Summary and Comparison of Version 3.0 and Version 4.0
If you can't read please download the document
description
Summary and Comparison of Version 3.0 and Version 4.0 . “The Land Health Concept and Conservation” (1946). “The capacity for self-renewal in the biota.”. Abnormal erosion Decline of yields Shortening of species lists Dominance of plant weeds . Symptons of “Land Sickness”. Indicators. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of Summary and Comparison of Version 3.0 and Version 4.0
-
Summary and Comparison of Version 3.0 and Version 4.0
-
The Land Health Concept and Conservation (1946)Abnormal erosionDecline of yields Shortening of species listsDominance of plant weeds The capacity for self-renewal in the biota.Symptons of Land Sickness
-
IndicatorsAttributesInterpretationsApplications
-
Quantitative & Qualitative StudiesQuantitativeObjective Measure attributes Cheatgrass cover is 85% QualitativeObservedDescribe or rate attributes Cheatgrass is rated as abundant
Strength in Combining the Two
-
Whats Next? Version 4.0- peer review completed Published this summer Protocol will continue to evolve Quantitative Manual (Spring/03)
-
BLMs National Training Center (Phoenix)Course 1730-37 is an interagency course for BLM, NRCS, & NPS (others welcome)
Measurements added
Next course-Boise, ID June 23-27, 2003 Contact -Julie Decker 602-906-5507
/Measuring
-
Changes from Version 3.0 to 4.0Ecological Site Description and/or Ecological Reference Area(s) replaced by Reference Worksheet
-
Changes from Version 3.0 to 4.0Discarded Species Abundance Worksheet and incorporated this information into the Functional/Structural Worksheet
Incorporating more spatial context and State and Transition models into the protocol.
Fine-tuned the worksheets to improve usability.
-
Quantitative
-
Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland HealthIntended UsesUsed by experienced personnel
Provide a preliminary evaluation of rangeland health
Identify areas (early warning) that are potentially at risk of crossing a threshold
Communication tool
-
Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland HealthNot to be used to:Identify the cause(s) of resource problems
Make grazing or other management decisions
Stand alone as a trend or monitoring tool
Independently generate national/regional assessments of rangeland health
-
This technique is not to be used as a monitoring tool (e.g., trend) nor is it to be used as the sole basis for grazing decisions.
Additional qualitative and quantitative information should be evaluated for BLM S&Gs
Review Intended Uses section of TR to insure that this protocol is not used inappropriately
-
Lets work together to make it better
