Ecological resilience is a powerful heuristic for ecosystem management in the context of rapid environmental change. Significant efforts are underway to improve the resilience of biodiversity and ecological function to extreme events and directional change across all types of landscapes, from intact natural systems to highly modified landscapes such as cities and agricultural regions. However, identifying management strategies likely to promote ecological resilience remains a challenge. In this article, we present seven core dimensions to guide long-term and large-scale resilience planning in highly modified landscapes, with the objective of providing a structure and shared vocabulary for recognizing opportunities and actions likely to increase resilience across the whole landscape. We illustrate application of our approach to landscape-scale ecosystem management through case studies from two highly modified California landscapes, Silicon Valley and the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta. We propose that resilience-based management is best implemented at large spatial scales and through collaborative, cross-sector partnerships.
Deciding where to implement actions for biodiversity conservation remains challenging for many reasons, including the increase in maps aimed at prioritizing locations for conservation efforts. Although a growing numbers of maps can create the perception of uncertainty and competing science, a shared set of principles underlie many mapping initiatives. We overlaid the priority areas identified by a subset of maps to assess the extent to which they agree. The comparison suggests that when maps are used without understanding their origin, confusion seems justified: The union of all maps covers 73% of the contiguous United States, whereas the intersection of all maps is at least 3.5%. Our findings support the need to place a strong focus on the principles and premises underpinning the maps and the end users' intentions. We recommend developing a science-based guidance to aid scientists, policymakers, and managers in selecting and applying maps for supporting on-the-ground decisions addressing biodiversity loss and its interconnected crises.
In response to the need and an intergovernmental commission for a high resolution and data-derived global ecosystem map, land surface elements of global ecological pattern were characterized in an ecophysiographic stratification of the planet. The stratification produced 3,923 terrestrial ecological land units (ELUs) at a base resolution of 250 meters. The ELUs were derived from data on land surface features in a three step approach. The first step involved acquiring or developing four global raster datalayers representing the primary components of ecosystem structure: bioclimate, landform, lithology, and land cover. These datasets generally represent the most accurate, current, globally comprehensive, and finest spatial and thematic resolution data available for each of the four inputs. The second step involved a spatial combination of the four inputs into a single, new integrated raster dataset where every cell represents a combination of values from the bioclimate, landforms, lithology, and land cover datalayers. This foundational global raster datalayer, called ecological facets (EFs), contains 47,650 unique combinations of the four inputs. The third step involved an aggregation of the EFs into the 3,923 ELUs. This subdivision of the Earth’s surface into relatively fine, ecological land areas is designed to be useful for various types of ecosystem research and management applications, including assessments of climate change impacts to ecosystems, economic and non-economic valuation of ecosystem services, and conservation planning.
Eradication of an invasive species is a holy grail sought by land managers, scientists and policy makers alike. This prize is particularly attractive to funding bodies that foresee a one-off investment to solve a problem. We evaluate a 20-year eradication project on the annual weed Martynia annua L. from remote Gregory (Jutburra) National Park in northern Australia. M. annua was regionally introduced in the 1860s and has since become naturalised and locally abundant on some pastoral properties. When land use changed from grazing to national park in the mid 1980s, M. annua was thought to be a serious problem. An eradication project was started in the late 1980s. Eradication of all individuals from within the National Park has not been successful but there have been other benefits of the project. We analysed operational, biological, social and economic criteria to find that the principal barriers to eradication were: occasional inaccessibility during the crucial seed production window; many widely dispersed small infestations; a perennial seed bank; and long-distance dispersal mechanisms. The two successes of the project were control of the weed to a level where ecological impact was negligible; and extensive community engagement. A novel approach adopted by the National Park, a biannual event called the Devil’s Claw Festival, has trained and educated hundreds of local, national and international people about biological invasions and conservation issues in remote northern Australia. Long-term institutional leadership and investment have been crucial for this project. We offer recommendations to policy makers embarking on eradication projects of widespread rangeland weeds.
Abstract Regulations and guidelines with recommendations on driving and flying following a major cardiac event or cardiac intervention, or both, have been published by national and international cardiology societies, including the European Society of Cardiology. However, most of them are mainly based on consensus of opinion of experts and/or small studies and registries, and become outdated in the light of emerging new evidence. What constitutes an acceptable risk cannot always be answered by scientific evidence and may have to be a matter of consensus. The balance between individual freedom and protection of the public is not easily achieved and requires ongoing review and update.
