SpringerLink
Log in

Regional multiresource models in a national framework

  • Profile
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The design and integration of models projecting the effects of management on environmental systems is one step in the environmental planning process. Interactions between resources produced on the same unit of land under current and future management can be examined only when assumptions and processes of these dynamic environmental systems are quantified. Multiresource interaction models have generally been large and cumbersome while also suffering from an inadequate amount of detail. This article presents a conceptual framework for integrating individual resource models to project multiresource interactions at a regional scale. Land management impact projections require common definitions of the total land base and common definitions of management activities applied to the same land unit. A case example focusing on the resources of timber, forage, wildlife, fish, and water for the southern United States is presented.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literature Cited

  • Adams, D. M., and R. W. Haynes. 1980. Softwood timber assessment market model: structure, projections, and policy simulations. Forest Science Monograph no. 22, 64 pp.

  • Alig, R. J. 1986. Econometric analyses of the factors influencing forest acreage trends in the Southeast.Forest Science 32:119–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alig, R. J., D. M. Adams, and R. W. Haynes. 1983. Longrange projection of forest area changes: new approaches are needed.Journal of Forestry 81:723–727.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, P. G., J. B. Pickens, C. Ohlander, and B. Benninghoff. 1980. Many resources, many uses: a system analysis approach to renewable resource development.Water Resources Bulletin 16:738–744.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, R. G. 1978. Description of the ecoregions of the United States. US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Ogden, Utah, 77 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, E. T., and D. R. Betters (eds.). 1983. Overstory-understory relationships in western forests. Western Regional Research Publication no. 1. Colorado State University Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, 37 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bousfield, M. V. 1977. Intercensal estimation using a current sample and census data.Review of Public Data Use 5(6):6–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chalk, D. E., S. A. Miller, and T. W. Hoekstra. 1984. Multiresource inventories: integrating on wildlife resources.Wildlife Society Bulletin 12:357–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clary, W. P. 1979. Grazing and overstory effects on rotationally burned slash pine plantations ranges.Journal of Range Management 32:264–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglass, J. E. 1974. Watershed values.Journal of Forestry 72:617–621.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglass, J. E. 1977. State of the art in managing water resources on forest land. Pages 56–60in Proceedings of the Western North Carolina research-resource management conference. Southeast Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, North Carolina.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duvall, V. L., and H. E. Grelen. 1967. Fertilization uneconomic for forage improvement in Louisiana pine plantations. USDA Forest Service Research Note S0-51. Southern Forest and Range Experiment Station, New Orleans, Louisiana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flather, C. H., and T. W. Hoekstra. 1985. Evaluating population-habitat models using ecological theory.Wildlife Society Bulletin 13:121–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grelen, H. E. 1978. Forest grazing in the South.Journal of Range Management 31:244–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. D., and N. J. Knight. 1981. Natural variation in abundance of salmonid populations in stream and its implications for design of impact studies. USEPA EPA-600/S3-81-021. Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon [available from National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia: PB 81–163 214].

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkes, C. L., D. E. Chalk, T. W. Hoekstra, and C. H. Flather. 1983. Prediction of wildlife and fish resources for national assessments and appraisals. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-100. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, 21 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirst, S. M., 1984. Applied ecology and the real world. II. Resource management and impact assessment.Journal of Environmental Management 18:203–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoekstra, T. W., and J. Hof. 1985. National assessments of wildlife and fish: a technical framework. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-122. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, 6 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hof, John, L. A. Joyce, G. S. Alward, and T. W. Hoekstra. 1983. Multilevel analysis of forest and rangeland resources. Pages 43–49in F. J. Wagstaff (comp.), Proceedings: range economics symposium and workshop. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report INT-149. Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah, 152 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollick, M. 1981. The role of quantitative decision-making methods in environmental impact assessment.Journal of Environmental Management 12:65–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollings, C. S. (ed.). 1978. Adaptive environmental assessment and management. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, John Wiley and Sons, Shicherster, UK, 337 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. K., H. A. Pearson, K. F. Ribbeck, and L. G. Davis. 1985. Management of subclover in pine forests.Louisiana Agriculture 29:3–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, L. A., and T. W. Hoekstra. 1984. A national perspective on information needs from inventories. Pages 218–227in H. G. Lund (ed.), Preparing for the 21st century: proceedings of the forest land inventory workshop, Denver, Colorado, 30–26 March 1984. Timber Management, Forest Service, Washington, DC, 334 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, L. A., B. McKinnon, J. G. Hof, and T. W. Hoekstra. 1983. Analysis of multiresource production for national assessments and appraisals. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-101. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, 20 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchings, J. T., and J. M. Klopatek. 1982. A regional approach to prediction of distribution and abundance of animal species. Final report for Interagency Agreement (IAG 40-1105-80), ORNL, Environmental Sciences Division and USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, 67 pp. Mimeo.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClure, J. P., N. D. Cost, and H. A. Knight. 1979. Multiresource inventories: a new concept for forest survey. USDA Forest Service Research Paper SE-101. Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, North Carolina, 68 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClure, J. P., and H. A. Knight. 1984. Empirical yields of timber and forest biomass in the southeast. USDA Forest Service Research Paper SE-245. Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, North Carolina, 75 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, T. R., and J. M. Omernik. 1979. Nonpoint source-stream nutrient level relationships: a nationwide study. Supplement 1: nutrient map reliability. EPA-600/3-79-103. Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon [available through National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia], 31 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, J. 1983. Analysis of forage production for assessment and appraisals. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report RM-98. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, 26 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, J. E., and J. B. Pickens. 1985. An evaluation of herbage and browse production estimators used in the 1980 RPA Assessment. USDA Forest Service Research Paper RM-259. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, Colorado, 32 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • O'Brien, R., and D. van Hooser. 1983. Understory vegetation inventory: an efficient procedure. USDA Forest Service Research Paper INT-323. Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Ogden, Utah, 6 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Omernik, J. M. 1977. Nonpoint source-stream nutrient level relationships: a nationwide study. EPA-600/3-77-105. Environmental Research Laboratory, Corvallis, Oregon [available through National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia], 150 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, H. A. 1980. Livestock in multiple-use management of southern forest range. Pages 75–88in R. D. Child and K. Byington (eds.), Proceedings of a symposium: southern forest range and pasture resources. Winrock International, Morrilton, Arkansas, 268 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petak, W. J. 1980. Environmental planning and management: the need for an integrative perspective.Journal of Environmental Management 4:287–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pflieger, W. L., A. Schene, Jr., and P. S. Hanerland. 1981. Techniques for the classification of stream habitats, with examples of their application in defining stream habitats of Missouri. Pages 362–368in N. Armentrout (ed.), Acquisition and utilization of aquatic habitat inventory information: proceedings of a symposium, 28–30 October 1981, at Portland, Oregon. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, 376 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, B. M. 1972. The influence of percentage forest on design floods. Pages 335–340in S. C. Csallany, T. G. McLaughlin, and W. D. Striffler (eds.), Watersheds in transition. Proceeding Series no. 14. American Water Resources Publication, Urbana, Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiflet, T. N. 1980. What is the resource. Pages 17–28in R. D. Child and E. K. Byington (eds.), Proceedings of a symposium: southern forest range and pasture resources. Winrock International, Morrilton, Arkansas, 268 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, E. L., W. L. Swank, and J. W. Hornbeck. 1980. Impacts of timber harvest and regeneration systems on stream flow and soils in the eastern deciduous region. Pages 516–535in Forest soils and land use: proceedings of the fifth North American forest soils conference, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tedder, P. L. 1983. Simulating management intensifications in national timber-supply projections.Journal of Forestry 81:607–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tedder, P. L., R. N. LaMont, and J. C. Kincaid. 1986. The timber resource inventory model (Trim): a projection model for timber supply and policy analysis. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report. Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, Corvallis, Oregon (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Torelli, L., and P. Tomasi. 1977. Indirect estimation of hydrologic parameters.Journal of the Hydraulic Division (no. HY2):169–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA Forest Service. 1976. RPA summary. Washington, DC, 29 pp.

  • USDA Forest Service. 1977. RPA assessment: book of procedures framework for supply analyses—range and multiresource use interaction elements. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC, 109 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA Forest Service. 1980a. An assessment of the forest and range land situation in the United States. FS-345. USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC, 631 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA Forest Service. 1980b. Forestland grazing. USDA Forest Service Forestry Report SA-FR10. State and Private Forestry, Southeastern Area, Atlanta, Georgia, 44 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • USDA Soil Conservation Service. 1981. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States. Agriculture handbook 296. Soil Conservation Service, Washington, DC, 156 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • US Geological Survey. Various dates. Hydrologic unit map [states of the United States]. Prepared in cooperation with the US Water Resources Council (scale, 1∶500,000). US Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia.

  • Watson, V. H., and C. M. Wells, Jr. 1985. Simulation of forage and beef production in the southern region Cooperative Series Bulletin 308. Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, Mississippi, 135 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolters, G. L., A. Martin, and H. A. Pearson. 1982. Forage response to overstory reduction on loblolly-shortleaf pine-hardwood forest range.Journal of Range Management 35:443–446.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, 240 West Prospect Street, 80526, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA

    Linda A. Joyce & Thomas W. Hoekstra

  2. Forestry Sciences Lab, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, 3041 Cornwallis Road, 27709, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA

    Ralph J. Alig

Authors
  1. Linda A. Joyce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas W. Hoekstra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ralph J. Alig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Joyce, L.A., Hoekstra, T.W. & Alig, R.J. Regional multiresource models in a national framework. Environmental Management 10, 761–771 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867729

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867729

Key words

Search

Navigation