Rangeland Ecology & Management最新文献

{"title":"Will It Burn? Characterizing Wildfire Risk for the Sagebrush Conservation Design","authors":"Michele R. Crist ,&nbsp;Karen C. Short ,&nbsp;Todd B. Cross ,&nbsp;Kevin E. Doherty ,&nbsp;Julia H. Olszewski","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.014","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.014","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>For millennia, wildfire has helped shape the sagebrush biome of the western United States. Over recent decades, historical fire regimes have been altered by several factors, including contemporary climate and fuel conditions, leading to the loss or degradation of hundreds of thousands of hectares (ha) of sagebrush each year. In response to wildfire threats, extensive fuel treatment investments are proposed across the region. To help inform strategic and cost-effective investments, we conducted a quantitative assessment of wildfire risk for the sagebrush biome. We used a geospatial fire modeling approach, customized for the sagebrush biome, to estimate spatially explicit burn probability and expected average annual area burned within three Sagebrush Ecological Integrity classes under the Sagebrush Conservation Design: Core Sagebrush Areas (CSAs), Growth Opportunity Areas (GOAs), and Other Rangeland Areas. We further used indices of ecological resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasive grasses to characterize fire risk and recovery potential. Our approach indicates that nearly 530,000 ha are likely to burn in a typical contemporary fire year across the highest integrity Sagebrush Ecological Integrity classes (7% in CSAs and 31% in GOAs). Of the CSAs and GOAs likely to burn, nearly 9 000 and 66 000 ha, respectively, are expected to have low resilience or resistance and therefore highest loss potential. Cost-effective conservation investments should include wildfire protection for high-integrity sagebrush with low resilience or resistance. Protection objectives may be met with strategically placed fuel breaks intended to enhance fire prevention and containment efforts. Fuel treatments, including prescribed fire and mechanical activities outside of fuel breaks, are by contrast best suited for high-integrity areas with relatively high resilience and resistance. Those activities should be risk-informed and intended to maintain or improve ecological integrity and resilience to wildfire rather than to exclude fire altogether.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 84-93"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437974","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"State of the Sagebrush: Implementing the Sagebrush Conservation Design to Save a Biome","authors":"K.E. Doherty ,&nbsp;J. Maestas ,&nbsp;T. Remington ,&nbsp;D.E. Naugle ,&nbsp;C. Boyd ,&nbsp;L. Wiechman ,&nbsp;G. Bedrosian ,&nbsp;M. Cahill ,&nbsp;P. Coates ,&nbsp;M. Crist ,&nbsp;M.C. Holdrege ,&nbsp;A.V. Kumar ,&nbsp;T. Mozelewski ,&nbsp;R.C. O'Connor ,&nbsp;E.M. Olimpi ,&nbsp;A. Olsen ,&nbsp;B.G. Prochazka ,&nbsp;J.R. Reinhardt ,&nbsp;J.T. Smith ,&nbsp;W.D. Sparklin ,&nbsp;K. Wollstein","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.017","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.017","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This special issue of Rangeland Ecology and Management is dedicated to applying the Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD) to improve conservation outcomes across the sagebrush biome in the face of pervasive ecosystem threats. This special issue provides new science and real-world examples of how we can implement the SCD to save a biome. The SCD is a tool to identify intact sagebrush areas and address the largest threats to the ecosystem. The SCD focuses on first protecting intact and functioning sagebrush ecosystems, called Core Sagebrush Areas, then works outward toward more degraded areas (i.e., “Defend the Core”). The premise behind the Defend the Core approach is simple: focus resources first on preventative actions that retain ecosystem services in Core Sagebrush Areas because they are more cost-effective and more likely to be successful. The opening article of this special issue creates a foundation for the 19 following papers, providing a coherent path for implementing the SCD. The overarching themes are: 1) Business-As-Usual Won't Save the Sagebrush Sea, 2) Better Spatial Targeting Can Improve Outcomes, 3) Conservation Planning is Needed to Develop Realistic Business Plans, 4) Targeted Ecosystem Management: Monitoring Shows Managing for Sagebrush Ecological Integrity is Working, 5) Maintaining Sagebrush Ecological Integrity is Ecologically Relevant, and 6) There is Only Hope if We Manage Change. The collective articles show that there is no shared plan to save the biome, yet a business plan for the biome could ensure realistic goals. The sagebrush biome still has vast expanses of open spaces with high ecological integrity at a scale that is rare in other ecological systems within the lower 48 states. If we focus on the common ground of the main drivers of ecosystem change, implementing the SCD and Defending the Core are viable strategies to help save a biome.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142438045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evaluating the Sagebrush Conservation Design Strategy Through the Performance of a Sagebrush Indicator Species","authors":"Brian G. Prochazka ,&nbsp;Carl G. Lundblad ,&nbsp;Kevin E. Doherty ,&nbsp;Shawn T. O'Neil ,&nbsp;John C. Tull ,&nbsp;Steve C. Abele ,&nbsp;Cameron L. Aldridge ,&nbsp;Peter S. Coates","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.021","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.021","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Sagebrush ecosystems support a suite of unique species such as the emblematic greater sage-grouse (<em>Centrocercus urophasianus</em>; sage-grouse) but are under increasing pressure from anthropogenic stressors such as annual grass invasion, conifer encroachment, altered wildfire regimes, and land use change. We examined the ability of an ecosystem-based framework for sagebrush conservation, the sagebrush conservation design (SCD) strategy, and the associated model of sagebrush ecological integrity (SEI), to identify and rank priority habitats for sage-grouse, a sagebrush indicator species. We compared sage-grouse population trends from 1996–2021 across the three ranked SEI categories. We then modeled those trends directly as a function of the same landcover predictors underlying SEI, used the median trend estimates to recategorize the sage-grouse's range, and used spatial correlation methods to compare our sage-grouse performance categories with those of SEI. Finally, we compared the sage-grouse condition categories, predicted by our landcover-based model, to empirical trends derived from population count data. We found that the SCD and SEI were effective tools for identifying and ranking priority habitats for sage-grouse. Population trends were stable in the core areas identified by SEI but declining in the lower (i.e., growth and other) condition categories. As a result, core areas encompassed an increasingly larger share of the total sage-grouse population in a disproportionately smaller area. Our model supports the general functional relationships between landcover and sage-grouse performance suggested by SEI. We found strong spatial congruence between our categories of predicted sage-grouse population performance, the condition categories of SEI, and empirical trends derived from population count data. Our analysis demonstrates that proactive ecosystem-based approaches to the conservation of the sagebrush biome can help optimize the return on limited conservation resources and benefits for sagebrush obligate species and help reduce some of the real and perceived conflicts inherent in single-species management.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 146-159"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Crossing the Chasm: Using Technical Transfer to Bridge Science Production and Management Action","authors":"Andrew Olsen ,&nbsp;Megan Creutzburg ,&nbsp;Mariah McIntosh ,&nbsp;Dylan O'Leary ,&nbsp;Katherine Wollstein ,&nbsp;Jeremy D. Maestas ,&nbsp;Lindy Garner ,&nbsp;Brian Mealor","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.008","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.008","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The rangeland science discipline has produced innovative science, datasets, maps, and tools to support rangeland conservation and management, such as those presented in this issue. Yet, there is a persistent gap between science production and on-the-ground implementation of conservation and management actions, and many managers remain in “information overload” while struggling to integrate technical products into management applications. Technical transfer seeks to overcome these barriers and empower land managers to address their land management challenges. We present a principle-based process for conducting effective technical transfer based on the collective experience of a network of technical transfer professionals and highlight an example of this process with Threat-Based Strategic Conservation workshops. We describe how much of the work of technical transfer occurs before any actions are taken, provide best practices for conducting technical transfer, and suggest steps to take after an effort to learn from and perpetuate technical transfer work. We provide considerations and insights for conducting effective technical transfer to support conservation and management in rangelands and beyond.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 178-186"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"An Interactive Tool to Promote Stepping Down the Sagebrush Conservation Design to Local Conservation Planning","authors":"Elissa M. Olimpi ,&nbsp;Tina Mozelewski ,&nbsp;Josh Gage ,&nbsp;Alexander V. Kumar ,&nbsp;Caitlin Littlefield ,&nbsp;Kevin Doherty","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.002","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.002","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Conservation efforts for the sagebrush biome in the western United States have been significant, but habitat loss and degradation are currently outpacing collective conservation efforts. The Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD), cocreated by scientists and managers working across the biome, issues an urgent call to action to radically reprioritize conservation efforts to save the biome. At the heart of SCD is the “defend and grow the core” strategy, which means prioritizing conservation in intact sagebrush areas with native understories and low levels of threats, as opposed to the business-as-usual approach of treating all threats or focusing on areas with the most severe threats. However, SCD applications are limited by the capacity of land managers to integrate maps of rangeland conditions and threats into planning processes for their management area. To increase the integration of spatial data and help managers and planners step down SCD to local-scale conservation planning, we developed a web application that provides a user-friendly interface. Here, we lay out a guide for web application users, which we hope will empower land managers to make strategic conservation decisions that best protect the sagebrush biome.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 107-114"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437976","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Using Satellite Remote Sensing to Assess Shrubland Vegetation Responses to Large-Scale Juniper Removal in the Northern Great Basin","authors":"Joseph T. Smith ,&nbsp;Andrew R. Kleinhesselink ,&nbsp;Jeremy D. Maestas ,&nbsp;Scott L. Morford ,&nbsp;David E. Naugle ,&nbsp;Connor D. White","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.010","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.010","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Woody encroachment into grasslands and shrublands disrupts ecosystem processes and reduces biodiversity. Tree removal is a widespread strategy to restore ecosystem services and biodiversity in impacted landscapes. However, tree removal can also increase the risk of invasion by exotic annual grasses. In western North America, juniper (<em>Juniperus spp.</em>) encroachment threatens the ecological integrity of intact sagebrush (<em>Artemisia tridentata</em>) shrublands. We used remote sensing to track vegetation changes following juniper removals on 288 parcels totaling 106 333 ha in southern Idaho, USA. We also analyzed vegetation changes following 64 wildfires that burned 152 611 ha of nearby rangeland during the same period. We matched areas within removals and wildfires to similar undisturbed areas, and then used causal impact analysis to estimate the effects of the disturbances. Juniper removals resulted in sustained reduction of tree cover and increased perennial forb and grass cover across nearly all sites, achieving key management goals. Based on the metrics evaluated, juniper removal was more effective than wildfire in delivering long-term restoration in this sagebrush system. However, juniper treatments also stimulated temporary undesirable increases in annual grasses and forbs, indicating the need for additional management to achieve durable conservation outcomes. Intensive mechanical methods initially reduced shrub cover in some treatments, but shrubs recovered to near pre-treatment levels within 7 years. Using a recently-developed metric of ecological integrity for sagebrush ecosystems, we show that these large, long-term projects halted or reversed degradation attributed to juniper expansion, demonstrating that restoration can improve the trajectory of ecosystems when implemented at scale.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 123-134"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142438042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cooperative Conservation Actions Improve Sage-Grouse Population Performance Within the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment","authors":"Peter S. Coates ,&nbsp;Brian G. Prochazka ,&nbsp;Sarah C. Webster ,&nbsp;Cali L. Weise ,&nbsp;Cameron L. Aldridge ,&nbsp;Michael S. O'Donnell ,&nbsp;Lief Wiechman ,&nbsp;Kevin E. Doherty ,&nbsp;John C. Tull","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.007","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.007","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Developing a robust monitoring framework that integrates efficacy assessments of cooperative conservation and restoration actions in relation to population viability is critical for successful long-term recovery of target ecosystems and species. However, often it is difficult to quantify conservation action efficacy because of the complex, dynamic nature of ecosystem processes and practical limitations associated with assessing target species’ population dynamics. Here, we present an analytical framework that allows for quantification of conservation action efficacy using greater sage-grouse (<em>Centrocercus urophasianus</em>; hereafter, sage-grouse) within the Bi-State Distinct Population Segment which spans the border of Nevada and California. This framework utilizes a web-based repository of conservation efforts carried out in sagebrush ecosystems and readily fits within contemporary sagebrush conservation design strategies. We employed a state-space model within a Bayesian framework to estimate abundance (<em>N</em>) as inputs for a progressive change before-after-control-impact paired series (BACIPS) design. Although sage-grouse populations continue to decline in the Bi-State, count data from 57 leks (monitored between 2003–2021) coupled with 85 unique actions (initiated between 2012–2019) provided clear evidence that conservation efforts increased population abundance, on average, by 4.4% annually, resulting in a predicted population abundance that was 37.4% greater than if no actions had occurred, since 2012. Population gains varied by the type of conservation action and according to the number of lag years following its implementation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 135-145"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142438040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"There Is No Hope Without Change: A Perspective on How We Conserve the Sagebrush Biome","authors":"Matthew Cahill","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.004","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.004","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This is not a typical journal article in tone or style. As part of a special issue focused on the Sagebrush Conservation Design and Strategic Conservation, this paper highlights how we need to change our management of the sagebrush biome with a perspective of why that change matters. Sagebrush ecosystems are in steep decline, losing more than 1 million acres annually for decades from biome-altering threats of invasive annual grasses, conifer expansion, catastrophic wildfire, and climate change. As illustrated by the other papers in this special issue, management of the sagebrush biome needs to drastically change, focusing prevention and restoration on intact landscapes while accepting we cannot bring back the biome where it is already lost. Imbedded in this choice to change how we manage the biome is why that change matters. In this paper I include a series of personal anecdotes, observations, and connections that I hope helps you, the reader, understand the content of this special issue not only as an integrated body of science, but also an embrace of how we relate to the future of the biome. I embrace that future by applying the Defend and Grow the Core framework around Sagebrush Conservation Design Core and Growth Areas, and by layering in the tenants of the Resist, Accept, Direct model. The biggest gaps for ecosystem management are not from lack of knowledge, but from lack of clear administration priorities and funding, and robust social capacity to restore and steward our last geographies of hope. By using both a pessimist's and optimist's perspective on the plight of the range, I hope you deeply sense the opportunity and the urgency we face, making hard choices of what we do and where, building a long-term commitment to a restoration economy, and supporting people to save the sagebrush sea.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 209-214"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437892","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Closing the Conservation Gap: Spatial Targeting and Coordination are Needed for Conservation to Keep Pace with Sagebrush Losses","authors":"Tina G. Mozelewski ,&nbsp;Patrick T. Freeman ,&nbsp;Alexander V. Kumar ,&nbsp;David E. Naugle ,&nbsp;Elissa M. Olimpi ,&nbsp;Scott L. Morford ,&nbsp;Michelle I. Jeffries ,&nbsp;David S. Pilliod ,&nbsp;Caitlin E. Littlefield ,&nbsp;Sarah E. McCord ,&nbsp;Lief A. Wiechman ,&nbsp;Emily J. Kachergis ,&nbsp;Kevin E. Doherty","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.016","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.016","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Core sagebrush areas (CSAs), patches of high sagebrush ecological integrity, continue to decline despite significant conservation and restoration investments across the sagebrush biome. Historically, conservation decisions in the biome have been driven by wildlife species-specific demands, but increasing recognition of the scale of threats and the pace of ecosystem degradation has compelled a shift towards threat-based ecosystem management. Therefore, there is a need to evaluate the scale of conservation implementation relative to the rate of degradation or loss from specific threats to the biome to assess whether a conservation deficit exists. To this end, we: 1) quantified and compared the average hectares of conservation practices implemented annually relative to the hectares of CSA loss attributed to each threat; 2) evaluated the relative amount of conservation actions in core sagebrush areas, growth opportunity areas, and other rangeland areas; and 3) assessed how much additional conservation may be needed to stop CSA declines. We then quantified how better spatial targeting and enhanced coordination might reduce the total additional amount of future conservation needed, and evaluated how an influx of resources can close the conservation gap, or the deficit between the conservation needed to offset annual loss and degradation and the capacity for conservation implementation. We found that current rates of conservation (e.g., hectares treated annually) are markedly lower than rates of CSA loss (∼10% of average annual loss). Furthermore, most conservation actions, ∼90% for some treatment types, occurred outside of CSAs likely reducing the efficacy of these conservation actions at retaining and restoring intact sagebrush rangelands. Additionally, we found that conservation efforts will need to increase by more than an order of magnitude (at least 10x) annually to halt CSA declines. However, through better spatial targeting of conservation actions, the increase in conservation needed to stop CSA loss could be reduced by 70% or more. This analysis demonstrates the divergent futures that may await the sagebrush biome pending key decisions regarding conservation targeting, stakeholder cooperation, and the strategic addition of resources.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 12-24"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Well-Connected Core Areas Retain Ecological Integrity of Sagebrush Ecosystems Amidst Overall Declines From 2001–2021","authors":"David M. Theobald ,&nbsp;Alexander V. Kumar ,&nbsp;Kevin Doherty ,&nbsp;Katherine A. Zeller ,&nbsp;Todd B. Cross","doi":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.020","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.rama.2024.08.020","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Conservation of species’ mobility and ecological integrity is necessary for the productivity of the sagebrush biome in the western United States. Building on the recently developed Sagebrush Conservation Design (SCD) that mapped sagebrush ecological integrity (SEI)—defined as the higher cover of sagebrush and perennial grass and reduced threats due to invasive annual grass, tree encroachment, and human disturbance—we modeled the structural connectivity of sagebrush ecosystems to better incorporate the role of landscape-level processes into assessments of integrity. Because integrity can vary spatially, as well as temporally, we quantified both interannual variability and trends in variability in SEI from 2001–2021. We used the resultant map to identify areas with high structural landscape connectivity (i.e., “well-connected cores”), then determined the coincident core sagebrush areas (CSAs) that represent functioning sagebrush ecosystem with few landscape threats, and growth opportunity areas (GOAs) that represent functioning systems impacted by one or more threats as originally defined and mapped in the SCD. We found that CSAs were located in areas with higher landscape connectivity, and the biome-wide average of SEI declined by 30% from 2001 to 2021, although the structural connectivity biome-wide declined one-third less (by 20%). CSAs located in areas with high connectivity had 25% higher SEI values on average than those with low connectivity, and the trend in declining SEI values was slower. Our datasets of landscape connectivity can be combined with other SCD products to provide a broader ecosystem context—both spatially and temporally. Our results can be used to inform, refine, focus, and prioritize conservation and management efforts to those CSAs and GOAs we identified as particularly well connected and which may be more resilient to recently altered dynamics and declines—those that will serve to anchor efforts to conserve the sagebrush biome in light of changing land use and climate.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49634,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Ecology & Management","volume":"97 ","pages":"Pages 41-50"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142437970","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}