Ecosystem service indicators on military-managed drylands in the Western United States.

Abstract

Lands devoted to military use are globally important for the production of ecosystem services and for the conservation of biodiversity. The United States has one of the largest military land estates in the world, and most of these areas occur in water-limited landscapes. Despite many of these areas receiving intense or sustained disturbance from military training activities, the structure and function of ecosystems contained within their boundaries continue to provide critical benefits to people across spatial scales. The land owned and managed by the Department of Defense is subject to regulation across local, state, and federal governing bodies, constraining and shaping both how land management is conducted and how ecosystem services are prioritized. Here, we explored the supply of ecosystem services from military lands in dryland areas of the United States using key indicators of ecosystem services: biodiversity estimates derived from range maps, ecosystem productivity estimates from satellite observations, and spatially explicit, hierarchical ecosystem classifications. Additionally, we utilized content analysis of the environmental management plans of these areas to describe the unique set of demands and regulatory constraints on these areas. We found that the US military land estate in drylands contains many types of ecosystems and provides a large and diverse supply of ecosystem services, comparable to the sum of services from public lands in these areas. Additionally, the degree to which the ecosystem services concept is captured in environmental management plans is strongly shaped by the language of the governing legislation that mandated the use of environmental management plans in these areas, although these plans do not explicitly address land management using the concept of ecosystem services. Collectively, our findings suggest that military use and management of land represents an important source of ecosystem services, that military land use can be considered a cultural ecosystem service unto itself, and that top-down regulation can affect how these services are identified and valued. Our work highlights the need for the research and conservation communities to quantify ecosystem services from individual military installations so that both services and biodiversity can be safeguarded in an era of military conflict across the globe.