Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
BOX 7.1
Continued
Stewardship efforts should do the following:
• Begin with analysis of the current and historic ecological conditions at the
watershed level—ridge top to ridge top
• Incorporate the social, cultural, and economic dynamics of the local
community
• Maintain spatial and temporal patterns of species composition, structure, and
seral stages that are within a resilient range for the landscape
• Address not only the symptoms but also the causes of habitat loss and modifi-
cation that exceed normal ranges and cycles for these disturbance-adapted
systems
• Avoid strategies likely to entail recurring high maintenance costs
• Define clear, achievable, and measurable management objectives
• Use adaptive and flexible management, supported or modified by feedback
from monitoring, with multiparty monitoring being an important tool for col-
laborative processes on public lands
Stewardship should draw from passive and active management strategies that ad-
dress specific issues and conditions within the watershed. A broad range of resource
management tools needs to be available, including, but not limited to, prescribed
burning, precommercial and commercial logging, revegetation using both native
and nonnative plant species, managed grazing, restoring channel morphology and
structure, use of herbicides and pesticides, riparian and rare plant community pro-
tection as well as permanent and temporary road closures.
$200,000 was invested in the forest and range surveys alone. Each of these subcom-
mittees was formed from a diverse group of citizens and agency representatives under
the invitation of Wallowa County. The subcommittees soon recognized the need for
further information about wildlife habitat to allow for consideration of the full range
of species within the watershed. The subcommittees jointly conferred with a variety
of wildlife specialists and wildlife-based interest groups, as well as the Nez Perce tribe.
Along with subcommittee representatives, this conference included representatives
from federal agencies (the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Oceanic and At-
mospheric Administration-Fisheries, and USFS), the State of Oregon (Oregon De-
partment of Fish and Wildlife), conservation organizations (Hells Canyon Preserva-
tion Council, The Nature Conservancy, and Defenders of Wildlife), and local entities
(Wallowa Resources and the Wallowa County Soil and Water Conservation District).
Key issues resulting from the workshop were incorporated into the integrated
recommendations.
The forest vegetation subcommittee built a methodology for assessing forest con-
ditions based on the existing USFS vegetation database. In addition to the aforemen-
tioned entities, collaborators included Joseph Timber Company, Wallowa Forest
Products, RY Timber, Oregon Department of Forestry, and private landowners. The
