Large infrequent disturbance (LIDs) can have significant effects on the ecosystem in which they occur, yet proactive steps to protect ecosystem services are rarely included in management plans. These disturbances include storms, fires, insect outbreaks, droughts, and volcanic eruptions. Planning for LIDs is a major opportunity. While disasters are occurring with increasing frequency and intensity, and large amounts of support are often made available to government agencies in the aftermath of a disaster, there still is no forethought mode of response from an ecosystem perspective. However, anticipating and adapting to LIDs is a challenge. In particular, there are gaps in knowing how to respond, who should make the decisions, and how to act to best protect and enhance ecosystem services in face of disaster. Aa part of a recent workshop at the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis (NIMBioS), we developed an approach to address ecosystem management in the face of risks from disturbances. The objective of this study was to compare across diverse disturbance types in order to reveal where common approaches to planning and adaptation are effective and where differences occur.
Results/Conclusions
Opportunities and constraints in anticipating and responding to LIDs are discussed in relation to how attention to ecosystem attributes can enhance resilience to future disturbances. Drivers of these LIDs and responses to them are changing; so past conditions may not predict the future. Management actions should be tailored to particular disturbances and stakeholders’ goals. There are some patterns to the effects and possibilities for ecosystem enhancement. We are developing a template that details the challenges that need to be considered (including the scale of the disaster, the immediacy of support available, and the science knowledge or network that is in place). This approach builds from the model of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for disease response by having first responders include scientists who have an ecosystem perspective. Key components of this approach are identification of the characteristics of disaster (type, intensity, frequency, scale, etc.), who makes the decisions about actions to reduce impacts or facilitate recovery, and what are potential decisions. Basic principles include consideration of no restoration intervention, monitoring before and after to assess effects, having permanent photo points to document changes, and recognizing that it is often impossible to return to “historic range of variability.”