The genius founder of the CNN, TBS and TNT cable networks, Ted Turner, is the largest private landowners in the USA..........."Exemplifying an unending case of biophelia(love of creation), Ted has spent much of the last 30 years puzzling back together the broken pieces of the western landscape, making it more closely resembling a pre-European-contact picture"............. "Now, after a relatively mum decade, the man who invented cable news is back to the bullhorn, evangelizing via a fledgling ecotourism business known as Ted Turner Expeditions (TTX)"............"“I don’t have a single cow".........."We’ve replaced them with bison, the original animal that populated the plains"........... "They’re more environmentally friendly as far as grazing is concerned"................"Cattle evolved in Europe, where there’s copious rainfall and lush grass, whereas bison grew up on the plains with no cattle or horses"..............."Our ranches(14 of them covering 1.9 million acres, all with conservation easements) don’t have domestic sheep or domestic goats"............. "Those "domestics" didn’t come from America either; they came over from Europe"..........."The most numerous bird in the U.S. is the starling"............"There were none in North America"............."They were brought over from Europe to eat caterpillars on fruit trees, and they’ve taken off and become the most numerous bird in North America"..............."Not one person in 10 knows that"..............."Turner’s land represents a new kind of park, a private national park, encompassing the ideals and ambitions of its outspoken owner"............"Importing foreign species is a very tricky business"............."They take over native creatures becasue their natural predators are not present here and throw the circle of life out of whack"............"And you practically can’t get rid of that once it gets established".................I hope all of you join me in a "tip of the hat" for Mr. Ted, 'for putting into practice and demonstrating by example, the ultimate environmental goal of leaving the land in as fine a condition, ecologically speaking, as one found it, or to do no harm, or, whenever possible, to use proceeds to heal past abuses and restore ecological function in a way that re-enhances natural values"

http://www.amtrakthenational.com/ted-turner-is-on-a-mission-to-save-everything

Ted Turner Is on a Mission to Save Everything

Story by Elaine Glusac • Photography by Jesse Rieser • For the December 2016 – January 2017 issue
Mr. Ted Turner

http://mountainjournal.org/the-essential-role-of-capitalism-in-protecting-nature

The Essential Role Of Eco-Capitalism In Saving The Best That Remains

GREATER YELLOWSTONE'S RICH TAPESTRY WILL BE WON—OR LOST—BASED ON WHAT BUSINESSPEOPLE DO NEXT

 January 29, 2018; by Todd Wilkinson

While I was researching my book on Greater Yellowstone media pioneer turned bison rancher Ted Turner (Last Stand: Ted Turner's Quest to Save a Troubled Planet), my thinking about landscape-level conservation began to shift, particularly in pondering the critical intersection of public and private land.

As I have shared with friends, after giving a hundred public talks on Turner's trailblazing ethos as an eco-capitalist, I've accrued far more knife wounds in the back from environmentalists who are skeptical about any billionaire doing good.  Some are warier of Turner than hardcore political conservatives who have convinced themselves he is somehow an evil lefty simply because he was married to actress Jane Fonda.

It's mind-boggling how many perceptions of people are based upon mythology or hearsay that isn't ground-truthed by fact. 

This I know: In business circles today, there are many people talking about "the triple bottom line,"—i.e. maintaining a measurable ledger sheet that accounts for three different kinds of values factored into business decisions.

° The first is the factual reality that in order for the dividends of private lands conservation to persist into the future, being passed along from one generation to the next, they need to be economically sustainable. That is, conservation which functions only as a net debt proposition or liability heired to future generations cannot and will not last, no matter how solid the intentions. That's why Western ranch country is riddled with a history of land consolidations and bust-ups. Any self-righteous person who doesn't understand the difference between operating in the red versus being in the black has no business criticizing people who live by its cruel reality. This is the economic leg of the triple-bottom line.

 Secondly, as Turner has put into practice and demonstrated by example, the ultimate goal is to leave land in as fine a condition, ecologically speaking, as one found it, or to do no harm, or, whenever possible, to use proceeds to heal past abuses and restore ecological function in a way that re-enhances natural values. This is the ecologic leg and achieving this can be accelerated if incentives are provided that help alleviate the costs of doing good.

° Thirdly, decisions should be done in a way in which humans are approached with dignity. It means treating employees well and paying them a living wage with health insurance in the event they or family members get sick. It means that working for you does not leave employees in a chronic state of economic desperation.  It means treating your neighbors with respect and working constructively across fencelines to preserve the values both sides hold dear.  It means trying to keep as much of your economic activity local, enabling investment dollars to trickle down and cycle widely throughout the community.

Many environmental problems inherited from the Old West are the result of not adhering to those principles—of approaching the region as one would a natural resource colony. Distant boardrooms aren't always interested in the long-term condition of the land following its exploitation, or building durable, diverse communities, or thinking beyond short-term profitability.  

In economic parlance, the costs that companies don't account for, and have passed along for others to deal with, are called "externalities" and often those costs have been passed along to taxpayers in the form of expensive cleanups.

No one can deny that because of modern environmental regulations put on the books to protect public lands—and an accompanying shift toward more enlightened thinking, corporate accountability driven by social concerns of shareholders, and incentives for advancing better stewardship on private lands— things have dramatically improved over the last century.

That's good news but in a region like Greater Yellowstone the ecological threads holding wildness together extend across both private and public land. In some cases it doesn't matter how big the public land base is; if key pieces of private land—like tracts encompassing river valleys, wildlife corridors and winter range or breeding habitat—aren't safeguarded, the whole fabric could unravel.

Mountain Journal believes in celebrating and highlighting the efforts of private sector exemplars. Some of these are demonstrating how the tenets of the triple bottom line work on a variety of scales. Some of the stories that we'll be featuring here will include tales of businesspeople who, once infected with biophilia, have become local heroes in their communities by bringing innovative ideas to land protection. 

Most people, we believe, want to do the right thing in order to protect the landscapes they are drawn to and nurture their souls, but many don't know how.

Mountain Journal is a place where good ideas are shared. Correspondingly, there is an astounding amount of financial wealth congregated in Greater Yellowstone, held by people (permanent denizens and part-time visitors) who are drawn to the natural beauty and unparalleled wildlife values here.

Many have demonstrated their commitment to the ethic of giving back and, being big picture people, they understand how their can make a profound difference in helping to preserve the best of Greater Yellowstone that remains. With more involvement from people with means, game-changing things are possible and yet there is urgency given accelerating growth trends and landscape-level shifts brought by climate change already under way. 

To get us started, we are sharing two short videos here that are well worth viewing. The first involves the story of Bozeman capital investment manager Robert Keith who delivered a TedX-Bozeman talk. Together with Carl Palmer, Keith founded the Bozeman-based Beartooth Group in 2005 that identifies investment opportunities for those interested in the triple bottom line.  Palmer today heads Santa Barbara, California-based LegacyWorksGroup that works with non-profits and uses impact investing on ecological restoration, strategy development, environment-friendly entrepreneurship, and place-based education.

Keith in his TED Talk mentioned a statistic. Today there are over 18,000 investment firms in the U.S. that manage about $16 trillion and invest $500 billion a year in new projects. "What if we could take a tiny sliver of that investment capital and put it to work for a good cause, in our case restoration and protection of the American West?" he asked.

Think of how the figures cited by Keith have grown over the last decade and a half. If you are a person with means who resides in Greater Yellowstone or plans to retire here, it's chic to support environmental protection; it lifts up your value and prestige in a community.

Businessman Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City and an outspoken promoter of sustainability, corporate altruism, and healthy environments, is featured in the February 2018 edition of National Geographic with NatGeo's Editor in Chief Susan Goldberg. 

Bloomberg notes that acting on altruism is admirable but he notes that sound environmental decisions have shown time and again to be shrewd investment decisions, too. Moreover, companies that are openly committed to environmental protection are attracting top-flight talent entering the workforce. 

When Goldberg asked Bloomberg what role big employers play in the environment, Bloomberg replied, "Why will a corporation be environmentally friendly?  Today, if you go and recruit on campus for the best and brightest, they [young people] interview you. They ask, What are you doing for the environment? Employees want to work for an environmentally-friendly company. And then there are investors. If you talk to the managers of the big pensions and endowments, they want socially responsible investing. We don't buy coal stocks, gun stocks, tobacco stocks."

"Today, if you go and recruit on campus for the best and brightest, they [young people] interview you. They ask, What are you doing for the environment? Employees want to work for an environmentally-friendly company. And then there are investors. If you talk to the managers of the big pensions and endowments, they want socially responsible investing."  —Michael Bloomberg

The second video highlights a news-making agreement, just announced, that involves the creation of new national parks in the Patagonia region of Chile, made possible by Kristine Tompkins and her late husband, Doug. Following their multi-decade careers as businesspeople and entrepreneurs in the clothing industry, the Tompkinses saw an urgent need for wildland conservation in that South American country. 

Tompkins founded both The North Face and Esprit. Kris McDivitt Tompkins helped Yvon and Malinda Chouinard build clothing company Patagonia—while serving as its chief executive officer—into one of the most respected environment-minded companies in the world. She was instrumental in founding One Percent For The Planet by which companies devote one percent of their profits to causes advancing environmental protection. In recent decades, the Tompkinses poured themselves and their resources into buying private property in Chile.

They worked hard to win the trust of locals and their land acquisition has culminated in giving their properties to the Chilean government on behalf of citizens there. The centerpiece is Pumalin Park, an 800,000-acre, publicly-accessible reserve in Chile's Los Lagos region. Another focus area is the Ibera Wetlands in northeastern Argentina. Both are shining examples of private enterprise bettering nature and humanity.  

A historic five-park agreement, signed by Kris Tompkins and Chile President Michelle Bachelet, was announced January 29, 2018. You can read the Guardian story about it here. 

Mountain Journal's friend Dennis Glick, who founded the Bozeman, Montana-based think tank FutureWest and oversaw the Greater Yellowstone Tomorrow program for the Greater Yellowstone Coalition, has often spoken to us about the "south-to-north" axis of conservation lessons learned.

Normally, and often, land protection has been presented as a purely imperialistic gringo invention and one that has spread to the rest of the world in the wake of Yellowstone National Park's creation in 1872.

But as Glick, who worked as a Peace Corps volunteer in Central America and then became a leader in World Wildlife Fund's conservation initiatives there four decades ago, says: "There is much we can learn from how other countries have adopted and adapted conservation models to suit their own needs." 

Before resetting in Greater Yellowstone 30 years ago, Glick worked in Costa Rica, a nation for which nature-tourism is its main economic engine. Fully 25 percent of Costa Rica's land mass is protected via a network of 27 national parks, 58 wildlife refuges, 32 other protected zones, 15 wetland areas/mangroves, 11 forest reserves, eight biological reserves and a dozen others. All of these areas are aimed at safeguarding biological diversity which attracts travelers from around the world. 

Consider: Costa Rica, about the size of West Virginia, is home to 10,000 species of plants and trees, 850 indigenous and migrant birds (some that spend part of their year in the U.S.), 205 species of mammals, over 35,000 speaks of insects, 160 species of amphibians, 220 species of reptiles, and around 1,013 species of fresh and saltwater fish.

Glick helped lay the groundwork for a number of national parks in Central America and he praises the Tompkinses for persevering over resistance in Chile. As he says, the citizens of Costa Rica are proud of their natural heritage and he says that in a generation the parks created by the Tompkinses in Chile and Argentina will be cherished as national treasures embedded in their identity.

Here's a truth: without the private sector marshaling both human intellectual and financial capital to address critical conservation issues in Greater Yellowstone, the wildness in America's most iconic ecosystem could become fragmented and seriously eroded within the span of a single generation.

When I first moved into my southern California home, Moles were my first year "close-in" neighbors, tunneling caverns beneath my back lawn......... ."These molehills were from 2-inches to 2-feet tall, as they pushed excess soil to the surface"................... "One mole can dig 200-feet of feeding tunnels in a 24-hour period"............ "So, even though it may seem like you have a multitude of moles in your yard, you probably only have one; maybe two"............ "Moles are solitary, territorial animals, requiring large territories in which to forage".........I did not kill them with poison..............I flushed them out with my watering hose, trapped them in a pail and "re-wilded" them across the street in open-space terrain............."Note that while I chose to move my "digging neighbors", they can be good neighbros if your choose to allow holes in your yard..............."Moles feed on white grubs; beetle larvae".......... "And they can eat their weight in grubs".........., "Moles have an insatiable appetite for Japanese beetles, European chafers, rose chafers, Asiatic garden beetles, and Oriental beetles, before they emerge as adults"......... "All of these beetles are voracious pests of ornamental plants".......

https://adirondackexplorer.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=f2786fbb7862339a0b90113d7&id=6097d49799&e=46b8d98c61

SATURDAY, APRIL 21, 2018

Moles and Voles and Yards with Holes

by Richard Gast

It’s spring. Days are getting longer. The weather’s getting warmer. The sun is sitting higher in the sky. And, as I write this, the persistent snow in my yard is finally giving way to bare ground.

This is the time of year when the consumer horticulture season really begins in earnest at Cooperative Extension. It often starts with questions from anxious callers about recently discovered lawn, landscape, and garden damage; often from wildlife pests. Questions about mice, squirrels, and chipmunks are frequent. But, perhaps because of their tenacious tunneling activities, the most noteworthy culprits of concern to frazzled callers are meadow voles and hairy, or more often, star-nosed moles, the 2 mole species that live in northern New York.

Series of connecting Mole Hills-likely one, at most two Moles
in this picture doing this

It’s certainly worth distinguishing which pest you have. Eastern gray squirrels bury and dig up nuts in the lawn and in mulched garden beds. The holes are typically about the size of a quarter and shallow. But, gray squirrels neatly cover their stashes with the dirt they remove; even taking the time to tap the dirt down with their paws.

Grey squirrels, red squirrels, and flying squirrels are tree squirrels and, as such, do not dig tunnels. They live in hollows in trees, or nests made of twigs and leaves. Red squirrels, however, habitually prune conifers, littering lawns with fallen branch tips. They eat the seeds and leave the rest behind. Flying squirrels do not create as many problems as other tree squirrels. They are the only squirrels that are active at night.


Mole dining on worm..............Beneficial Moles are eating
tons of grubs and invasive beetles

Chipmunks are small ground squirrels with limited digging ability. Chipmunk tunnel entrances are usually found in inconspicuous places (e.g. near stumps, brush or log piles, or buildings) and are about 2 inches in diameter; typically with no loose or piled soil near the opening.

All squirrels may move into attics, walls, or vacant camps. Once inside, they can damage insulation and electrical wiring.

When dealing with problem squirrels, both Remington and Winchester manufacture several products that provide very effective squirrel control. However, local ordinances regarding the discharge of firearms must be followed.

Meadow voles are small rodents, sometimes called field mice. They construct surface runways and underground tunnels. Pine voles may or may not live in the North Country. They don’t use surface runways, but do construct extensive underground tunnel systems.

Mole surveying it's domain from hole

Voles create labyrinthine networks of runways under the snow, in winter. But they usually leave lawns or open areas when the snow melts and the lawn quickly recovers. They can cause extensive damage in orchards, however, by girdling trees. Rabbits will girdle trees, too, but rabbit gnaw marks are markedly larger and more uniform than those of voles.

The star-nosed mole and the hairy-tail mole are the only mole species that live this far north. Both create deep tunnels (burrows where they nest, often under something solid such as tree roots or rocks) and shallow (feeding) tunnels; forming ‘molehills’ that can be from 2-inches to 2-feet tall, as they push excess soil to the surface. One mole can dig 200-feet of feeding tunnels in a 24-hour period. So, even though it may seem like you have a multitude of moles in your yard, you probably only have one; maybe two. Moles are solitary, territorial animals, requiring large territories in which to forage.

Mole outside of it's hole

Moles feed on white grubs; beetle larvae. And they can eat their weight in grubs, daily. In other words, moles have an insatiable appetite for Japanese beetles, European chafers, rose chafers, Asiatic garden beetles, and Oriental beetles, before they emerge as adults. All of these beetles are voracious pests of ornamentals. And, as grubs, all feed on grass roots. In fact, white grubs may be the most damaging turf insect pests in the United States. Because of this, you might try living the mole and raking up the molehills once the ground dries out.

When it comes to mole control, there are no easy answers. And the “control measures” people employ are endless; all sorts of electronic, ultrasonic, and vibrating pest control devices; stuffing the tunnels with brambles, moth balls, broken glass, rat poison, and cat poop; flooding the tunnels. None of these are good ideas.

The family cat is a much better alternative. Or put on your work boots and flatten down portions of the objectionable tunnels. The offending critter will reopen a tunnel that is actively being used. You can then dig up a short length of the working tunnel and set a trap. Scissor or harpoon-type traps work well and are recommended. I find that a rat trap set in the tunnel also works well. Just cover up the open tunnel above the trap using a small piece of plywood and place the soil that you removed on top. A blow from a shovel onto a surface run where a mole is feeding may kill the mole; even several inches beneath the surface.

Photo of Star-nosed mole courtesy US National Park Service.

Less than 1% of the pre-settlement(pre AD1500) forest exists in the USA east of the Mississippi River........."Known as "OLD GROWTH FOREST", these woodlands created the type of ecosystem conditions that most indigenous organisms(plants, insects, reptiles, amphibians, reptiles, mammals and birds were accustomed to and thrived in"........."Old Growth forests are not only old chronologically, they are complex, with various tree heights and widths, plenty of woody debris, understory vegetation creeping up into the vertical space, and interruptions in the canopy that allow sunlight to shine through--all optimizing biodiversity of life in the forest" .............."U of Vermont forest ecologist,Bill Keeton and Harvard Forest Director David Foster are trying to speed up the maturation(old growth type stasis) of the secondary and tiertiary 70 to 90 year old "STRUCTURALLY SIMPLE" woodlands that dot the eastern forest landscape today from the Great Lakes across to New England and down the Appalachian Spine and west across the old confederate states"............"This man-assisted succession process is known as STRUCTURAL COMPLEXITY ENHANCEMENT(SCE)".................."When nature has time to take its course, natural disturbances like windstorms uproot and blowdown trees".............. "Foresters are now working to create these same type conditions--"tip-up mounds", "holes in the canopy" and other “natural” features via mechanical means"............... "They are pulling trees over to form tip-up mounds".............. "By Girdling, or removing a strip of bark from the circumference of a tree trunk, snags, or standing dead trees are created"............. "Certain trees are also strategically being harvested to open up the canopy near larger, faster-growing trees"............All of this to assist in the rewilding and biodiversity optimization of the woodlands....................."Foster and Keeton both collaborated on Wildlands & Woodlands, a regional initiative that calls for conserving 70 percent of New England, or 30 million acres, as forests".................. "They envision 27 million acres of woodlands composed mostly of privately owned, managed land (which could include SCE), along with three million acres of wildland growing naturally"............"Advocates of old-growth restoration have been criticized for idolizing a historic habitat that no longer fits into the modern landscape".................. "But Keeton says his blend of sustainable forestry and functional habitat is an attempt to build a resilient ecosystem for a future of environmental uncertainty".................“It’s very important to make it clear that this is not a kind of emotional or historical attempt to go back,” Foster says...........“It’s an attempt to go forward"

https://www.nrdc.org/stories/forests-just-ones-mother-nature-used-make

Forests, Just Like the Ones Mother Nature Used to Make

New forestry techniques that create the look of old-growth habitats can boost biodiversity—with extra carbon storage as a bonus.

June 12, 2017; Clara Chaisson

If you build it, they will come.

These words, forest ecologist Bill Keeton tells me, are more or less the guiding principle behind his efforts to build not a field, but a forest of dreams: an old-growth forest that supports wildlife and stores carbon.

In the northeastern United States, the “old-growth” designation begins around 150 years old. These senior stands purify water and shelter a wide variety of plants and animals as the wear and tear to their aged limbs and roots provide microhabitats not found elsewhere.

Harvard forest diorama of old-growth pre-settlement forest

Today, forests cover about 80 percent of the Northeast. That sounds pretty good until you hear that of all the old-growth forests that dominated the region prior to European settlement, less than 1 percent remains. “That is the type of ecosystem conditions most organisms were accustomed to,” says David Foster, director of the Harvard Forest. “And over the last 400 years, we’ve pretty effectively eliminated those kinds of habitats.”

The typical 70-90 year old second growth non-complex eastern
woodland forests of today

Woody debris on the forest floor of a structural complexity enhancement plot inside the Jericho Research Forest(Vermont)-below picture

Now, land managers across the Northeast are trying to give old-growth forests a boost. Instead of simply waiting for them to grow up, Keeton, a professor of forest ecology at the University of Vermont, has been taking a more hands-on approach, one that tries to speed up a forest’s maturation process by using silvicultural techniques called structural complexity enhancement (SCE).

Hiking with Keeton through UVM’s 485-acre Jericho Research Forest on a warm day in April, I saw a typical northern hardwood forest—one with its roots in Colonial times, when most of the Northeast’s landscape was cleared for agriculture. Farming culture eventually shifted westward during the mid-19th century, and since then the region’s forests have followed the predictable stages of succession after a major disturbance.

“Everything you see here, 150 years ago, was farmland,” Keeton told me, pointing to the hemlocks, beeches, and sugar maples surrounding us. We were standing in one of the control sections, which, for a point of comparison, the researchers have left untouched since the SCE study began 17 years ago. Keeton tests out his methods on several five-acre plots elsewhere in the Jericho forest, as well as on some plots that grow on the side of nearby Mount Mansfield.

The trees I saw ranged from about 70 to 90 years old, still middle-aged by their species’ standards and a couple of human generations shy of achieving the late-successional sweet spot. “Structurally simple, homogeneous, uniform . . . these are all terms you might use to describe the trees here,” Keeton said.

By contrast, more mature forests are complex, with various tree heights and widths, plenty of woody debris, understory vegetation creeping up into the vertical space, and interruptions in the canopy that allow sunlight to shine through. And while there’s not much foresters can do about age, structure—as “structural complexity enhancement” implies—is where Keeton’s techniques comes in.

Existing sustainable forestry techniques include cutting down single trees of multiple ages throughout a timberland, or logging small clusters from a larger managed tract. These help maintain forest structure and function to a certain extent, but Keeton takes it to the next level.

After a short walk, he and I entered a section treated with SCE. The differences from the control were immediately apparent. A large dirt pile created by a fallen tree, called a tip-up mound, greeted us. Overhead, we glimpsed a patch of sky through a clearing in the canopy. Nearby, several girthy trees stretched upward, while downed branches and trees littered the forest floor.

When nature has time to take its course, natural disturbances like windstorms eventually create these scenes. Here, the tip-up mound, hole in the canopy, and other “natural” features are all man-made. Foresters pull trees over to form tip-up mounds. Girdling, or the removal of a strip of bark from the circumference of a tree trunk, results in snags, or standing dead trees. Certain trees are also strategically harvested to open up the canopy near larger, faster-growing trees.

Keeton has spent most of his career studying old-growth forests. To engineer his own, he made a list of desired characteristics and devised a matching silvicultural treatment for each one—the idea being that the way a habitat is put together is what makes it tick. “If we can understand the architecture of an ecosystem, we can understand a lot about its function,” he says.

Bill Keeton, a professor of forest ecology at the University of Vermont, stands beside a tip-up mound at the structural complexity enhancement plot at the Jericho Research Forest in Vermont.

For instance, species like yellow birch grow best atop tip-up mounds, their leggy roots performing a slow-motion split into the soil as their perches rot. Ground-nesting birds like winter wrens like to nest in the overturned roots, and frogs and eastern red-backed salamanders enjoy the pools of rainwater that often form in the hole at the tree’s base. Cavity-nesting birds favor standing snags, and decaying “nurse logs” provide ideal habitat for seedlings and fodder for fungi, which are important decomposers and drivers of plant diversity.

The biological implications were palpable in the SCE plot in the sheer amount of green and number of limbs and logs to duck under and hop over. To put it in cruder terms, finding a sheltered spot to, ahem, use the facilities was a lot easier there than in the control section.

As all this biomass accumulates, so does the forest’s carbon stock. In a study published this spring in the journal Ecosphere, Keeton and former UVM graduate student Sarah Ford found that SCE-managed units store significantly more carbon than those treated with traditional techniques—a winsome combination in the dawning age of carbon markets and a potential tool in the global fight against climate change.

Using modeling to simulate growth based on pre-treatment data, Keeton and Ford found that after a decade, the SCE plot stored just 16 percent less carbon than an untouched forest—while a conventionally managed swath contained about 45 percent less.

The world’s forests offset approximately 30 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions. As the temperature climbs, interest in increasing carbon sinks is also on the rise. Emerging carbon markets, whether voluntary or mandated, pay forest owners whose land sequesters carbon. The more it absorbs and stores, the higher the sum.

Foster, of the Harvard Forest, says SCE is a promising option for certain parcels of land. “The advantage of this approach is that it gives more immediate results and allows landowners who are interested in diversifying their landscape new options,” he says. But he also stresses that it’s important to balance this type of active management with large-scale preservation.

Foster and Keeton both collaborated on Wildlands & Woodlands, a regional initiative that calls for conserving 70 percent of New England, or 30 million acres, as forests. They envision 27 million acres of woodlands composed mostly of privately owned, managed land (which could include SCE), along with three million acres of wildland growing naturally.

Advocates of old-growth restoration have been criticized for idolizing a historic habitat that no longer fits into the modern landscape. But Keeton says his blend of sustainable forestry and functional habitat is an attempt to build a resilient ecosystem for a future of environmental uncertainty.

“It’s very important to make it clear that this is not a kind of emotional or historical attempt to go back,” Foster says. “It’s an attempt to go forward.”

So, apparently "size does matter"-----to some extent............."Researchers in the University of Wyoming's Department of Ecology discovered that nature reserve size and species similarity are the primary factors in determining whether multiple wildlife species are indirectly protected under the umbrella of a reserve created to enhance conservation for one species---in this case, the Greater Sage Grouse in Wyoming"............."The umbrella species concept is one surrogate species strategy in which a species with large area requirements—such as the greater sage grouse—is provided sufficient protected habitat"............. "In turn, that same habitat can provide protection of many other species in the same area"............ "The main advantage of this strategy is the potential to conserve numerous species without extensive, individual consideration for each species"............."Interestingly enough, the species that benefited the most were the ones most similar to the sage grouse—other birds; those highly associated with sagebrush plant communities; and those with widsprea habitat"..........."In contrast, the habitat of species with restricted distributions, particularly combined with vegetation associations not closely matching the greater sage grouse, did not receive as much protection from the umbrella reserve"................. "Some of these species included the spotted ground squirrel, dwarf shrew, prairie lizard and the plains pocket gopher".............."The results suggest that wildlife managers should pay close attention to background species with limited habitat, particularly if their vegetation associations do not align closely with those of the umbrella species".............."In this case, what might be ideal sagebrush habitat for sage grouse might not be right for other species"

https://phys.org/news/2018-04-greater-sage-grouse-habitat-species.html

Researchers study how well greater sage grouse habitat protects other species

April 18, 2018, University of Wyoming

Researchers in the University of Wyoming's Department of Zoology and Physiology and Program in Ecology discovered that size does matter—as it pertains to the effectiveness of secondary species' wildlife protection relative to the size of a wildlife reserve set aside for an umbrella species.



Researchers in the University of Wyoming's Department of Zoology and Physiology and Program in Ecology discovered that reserve size and species similarity are the primary factors in determining whether multiple wildlife species are indirectly protected under the umbrella of a reserve created to enhance conservation for one species -- in this case, the greater sage grouse in Wyoming. Credit: Dave Showalter

The umbrella species concept is defined as multiple wildlife species being indirectly protected under the umbrella of a reserve created to enhance conservation for one species—in this case, the greater sage grouse in Wyoming. The research group investigated two potential mechanisms—reserve size and species similarity—underlying the concept's successful application. Larger alternative reserves serve as better umbrellas but, regardless of reserve size, not all species received equal protection, the study determined.

"This study provides us a better understanding of which species might fall through the cracks, and which may need targeted attention for their conservation," says Anna Chalfoun, a UW associate professor of zoology and an assistant unit leader for the Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit.

"I was surprised at the findings. The longtime assumption is that what's good for the grouse is good for any other species living in sagebrush country," says Jason Carlisle, a Ph.D. student in UW's Program in Ecology from 2011-17 who led the study. "Sage grouse are often the flagship species in the ecosystem. But, when examining how well the protected area established for sage grouse covers other species that depend on sage grouse habitat, it leaves a lot to be desired."

Carlisle was lead author and Chalfoun a co-author of a paper, titled "Identifying Holes in the Greater Sage-Grouse Conservation Umbrella," that was published March 30 in the online version of The Journal of Wildlife Management and is expected to be in print later this month. The journal publishes manuscripts containing information from original research that contributes to basic wildlife science. Topics include investigations into the biology and ecology of wildlife and their habitats that have direct or indirect implications for wildlife management and conservation.

Douglas Keinath, formerly the lead vertebrate zoologist with the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database at UW; and Shannon Albeke, a research scientist/eco-informaticist in the Wyoming Geographic Information Science Center, were co-authors of the paper. Carlisle and Keinath also were part of the Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. The project was funded by a state wildlife grant from the Wyoming Game and Fish Department.

The sagebrush sparrow was one of the species that benefited most from being under the umbrella of a reserve created to enhance conservation for the greater sage grouse. Credit: Taylor Sherr

"When you hear people generally talking about sage grouse, whether it be land managers or politicians, they oftentimes are already making an assumption that sage grouse, as an umbrella species, is benefiting other species," Chalfoun says. "But, that assumption had not been critically tested."

Until now.

The umbrella species concept is one surrogate species strategy in which a species with large area requirements—such as the greater sage grouse—is provided sufficient protected habitat. In turn, that can provide protection of many other species in the same area. The main advantage of this strategy is the potential to conserve numerous species without extensive, individual consideration for each species, Chalfoun says.

Carlisle described the concept as such: "The more umbrella you pop up, the more coverage you'll get from rain."

Greater sage grouse are listed as endangered in Canada under the Federal Species at Risk Act. Each of the 11 states, including Wyoming, and two Canadian provinces where greater sage grouse live has a strategic plan to manage the species. Many, like in Wyoming, focus on government-established reserves, called "core areas," that are prevalent throughout the state, Chalfoun says. In 2015, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service determined an endangered species listing for greater sage grouse was not warranted in Wyoming or elsewhere.

"The Wyoming politicians and wildlife managers had the foresight to implement the core-area strategy," Chalfoun says. "Certainly, as a result of that, it has resulted in a lot less loss and fragmentation of Wyoming's sagebrush habitat."

A primary reason Wyoming was a good place for this study is that the state is home to approximately 37 percent of the remaining greater sage grouse in the world, says Carlisle, originally from Payson, Utah.

"Wyoming is going to be critical. Wyoming has a strong history in protecting sage grouse," he says. "This is an opportunity to build on that and to look for what sage grouse management is going to mean for other species."

Crunching the Numbers

Carlisle spent the bulk of his time crunching the numbers based on maps compiled by the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database. In what he termed "a poor man's supercomputer," Carlisle used about a dozen desktop computers in the Wyoming Geographic Information Science Center lab that ran simultaneously 24/7 for about a month during one summer. The computers were used to create 80 simulated reserves of various sizes and calculate the overlap they would provide the wildlife species.

The pygmy rabbit was another of the species that received good indirect protection from being under the umbrella of a reserve created to enhance conservation for the greater sage grouse. Credit: Spencer Schell

The established umbrella reserve, a sagebrush-steppe ecosystem in Wyoming, protected 82 percent of the state's greater sage grouse population and 0-63 percent of the habitat of the background species studied. The established reserve outperformed equally sized, simulated reserves for only 12 of the 52 background species of wildlife listed in the State Wildlife Action Plan as "species of greatest conservation need." These species were associated with vegetation communities where there are greater sage grouse, Chalfoun says.

The dozen species that had the most habitat covered by the umbrella reserve were the Columbian sharp-tailed grouse, pygmy rabbit, sagebrush sparrow, greater short-horned lizard, great basin spadefoot (a toad), black-footed ferret, Idaho pocket gopher, olive-backed pocket mouse, sage thrasher, great basin pocket mouse, ferruginous hawk and the mountain plover.

"The species that benefited the most were the ones most similar to the sage grouse—other birds," Chalfoun says of the established reserve.

These species include avian species; those highly associated with sagebrush plant communities; and those with widespread habitat, the paper says.

Carlisle agrees that other birds fared best under the umbrella species reserve. However, he also pointed to the state reptile, the greater short-horned lizard, as "a good news story." Core sage grouse habitat protected 46 percent of the habitat where the lizards dwell, he says. This was 12 percent higher than the computer simulation results.

In contrast, the habitat of species with restricted distributions, particularly combined with vegetation associations not closely matching the greater sage grouse, did not receive as much protection from the umbrella reserve. Some of these species included the spotted ground squirrel, dwarf shrew, prairie lizard and the plains pocket gopher.

The Wyoming pocket gopher, which is only native to Wyoming and is roughly the size of a guinea pig, was a prime example of a secondary species that did not fare all that well under the umbrella of sage grouse habitat, Carlisle says.

"We found this core area for sage grouse covered about 20 percent of their (Wyoming pocket gophers') habitat in the state," he says. "Twenty percent is not a lot for these types of species. In the simulations we did, the simulated areas covered twice as much (Wyoming pocket gopher) habitat."

The results suggest that wildlife managers should pay close attention to background species with limited habitat, particularly if their vegetation associations do not align closely with those of the umbrella species.

The paper's findings concede whether conservation strategies based on umbrella species are effective at conserving background species because of the selected umbrella species, or because the strategies inherently involve protecting large areas remains an open question.

Understanding which traits predispose background species to protection under an umbrella strategy will be important to the overall success of conservation based on the umbrella species concept, Chalfoun says.

"The point of this is we can't assume all types of species are benefiting merely because of sage grouse," Chalfoun says. "What might be ideal sagebrush for sage grouse might not be right for other species."

 Explore further: Livestock grazing management compatible with nesting greater sage-grouse

More information: Jason D. Carlisle et al, Identifying holes in the greater sage-grouse conservation umbrella, The Journal of Wildlife Management (2018). DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.21460 

Journal reference: Journal of Wildlife Management

In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson signed into law the bi-partisan passed WILDERNESS ACT........Can any of you believe that the Senate passed this landmark conservation bill by a vote of 73 yes, 12 No(15 Senators did not vote) and the House passed the bill by an astounding 374 yes, 1 No vote...............I daresay on any issue, environmental or otherwise, there might never be such a resounding support of any issue, ever again, in the "swamp of D.C."..............Was the Congress of this era(1960-1973) and Presidents Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon as gifted in their foresight and wisdom on these environmental issues as our Founding Fathers were in creating the Constitution???? ...............Republican Nixon passed the Clean Air and Water Acts as well as the Endangered Species Act and both Democrats(Kennedy and Johnson fought for and signed the Wilderness Act).............The Wilderness Act Statement of Policy----"In order to assure that an increasing population, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within the United States and its possessions, leaving no lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the Congress to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness"............ "For this purpose there is hereby established a National Wilderness Preservation System to be composed of federally owned areas designated by Congress as "wilderness areas", and these shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness"............"A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain"............. "An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions"

http://mountainjournal.org/american-conservation-movement-has-lost-its-edge

Brandborg Worried Conservation Movement Has Lost Its Edge

DEAD AT 93, FORMER HEAD OF THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY SAID ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS HAVE FORGOTTEN HOW TO FIGHT THE GOOD FIGHT

Todd Wilkinson; 4/17/18

Has the mainstream wildlands conservation movement gone soft, lost its edge, forgotten the hard-earned lessons of the past?  

Montana's Crazy Mountains(above picture), forming the northern jagged tier of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, are the picture of wildness. Inexplicably, the Custer-Gallatin National Forest has recommended that not a single acre of of the range be designated as federal wilderness. The Forest Service has not offered a sound reason for its decision here, nor the logic behind its less than robust recommendation for wilderness in the Gallatin Range nor why it claims that lands inside wilderness study areas in Montana and Wyoming no longer quality as wilderness. The agency, critics say, has a lot of explaining to do. 

Are some groups interested only in fundraising?  Do others use the guise of “consensus” because they are conflict-averse and avoid saying things contributors don’t want to hear? 

Do they rationalize positions based upon what they believe to be “politically expedient” instead of creating citizen groundswells that change political trajectories and make stronger cases for wildland protection?

These were questions raised often by Stewart Brandborg who passed away this week at the age of 93.

If you don’t know of “Brandy,” he served for 12 years as executive director of The Wilderness Society at perhaps the most pivotal moment in the organization’s history, when The Wilderness Act of 1964 was nearing the finish line, then signed into law, and the looming question became, “what’s next?”

Until the end, Brandborg never lost the fire in his belly, nor the conviction that brave acts of conservation aren’t achieved by those who stake out weak-kneed and middling positions. He was openly critical of groups he perceived were willing to compromise away dwindling wild landscapes being swarmed by more human activity. 

During his tenure, Brandborg helped make the case for creation of 70 wilderness areas in 31 states. He once told me, “we don’t have enough wildlands left to squander or bargain away. We forget that what’s left is all there is.”

FEDERAL WILDERNESS(GREEN SHADED) IN THE LOWER 48 STATES

I’ll never forget a night at Brandborg’s house during the 1990s following an event in the Bitterroot Valley that brought together aging champions of the American wilderness movement. It included Brandborg (son of a federal forester), the late John Craighead, Michael Frome, the legendary David Brower, and Dale Burk.

Afterward, I stayed at the Brandborgs along with Frome and Brower. We spent the entire night sipping scotch, me listening silently to tales of derring-do, about how dams were stopped from blocking rivers, how redwoods and giant sequoias were spared from industrial forestry, and the fearlessness demonstrated by those who made wilderness protection a law of the land.

No one understood the fight better than Brandborg, who ensured that the language of the Wilderness Act remained in the law after its primary author, the leader of the Wilderness Society, Howard Zahniser, died just months before it got a decisive vote.

Brandborg spoke about how more recent staffers with the Wilderness Society didn’t want to hear his advisements that advocates must never settle for what the Forest Service, politicians and resource extractionists decide is doable; you push to protect as much wilderness-caliber lands as possible because there won’t be a second chance.  

Frome agreed. A college professor and journalist, he noted how conservation organizations tried to blackball him when he called them out, claiming they had lost their spine. U.S. Sen. Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin, the father of Earth Day, had once said this of Frome: "No writer in America has more persistently and effectively argued for the need of national ethics of environmental stewardship than Michael Frome.”

Brower, one of the true green lions of American environmentalism in the 20th century, said one doesn’t protect land to be popular. Still, by laying out a vision, Brower, in 17 years at the helm of the Sierra Club, grew its membership from 7,000 to 77,000. He created excitement about the idea of citizens stepping forward together often to unconditionally safeguard places they might never visit.

Conservation, he explained that night, involves advancing ideas that are ahead of their time, that make the status quo feel uncomfortable in the moment, but years in the future such foresighted thinking is never regretted by those benefitting from it. Wild nature, as we know it today, would not exist had earlier generations of young people not pushed public land managers and elected officials to see the light, he noted.

Lately, I’ve had conversations with recreationists who have invoked the Muries, Edward Abbey, Brower and others. They claim those conservationists would abide demolition of the Wilderness Act and the giving away of wilderness study areas so they can have access to everything as outdoor gymnasiums.

Jan Murie, son of Adolph and Louise Murie and professor emeritus in biology at the University of Alberta, echoed thoughts expressed by his cousin, the late Martin Murie, who wrote in 2012: “The rationale [of collaboration and consensus] is that a shriveled wilderness bill that leaves out lands of true wilderness quality is better than no bill at all. If we give in to plans like that we can’t help asking if we aren’t selling the whole store.”

When presented with assertions by recreationists who invoked Murie quotes to undermine conservation, Jan Murie told me: “It is indeed irksome when people with little knowledge of their views present misinterpretations.”

Which leads us back to Brandborg. He said there is a pervasive willingness on the part of certain conservation organizations to settle for less. They forget that in the halls of Congress, conflict is a good and necessary thing. He argued that most feel-good consensus exercises, including one recently sponsored by the Custer-Gallatin National Forest, have been failures.

“We must resist the fuzzy, fuzzy Neverland of collaboration,” Brandy, who knew better than anyone else, said at a recent wilderness conference in Missoula. “We invite people to deliberate with us, but we must recognize the primary value is the wildness of this land and the preservation of it.”

Go back to the top of this column. Do the questions Brandborg raised hold validity?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.wilderness.net/nwps/legisact

The Wilderness Act of 1964

Public Law 88-577 (16 U.S.C. 1131-1136)
88th Congress, Second Session
September 3, 1964
(As amended)
Download the Wilderness Act (PDF)

AN ACTTo establish a National Wilderness Preservation System for the permanent good of the whole people, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SHORT TITLE

SECTION 1. This Act may be cited as the "Wilderness Act".

WILDERNESS SYSTEM ESTABLISHED STATEMENT OF POLICY

SECTION 2. (a) In order to assure that an increasing population, accompanied by expanding settlement and growing mechanization, does not occupy and modify all areas within the United States and its possessions, leaving no lands designated for preservation and protection in their natural condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy of the Congress to secure for the American people of present and future generations the benefits of an enduring resource of wilderness. For this purpose there is hereby established a National Wilderness Preservation System to be composed of federally owned areas designated by Congress as "wilderness areas", and these shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people in such manner as will leave them unimpaired for future use and enjoyment as wilderness, and so as to provide for the protection of these areas, the preservation of their wilderness character, and for the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wilderness; and no Federal lands shall be designated as "wilderness areas" except as provided for in this Act or by a subsequent Act.

(b) The inclusion of an area in the National Wilderness Preservation System notwithstanding, the area shall continue to be managed by the Department and agency having jurisdiction thereover immediately before its inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. No appropriation shall be available for the payment of expenses or salaries for the administration of the National Wilderness Preservation System as a separate unit nor shall any appropriations be available for additional personnel stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because they are included within the National Wilderness Preservation System.

DEFINITION OF WILDERNESS

(c) A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this Act an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvements or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which (1) generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man's work substantially unnoticeable; (2) has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation; (3) has at least five thousand acres of land or is of sufficient size as to make practicable its preservation and use in an unimpaired condition; and (4) may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historical value.

----------------------------------------------------

https://wilderness.org/our-25-favorite-wearethewild-photos

Greatest hits: 25 "We Are the Wild" photos and stories

We asked, you delivered.

As part of the 50th anniversary of the Wilderness Act, we asked supporters to submit favorite wild moments in the form of photos, videos and stories to our We Are the Wild campaign.

The results were amazing! Below are 25 great moments from our supporters that show the wild beauty and amazing times we share in wilderness. These are the moments that remind us how much wilderness shapes us, the moments that remind us that "We Are The Wild."

DESOLATION WILDERNESS-CALIFORNIA

BUFFALOR HILLS, NEVADA

JACKSON HOLE, WYOMING

 GEORGE WASHINGTON FOREST-VIRGINIA