 Background APPROACH ASSESSMENTS
CURRENT PAGE: 
 
|
|
Approach In broad outline, the Science Team divided its energy into (1) a period of data gathering and evaluation of data quality, (2) a period of assessment of the past and current status of the ecosystem, and (3) a final period of projecting and evaluating future trends under different possible strategies. The project devoted most of its effort to analyzing existing information rather than conducting new studies or experiments. The integration of this accumulated information became a primary objective, as the team sought a range of options for future directions of management. The study used geographic information systems (GISs) extensively as a primary means of synthesizing data, displaying information, and considering options for further analysis. The Science Team identified the primary questions to examine by involving a wider group of scientists to assist in data gathering and evaluation and by discussing the findings and implications of all the assessments. This process quickly showed the integral role of people, including their communities and institutions, as important ecosystem components equal to the flora, fauna, and other natural features. The team also recognized that dialogue with the public was necessary. A group of seventy people with diverse interests and responsibilities in the Sierra was assembled as key contacts. This group met with the team to review progress, ask questions, help in framing scenarios, assist in review of assessments, and plan larger public involvement. The team held smaller work sessions and reported on progress several times at announced public meetings called by the Steering Committee. Throughout the study, many team members met with individuals and local and regional groups, presented reports at professional and technical meetings, briefed county, state, and federal agency personnel, and held local workshops. These interactions between scientists and the public helped refine our process, content, approach, and scope.  Team member William Stewart (center) listens to input from Mono County Supervisor Andrea Lawrence (left), Mike Albrecht of TUCARE (right), and others at a public meeting. (Photo by Neil Michaels.) The charge of this study was not confined by the jurisdictions of ownership and management but rather followed the realities of the landscape. Data from both public and private lands were examined to the limit of time and resources; however, the 60% of the range in federal lands is highlighted because of availability of information. The team found that much has been studied in the Sierra Nevada, although, in many areas vital to understanding the future, essential knowledge was unavailable or tests of ideas have yet to be done. Science Team members were asked to draw reasonable inferences from their assessment of existing information, including their own observations. They have been explicit about the basis of this knowledge and these data and about where they are making assumptions or giving personal judgments. Assessments Assessment of the individual components of the system involved teams of various sizes, contacts with other scientists, requests for commissioned reports, review of published and unpublished literature, workshops, individual knowledge and observation, and in some cases original analysis of data or field evaluations. Assessment projects were guided by five questions:
In many places our assessments have used historical data as a guide to understanding natural ecological processes and conditions. These data have been as varied as ice cores from the poles, tree rings from thousand-year-old trees, diaries of early explorers, and photographs taken at the turn of the century. The past is always imperfectly known and understood, partly because the data are imperfect and because alternative explanations of processes and conditions may fit the same data. Supporting information from experimental research and from observations of conditions at select locations (such as parks) have been used to strengthen inferences from the past. But these approaches aim at understanding the present, not setting a fixed benchmark of what the future should be. The assessment summaries focus on those aspects of the ecosystem in which either existing conditions or present trends are in need of remedial action. Possible actions are given as alternative management strategies for improving conditions. What volume I presents is a brief summary of only some of the more important findings from these assessments. Practical limits of summarizing the substantial body of knowledge assembled by the study required us to omit much of the depth and richness. We have worked to avoid oversimplification or generalization without presenting the detailed methods and literature common to science reports. Thus, the full context, citation to sources, justification, and supporting data must be examined in the complete assessment reports. We have further summarized the assessments in a series of critical findings that are presented at the beginning of each chapter in this volume. These represent new findings, findings that confirm what has been generally believed about the Sierra, and emergent or synthesizing ideas that arose from SNEPs integrated analysis of individual reports. 
 
|