A comparison of ground cover and frequency estimation methods for post-harvest soil monitoring

The amount and type of ground cover is an important characteristic to measure when collecting soil disturbance monitoring data after a timber harvest. Estimates of ground cover and bare soil can be used for tracking changes in invasive species, plant growth and regeneration, woody debris loadings, and the risk of surface water runoff and soil erosion. A new method of assessing ground cover and soil disturbance was recently published by the U.S. Forest Service, the Forest Soil Disturbance Monitoring Protocol (FSDMP). This protocol uses the frequency of cover types in small circular (15cm) plots to compare ground surface in pre- and post-harvest condition. While both frequency and percent cover are common methods of describing vegetation, frequency has rarely been used to measure ground surface cover. In this study, three methods for assessing ground cover percent (step-point, 15cm dia. circular and 1x5m visual plot estimates) were compared to the FSDMP frequency method. Results show that the FSDMP method provides significantly higher estimates of ground surface condition for most soil cover types, except coarse wood. The three cover methods had similar estimates for most cover values. The FSDMP method also produced the highest value when bare soil estimates were used to model erosion risk. In a person-hour analysis, estimating ground cover percent in 15cm dia. plots required the least sampling time, and provided standard errors similar to the other cover estimates even at low sampling intensities (n=18). If ground cover estimates are desired in soil monitoring, then a small plot size (15cm dia. circle), or a step-point method can provide a more accurate estimate in less time than the current FSDMP method.

Fish contaminants through the tribal perspective : an ethnography of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community's tribal fish harvest

It has been well documented that many tribal populations and minority groups across the nation have been identified as being at high risk of the adverse health effects created by consuming fish that have been contaminated with mercury, PCBs, DDT, dioxins, and other chemicals. Although fish consumption advisories are intended to inform fish consumers of risks associated with specific species and water bodies, advisories have been the subject of both environmental injustices and treaty rights’ injustices. This means that understanding fish contaminants, through community perspectives is essential to good environmental policy. This study examined the fish contaminant knowledge, impacts on fishing and fish consumption, and the factors that contribute to harvesting decisions and behaviors in one tribal nation in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community. Using ethnographic methods, participant observation and semi-structured interviewing, fieldnotes were kept and all interviews were fully transcribed for data analysis. Among seventeen fishermen and women, contaminants are poorly understood, have had a limited impact on subsistence fishing but have had a substantial impact on commercial fishing activity. But ultimately, all decisions and behaviors are based on their own criteria and within a larger context of knowledge and understanding: the historical and cultural context. The historical context revealed that advisories are viewed as another attack on tribal fishing. The cultural context revealed that it is the fundamental guidance and essential framework associated with all harvesting beliefs, values, and traditional lifeways. These results have implications for advisories. ‘Fish’ and ‘contaminants’ appear differently based on the perceptions and priorities of those who encounter them.