and conducting analyses, biological inventories of species and habitats. Transportation and natural resource practitioner: Staff from any local, regional, state, or other type of planning agency or organization. Transportation Improvement Program (TIP): A document prepared by a metropolitan planning organization that lists projects to be funded with FHWA or Federal Tran- sit Administration (FTA) funds for the next 1- to 3-year period (http://www.fhwa. dot.gov/planning/glossary/glossary_listing.cfm?sort=definition&TitleStart=L). Transportation planner: Staff involved in transportation planning activities at state DOT, MPO, and local county or tribal planning agencies. Under the Eco-Logical guidance, the goal is to create a regional-scale approach to planning which involves local, regional, and state-level agencies and organizations working collaboratively. Transportation planning: Transportation planning, in the United States, that includes public involvement and considers land use, development, safety, and security. The planning process includes an analysis and evaluation of the potential impact of transportation plans and projects and strives to address a wide range of societal needs and concerns. Planning is done at the local, rural, tribal, metropolitan, state- wide, national, and international level. Transportation project development (and delivery): The general process of seeing a transportation project from the beginning, when a need is identified from an

48 MANAGER’S GUIDE TO THE INTEGRATED ECOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK existing plan, to getting it programmed, to the end, when it is approved for imple- mentation. The delivery of a transportation project is the process of implementing it once it is developed. Unfragmented habitat patches: Areas of land that have no discontinuities or barriers. Fragmented habitat has discontinuities or disturbances in an organism’s preferred environment. Fragmentation of habitats can cause the fragmentation of and im- pact to specific species populations. Species typically have a minimum habitat size that is required for survival, and in some cases this habitat needs to be unfrag- mented or have limited fragmentation for the species to persist over time. Vegetation data: Data describing vegetation and plant communities’ composition and distribution. Vulnerability: A resource’s susceptibility to stressors. By coupling the exposure of re- sources to stressors with the assessment of resource responses to stressors, the ef- fect of stressors on the resources (i.e., their vulnerability) can be calculated. Watershed: A land area that drains to a common waterway, such as a stream, lake, estuary, wetland, or ultimately the ocean (33 CFR § 332.2). Watershed restoration: “The return of an ecosystem to a close approximation of its condition prior to disturbance. In restoration, ecological damage to the resource is repaired. Both the structure and the functions of the ecosystem are recreated. … The goal is to emulate a natural, functioning, self-regulating system that is inte- grated with the ecological landscape in which it occurs” (NRC 1992). Weighting values: Values typically expressed as numeric scores on a fixed scale to in- dicate the relative importance of individual resources within the REF. They can be used to calculate and depict the relative importance or value of locations based on the weights of the resources present. Wetland function: A process or series of processes that take place within a wetland. These include the storage of water, transformation of nutrients, growth of living matter, and diversity of wetland plants; and they have value for the wetland itself, for surrounding ecosystems, and for people. Functions can be grouped broadly as habitat, hydrologic, or water quality, although these distinctions are somewhat ar- bitrary and simplistic. For example, the value of a wetland for recreation (hunting, fishing, bird watching) is a product of all the processes that work together to create and maintain the wetland (http://water.usgs.gov/nwsum/WSP2425/ functions.html).

Next: REFERENCES »
Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2) S2-C06-RW-4: Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Ecological Framework is designed to provide a basic understanding of the Integrated Ecological Framework (IEF), a nine-step process for integrating ecological and transportation planning. It presents information about the relevant stakeholders and types of expertise needed to help ensure positive transportation infrastructure and conservation outcomes.

The guide also includes updates to earlier documents developed for the C06 project. The guide is available in electronic format only.

The guide is part four of a four-volume set. Other volumes in the set include:

A supplemental report, Integrated Ecological Framework Outreach Project, documents the techniques used to disseminate the project's results into practitioner communities and provides technical assistance and guidance to those agencies piloting the products.

Each step of the IEF is supported by a database of case studies, data, methods, and tools. The IEF is available through the Transportation for Communities – Advancing Projects through Partnerships (TCAPP) website. TCAPP will be re-launched at a future date as “PlanWorks” by the Federal Highway Administration.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!