Search

Road-based citizen science surveys are increasingly used for long-term monitoring of wildlife, including amphibians, over large spatial scales. However, how representative such data are when compared to the actual species distribution remains unclear. Spatial biases in site selection or road network coverage by volunteers could skew results towards more urbanised areas and consequently produce incorrect or partial trend estimations at regional or national scales. Our objective was to compare and verify potential spatial biases of road-based data using distribution datasets of different origins. We used as a case study the common toad (Bufo bufo), a fast-declining species and the main amphibian targeted by conservation action on roads in Europe. We used Maxent models to compare road survey data obtained from the 35 year-long “Toads on Roads” project in Great Britain with models using national-scale toad distribution records as well as with models using randomly generated points on roads. Distribution models that used data collected by volunteers on roads produced similar results to those obtained from overall species distribution, indicating the lack of selection bias and high spatial coverage of volunteer-collected data on roads. Toads were generally absent from mountainous areas and, despite the high availability of potential recorders, showed nearly complete absence of road-based records in large urban areas. This is probably the first study that comparatively evaluates species distribution models created using datasets of different origin in order to verify the influence of potential spatial bias of data collected by volunteers on roads. Large-scale declines of widespread amphibians have been demonstrated using data collected on roads and our results indicate that such data are representative and certainly comparable to other existing datasets. We show that for countries with high road network coverage, such as Great Britain, road-based data collected by volunteers represent a robust dataset and a critical citizen science contribution to conservation.

Landscapes provide significant ecosystem service value in Natural World Heritage Sites (NWHSs) and are required to be preserved by regular monitoring and evaluation. It is vital to choose appropriate monitoring tools according to local conditions to guarantee the process is effective and efficient. This study aims to find out the spatial suitability of monitoring tools under a three-dimension system of space-based monitoring, sky-based monitoring, and ground-based monitoring. A suitability assessment was conducted from three aspects&mdash, the monitoring environment, object, and effect&mdash, from which typical differences existed among the three types of tools. Nine indicators were finalized, in which eight were classified and scored using the Delphi method with objectivity, and the remaining indicator was processed subjectively by quantifying the different monitoring effects on different landscape units by each of the tools. The method was verified using a case study in Bogda of Xinjiang Tianshan through overlay analysis in ArcGIS. The results showed an apparently stepped distribution characteristic related to altitude, where space-based monitoring zones are located in regions of high altitude, and the landscapes in low-altitude regions had the best monitoring effects using the ground-based tool and sky-based tool. Combined with the distribution characteristics of the 3-level protected zones, the results show a consistency with reality and could help planners to strategically deploy monitoring sites and allocate them advisable monitoring facilities and staffing.

Ecosystem monitoring is fundamental to our understanding of how ecosystem change is impacting our natural resources and is vital for developing evidence‐based policy and management. However, the different types of ecosystem monitoring, along with their recommended applications, are often poorly understood and contentious. Varying definitions and strict adherence to a specific monitoring type can inhibit effective ecosystem monitoring, leading to poor program development, implementation and outcomes. In an effort to develop a more consistent and clear understanding of ecosystem monitoring programs, we here review the main types of monitoring and recommend the widespread adoption of three classifications of monitoring, namely, targeted, surveillance and landscape monitoring. Landscape monitoring is conducted over large areas, provides spatial data, and enables questions relating to where and when ecosystem change is occurring to be addressed. Surveillance monitoring uses standardised field methods to inform on what is changing in our environments and the direction and magnitude of that change, whilst targeted monitoring is designed around testable hypotheses over defined areas and is the best approach for determining the causes of ecosystem change. The classification system is flexible and can incorporate different interests, objectives, targets and characteristics as well as different spatial scales and temporal frequencies, while also providing valuable structure and consistency across distinct ecosystem monitoring programs. To support our argument, we examine the ability of each monitoring type to inform on six key types of questions that are routinely posed for ecosystem monitoring programs, such as where and when change is occurring, what is the magnitude of change, and how can the change be managed? As we demonstrate, each type of ecosystem monitoring has its own strengths and weaknesses, which should be carefully considered relative to the desired results. Using this scheme, scientists and land managers can design programs best suited to their needs. Finally, we assert that for our most serious environmental challenges, it is essential that we include information from each of these monitoring scales to inform on all facets of ecosystem change, and this is best achieved through close collaboration between the scales. With a renewed understanding of the importance of each monitoring type, along with greater commitment to monitor cooperatively, we will be well placed to address some of our greatest environmental challenges.

The importance of rural landscapes is recognized at both the international and national level. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has established a program called Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) and agricultural landscapes are also listed in the UNESCO World Heritage List. The World Bank and the Convention on Biological Diversity also have departments working on this topic, while landscape has been included in the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union 2020&ndash, 2027. One of the most important tools for landscape management, conservation and valorization is the development of a monitoring system, suited to control not only dynamics, but also the effectiveness of the policies affecting rural landscape. A research project of the Italian Ministry of Agricultural, Food and Forestry Policies has identified 123 areas scattered in the entire Italian territory, with an average size of 1300 ha, in order to establish a national monitoring system for traditional rural landscapes. As a result of this national survey, the Ministry decided to establish the National Register of Historical Rural Landscapes, that is also the Italian list for potential application to GIAHS. These landscapes are characterized by a long history, presence of traditional practices, typical foods, complex landscape mosaics and high biocultural diversity. Detailed land use maps have been produced for each area, and among other data, the average number of land use types (19.6 ha) and the average patch size (2.7 ha) detected, confirm the fine grain of these landscapes characterized by high complexity and diversity of the landscape structure. A second survey was carried out five years later, in order to create a national monitoring system based on fixed study areas. The paper shows that in the last five years no major changes occurred, and even in the 33 areas where transformations are considered significant (i.e., &gt, 5% of the surface of the area), the characteristic features of the historical landscape are still well preserved. This confirms the resilience of these systems despite climatic and socioeconomic pressures.

Over the past few decades, there has been increasing interest in recording landscape change. Monitoring programmes have been established to measure the scope, direction and rate of change, and assess the consequences of changes for multiple interests, such as biodiversity, cultural heritage and recreation. The results can provide feedback for multiple sectors and policy domains. Political interests may change over time, but long-term monitoring demands long-term funding. This requires that monitoring programmes remain relevant and cost-efficient. In this paper, we document experiences from 20 years of the Norwegian Monitoring Programme for Agricultural Landscapes&mdash, the &lsquo, 3Q Programme&rsquo, We explain how data availability and demands for information have changed over time, and how the monitoring programme has been adapted to remain relevant. We also discuss how methods of presentation influence the degree of knowledge transfer to stakeholders, in particular to policy makers.

Following the 2000 European Landscape Convention, a new act strengthening landscape protection instruments has been in force since 2015. It sets forth legal aspects of landscape shaping (Dziennik Ustaw 2015, poz.774) and introduces landscape audits at the province level. A landscape audit consists in identification and characterization of selected landscapes, assessment of their value, selection of so-called priority landscapes and identification of threats for preservation of their value. An audit complies with GIS standards. Analyses use source materials, i.e. digital maps of physical-geographical mesoregions, current topographic maps of digital resources of cartographic databases, latest orthophoto maps and DTMs, maps of potential vegetation, geobotanic regionalization, historic-cultural regionalization and natural landscape types, documentation of historical and cultural values and related complementary resources. A special new methodology (Solon et al. 2014), developed for auditing, was tested in 2015 in an urban area (Myga-Piatek et al. 2015). Landscapes are characterized by determining their analytic (natural and cultural) and synthetic features, with particular focus on the stage of delimitation and identification of landscape units in urban areas. Czestochowa was selected as a case study due to its large natural (karst landscapes of the Czestochowa Upland, numerous forests, nature reserves) and cultural (Saint Mary’s Sanctuary, unique urban architecture) potential. Czestochowa is also a city of former iron ore and mineral resources exploitation, still active industry, dynamic urban sprawl within former farming areas, and dynamically growing tourism. Landscape delimitation and identification distinguished 75 landscape units basing on uniform landscape background (uniform cover and use of the land). Landscape assessment used a new assessment method for anthropogenic transformation of landscape – the indicator describing the correlation between the mean shape index (MSI) and the Shannon diversity index (SHDI) (Pukowiec-Kurda, Sobala 2016). Particular threats and planning suggestions, useful in development of urban areas, were presented for selected priority landscapes. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3846/enviro.2017.116

There are more than 580 natural areas in Oregon and Washington managed by 20 federal, state, local, and private agencies and organizations. This natural areas network is unparalleled in its representation of the diverse ecosystems found in the Pacific Northwest, and could prove useful for monitoring long‐term ecological responses to climate change. Our objectives were to (1) evaluate potential effects of climate change on these natural areas and (2) develop strategies for selecting and prioritizing sites for long‐term monitoring. Bioclimatic and Random Forest modeling were used to identify subsets of natural areas to prioritize for long‐term monitoring efforts based on the current and projected (2020s, 2050s, 2080s) outputs from 13 future climate models. Projection consensus suggest some of the largest effects of climate change on natural areas may be the result of a substantial range increase in suitable climate for warmer‐adapted forest types coupled with a reduction in habitat for cooler‐adapted forest types. We identify four strategies that could be used for prioritizing sites and help manage and protect biodiversity in the Pacific Northwest, especially given uncertainty over climate change effects.

The article describes the methodology of landscape and biodiversity monitoring in Estonia since 2004 for complying with European Union agricultural and environmental policies. The paper includes an overview of the introduction of the agri-environment programme; specifies how landscape features in agricultural and semi-natural areas are monitored, and to which extent agricultural impacts on environment are buffered by support measures. Designing monitoring networks to be spatially more efficient regarding changes in rural landscapes and assessing agricultural impacts is one of the keys to upgrading monitoring methods and decision-support systems.

Ecological services provided by coral reefs are threatened by complex dynamics of global and local drivers. Fostering an appropriate management at local scale may enhance the resilience of the coral reefs facing large-scale issues, more laboriously manageable. We propose to model a bespoke reef health index (RHI) using a comprehensive dataset of socio-ecological variables and the Boosted Regression Trees (BRT). The variation of the RHI was primarily explained by the cluster of physiographic variables (55.45%), to a lesser extent, by land cover (36.42%), and finally by sociological variables (8.12%). The dispersion and the mean of the slope, as well as the built-up area increasingly contributed to the satisfactory modeling of the RHI (14.07, 14.12, 15.37%, respectively). These results will hopefully be useful for the stakeholders tasking with integrated coastal sustainability.

With respect to the reduced weight in the Gross National Product (GDP) and the continuous decrease in manpower which has been recorded in the last decades, an important role is recognized to the rural sector in the current developmetn model which justify the heavy financial committment of Europe and Italy to sustain european agriculture.Within this role, land preservation has an important role for the sector competitiveness, the rural space quality and the citizen’s life quality, and this role is nowadays recognized even by the politics for landscape defined for the Piano strategico nazionale 2007-20131. Both action definitions and planning and development of landscape resources firstly require to define landscape monitoring systems pointing out trends, and critical and strength points represented by the great historical and environmental differences of Italian landscapes. This study is a synthesis of the results from a 5 year project aimed to the definition of a landscape monitoring system in Tuscany, ranging from 1800 and 2000 and based on study areas covering around 1% of the regional territory, which will soon be implemented. The first recorded results show a strong decrease of landscape diversity (40-50%) in the investigated time period. This study want to be an example for the implementation of the future monitoring system of this resource.

International audience; Rural landscapes are highly dynamic and their change impacts on a number of ecological processes such as the dynamics of biodiversity. Although a substantial amount of research has focused on quantifying these changes and their impact on biodiversity, most studies have focused on single dimensions of land use change. This lack of integration in land use change studies can be explained by the fact that data on the spatial, temporal, and ecological dimensions of land use are seldom available for the same geographical location. In this paper, the benefits of taking into account these three dimensions are illustrated with results derived from the Great Britain Countryside Surveys (CS), a large-scale monitoring programme designed to assess change in the extent and ecological condition of British habitats. The overview of CS results presented in this paper shows that (1) changes in land use composition will translate into a variety of spatial patterns; (2) the temporal stability of land use is often lower than can be expected; and (3) there can be large-scale shifts in the ecological condition of the land use types that form our rural landscapes. The benefits of integrated rural landscape studies are discussed in the context of other national monitoring programmes.