An expert panel-based approach to the assessment of vegetation condition within the context of biodiversity conservation stage 1: The identification of condition indicators

Ecological Indicators

Volumn 2, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 223-237

  Oliver, Ian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Delphi approach; Expert panels; Indicators; Vegetation condition

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CONDITION MONITORING; DECISION MAKING; NATURAL RESOURCES; PLANNING; PUBLIC POLICY; VEGETATION;

NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT;

ECOLOGY;

ASSESSMENT METHOD; BIODIVERSITY; BIOINDICATOR; CONSERVATION;

AUSTRALIA;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 0141889501     PISSN: 1470160X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-160X(02)00025-0     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. ANZECC (Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, State of the Environment Reporting Task Force), 2000a. National Framework for the Management and Monitoring of Australia's Native Vegetation. Environment Australia, Canberra, 71 pp.
2. ANZECC (Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, State of the Environment Reporting Task Force), Core Environmental Indicators for Reporting on the State of the Environment. Environment Australia, Canberra, 63 pp.
3. Benson, J., 1999. Setting the Scene. The Native Vegetation of New South Wales. A background paper to the Native Vegetation Advisory Council. Department of Land and Water Conservation, Sydney, 40 pp.
4. Cooperrider, A.Y., Boyd, R.J., Stuart, H.R. (Eds.), 1986. Inventory and monitoring of wildlife habitat. USDI Bureau of Land Management, Washington, DC.
5. Crance, J.H., 1987. Guidelines for using the Delphi technique to develop habitat suitability index curves, US Fish Wildl. Serv. Biol. Rep. 82 (10.134), 21.
6. Dale, V.H., Beyeler, S.C., 2001. Challenges in the development and use of ecological indicators. Ecol. Indicators 1, 3- 10.
7. DLWC (NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation), 1999. Development of Targets for Vegetation Retention and Re-vegetation, 22nd December, 1999. NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation, Sydney.
8. DLWC (NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation), 2000. NSW Salinity Strategy: Taking on the Challenge. NSW Department of Land and Water conservation, Sydney.
9. DNRE (Department of Natural Resources and Environment), 2000. Restoring Our Catchments. Victoria's Draft Native Vegetation Management Framework. Department of Natural Resources and Environment, Melbourne, 44 pp.
10. EA (Environment Australia), 2000. Native Vegetation Information System Draft VI-Vegetation Condition Framework. Environment Australia, Canberra.
11. EA (Environment Australia), 2001. A National Framework for Assessing Native Vegetation Condition. Environment Australia, Canberra.
12. Eyre, T.J., Jermyn, D., Kelly, A.L., 2000. Forest Condition and Habitat Assessment in Queensland, Version 2. Standards for Forest Assessment Technical Report 01/00, Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane, 62 pp.
13. Eyre, T.J., Kelly, A.L., Sutcliffe, T., Ward, D., Denham, R., Jermyn D., Venz, M., 2001. Forest Condition Assessment and Implications for Biodiversity. Forest Ecosystem Research and Assessment Technical Papers 2001-03, Department of Natural Resources, Brisbane, 96 pp.
14. Ferrier, S., 2002. Mapping spatial pattern in biodiversity for regional conservation planning: where to from here? Syst. Biol. 51, 331-363.
15. Franklin, J.F., Cromack, K., Denison, W., et al., 1981. Ecological Characteristics of Old-growth Douglas-fir Forests. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PNW-118. Pacific North-west Forest and Range Experiment Station, Portland, Oregon.
16. Griffin, N.R.M. P/L, 1999. Native Vegetation National Overview. Report for ANZECC, Environment Australia, Canberra, 117 pp.
17. Lindenmayer, D.B., Cunningham, R.B., Pope, M.L, Gibbons, P., Donnelly, C.F., 2000. Cavity sizes and types in Australian eucalyptus from wet and dry forest types: a simple rule of thumb for estimating size and number of cavities. For. Ecol. Manage. 137, 139-150.
18. Linstone, H., Turoff, M., 1975. The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, p. 81.
19. Ludwig, J.A., Tongway, D.J., 2000. Viewing rangelands as landscape systems. In: Amalds, O., Archer, S. (Eds.), Rangeland Desertification. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 39-52.
20. Lunt, I., 2001. Enhancing the links between restoration ecology and ecological restoration. Ecol. Manage. Rest. 2, 3-4.
21. McIntyre, S., McIvor, J.G., MacLeod, N.D., 2000. Principles for sustainable grazing in eucalyptus woodlands: landscape-scale indicators and the search for thresholds. In: Hale, P., Petrie, A., Moloney, D., Sattler, P. (Eds.), Management for Sustainable Ecosystems. Centre for Conservation Biology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 92-100.
22. MDBC (Murray-Darling Basin Commission), 1999. The salinity audit of the Murray-Darling Basin: A 100-year Perspective. Murray-Darling Basis Commission, Canberra.
23. NHT (Natural Heritage Trust), 2001. National Land and Water Resources Audit, 11 January 2002 (http://www.nlwra.gov.au/full/index.html).
24. Noss, R.F., 1990. Indicators for monitoring biodiversity: a hierarchical approach. Conserv. Biol. 4, 355-364.
25. Noss, R.F., 1999. Assessing and monitoring forest biodiversity: a suggested framework and indicators. For. Ecol. Manage. 115, 135-146.
26. NVAC (Native Vegetation Advisory Council), 1999. Native Vegetation Conservation Strategy for New South Wales - Draft. NSW Department of Land and Water Conservation, Sydney, 40 pp.
27. Oliver, I., in press. Introduction to an expert panel-based approach for the assessment of vegetation condition within the context of biodiversity conservation. Ecol. Manage. Rest.
28. Oliver, I., Smith P.L., Lunt, I., Parkes D., Gibbons P., in press, Pre-1750 vegetation, naturalness and vegetation condition: what are the implications for biodiversity conservation? Ecol. Manage. Rest.
29. Reckhow, K.H., 1994. Importance of scientific uncertainty in decision-making. Environ. Manage. 18, 161-166.
30. Saunders, D., Margules C., Hill, B., 1998. Environmental Indicators for National State of the Environment Reporting - Biodiversity. State of the Environment (Environmental Indicator Reports), Department of the Environment, Canberra, Australia.
31. Schamberger, M., 1988. Monitoring wildlife habitat: a critique of approaches. Statist. J. United Nations ECE 5, 303-313.
32. Schmoldt, D.L., Peterson, D.L., 2000. Analytical group decision-making in natural resources: methodology and application. For. Sci. 46, 62-75.
33. Schuster, E.G., Frisseil, S.S., Baker, E.E., Loveless Jr., R.S., 1985. The Delphi Method: Application to Elk Habitat Quality. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Research Paper INT-353, Ogden, 32 pp.
34. Tongway, D.J., 1994. Rangeland Soil Condition Assessment Manual. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, 69 pp.
35. Tongway, D.J., Smith, E.L., 1989. Soil surface features as indicators of rangeland site productivity. Aust. Range. J. 11, 15-20.
36. Tongway, D.J., Hindley, N., 1995. Manual for Soil Condition Assessment of Tropical Grasslands. CSIRO Wildlife and Ecology, Canberra, 60 pp.
37. Turoff, M., Hiltz, S.R., in press. Computer-based Delphi processes. In: Adler, M., Ziglio, E. (Eds.), Gazing into the Oracle: The Delphi Method and its Application to Social Policy and Public Health. Kingsley Publishers, London, pp. XXX-XXX, in press (also at http://eies.njit.edu/̃turoff).
38. Van Horne, B., 1983. Density as a misleading indicator of habitat quality. J. Wildl. Manage. 47, 893-901.
39. Verner, J., Morrison, M.L., Ralph, C.J., 1986. Wildlife 2000: Modelling Habitat Relationships of Terrestrial Vertebrates. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI.