Ecological risk assessment and problem formulation for Lake Uluabat, a Ramsar State in Turkey

Environmental Management

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 899-910

  Salihoglu, Guray ^a   Karaer, Feza ^a  

^a ULUDAG UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Environmental management; Problem formulation; Risk prioritization; Uluabat Lake

Indexed keywords

DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; ECOSYSTEMS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; LAKES; RISK ASSESSMENT;

PARTNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT; PROBLEM FORMULATION;

ECOLOGY;

ASSESSMENT METHOD; ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; LAKE; PARTNERSHIP APPROACH; RISK ASSESSMENT;

DEVELOPING COUNTRY; ECOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FISHING; LAKE ECOSYSTEM; LEGAL ASPECT; PROBLEM SOLVING; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; THEORY; TURKEY (REPUBLIC); WATER QUALITY; WORKSHOP;

BURSA [TURKEY]; EURASIA; TURKEY; ULUABAT LAKE;

EID: 4344660329     PISSN: 0364152X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-004-2864-x     Document Type: Review

References (37)

1. Adams, S. M., and M. Power. 1997. Assessing the current status of ecological risk assessment. Environmental Management 21:825-830.
2. Aksoy, E., M. A. Çullu, and H. Ergun. 1997. Remote sensing and geographical information system applications in the identification of adverse changes in natural resources of Bursa. Pages 16-18 in TUFUAB III-Remote Sensing and Applications in Turkey Seminar [in Turkish] May 1998. Bursa, Turkey.
3. Aksoy E., and G. Özsoy. 2002. Investigation of multi-temporal land use/cover and shoreline changes of the Uluabat Lake Ramsar Site using RS and GIS. Pages 73-79 in Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Land Use and Management, 2002. Çanakkale, Turkey.
4. Balsam, A., and C. Wood. 2002. A comparative evaluation of the EIA systems in Egypt, Turkey and Tunisia. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 22:213-234.
5. Barrington, R. 2001. Biodiversity: new trends in environmental management. Corporate Environmental Strategy 8:39-47.
6. Bartell, S. M. 1997. Ecological risk assessment: Progressing through experience or stalling in debate. Environmental Management 21:822-825.
7. Celik, G. (2000) Ecological Risk Assessment in Environmental Management and Problem Formulation for Uluolbait Ramsar Site Uludoig University Science Institute, MSC Thesis [in Turkish], Bursol-Turkey, pp 434.
8. DHKD 2001. Draft Report: Uluabat Lake Management Plan. Turkish Ministry of Environment & Society for the Protection of Nature (DHKD) [in Turkish], Ankara 50.
9. Environment Foundation 1999. Turkish Environmental Regulations [in Turkish]. Ankara, . 1201.
10. Erdmenger, G. 1998. Environmental management instruments. International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, Freiburg, Germany. 84 pp.
11. Harris J.H., R.B. Wenger, A. V. Harris, and D.S. Devault. 1994. A method for assessing environmental risk: A case study of Green Bay, Lake Michigan, USA. Environmental Management 18:295-306.
12. Hogsett, W.E., J.E. Weber, D. Tingey, A. Herstrom, E.H. Lee, and J.A. Laurence. 1997. An approach for characterizing tropospheric ozone risk to forests. Environmental Management 21:105-120.
13. ICLEI 1996. The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide. International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), Toronto, Canada 212.
14. Kooistra, L., R.S.E.W. Leuven, P.H. Nienhuis, R. Wehrens, and L.M.C. Buydens. 2001. A procedure for incorporating spatial variability in ecological risk assessment of Dutch river floodplains. Environmental Management 28:359-373.
15. Lemly, A.D. 1997. Risk assessment as an environmental management tool: considerations for freshwater wetlands. Environmental Management 21:343-358.
16. McDaniels, T.L. 2000. Creating and using objectives for ecological risk assessment and management. Environmental Science & Policy 3:299-304.
17. Ministry of Environment 1997. Handbook for Ramsar Convention [in Turkish]. Turkish Republic Ministry of Environment-General Directorate for Environmental Protection, Ankara 162.
18. Power, M., and S.M. Adams. 1997. Perspectives of the scientific community on the status of ecological risk assessment. Environmental Management 21:803-830.
19. Power, M., and L.S. McCarty. 1997. Fallacies in ecological risk assessment practices. Environmental Science & Technology 31:370A-375A.
20. Preston, B.L. 2002. Indirect effects in aquatic ecotoxicology: Implications for ecological risk assessment. Environmental Management 29:311-323.
21. Sampford, C. 2002. Environmental governance for biodiversity. Environmental Science & Policy 5:79-90.
22. Serveiss, V.B. 2002. Applying ecological risk principles to watershed assessment and management. Environmental Management 29:145-154.
23. Sewell, G.H. 1975. Environmental quality management. Prentice-Hall Inc, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 150.
24. Solomon, K.R., and P. Sibley. 2002. New concepts in ecological risk assessment: Where do we go from here. Marine Pollution Bulletin 44:279-285.
25. Storksdieck, M., and K.O. Zimmermann. 1994. Advanced environmental management tools and environmental budgeting at the local level. International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, Freiburg, Germany, 59 pp.
26. Suter II, G.W. 1996. Guide for developing conceptual models for ecological risk assessments. Environmental Risk Assessment Program Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 14 pp.
27. Suter, G.W., II 2000. Generic assessment endpoints are needed for ecological risk assessment. Risk Analysis 20:173-178.
28. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1994. Memorandum: Role of the ecological risk assessment in the baseline risk assessment, Oswer Directive No. 9285.7-17. USEPA, Washington, D.C. 2 pp.
29. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1996a. Waquoit Bay Watershed Ecological Risk Assessment Planning and Problem Formulation, EPA/630/R-96/045A (Draft). USEPA, Washington, D.C. 111 pp.
30. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1996b. Clinch Valley Watershed Ecological Risk Assessment Planning and Problem Formulation, EPA/630/R-96/005A (Draft). USEPA, Washington, D.C. 62 pp.
31. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. EPA/630/R-95/002F. USEPA, Washington, D.C. 114 pp.
32. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. Ecological risk assessment for the Middle Snake River, Idaho. Region 10 Office of Environmental Assessment, Washington, D.C. 100 pp.
33. Van Leeuwen, C.J. 1997. Ecological risk assessment: An input for decision-making. Environmental Management 21:812-816.
34. Welch, G., and H. Welch. 1998. Breeding bird survey of Uluabat Lake, Society for the Protection of Nature (DHKD) [in Turkish], Ankara, 80 pp.
35. Wenger, R.B., H.J. Harris, and D.S. Devault. 2000. An assessment of ecosystem risks in the St. Croix national scenic riverway. Environmental Management 25:599-611.
36. Yarar, M., and G. Magnin. 1997. Important bird areas of Turkey. Society for the Protection of Nature (DHKD) [in Turkish], Istanbul, Turkey 297.
37. Yin, Y.Y., G.H. Huang, and ICW. Hipel. 1999. Fuzzy relation analysis for multicriteria water resources management. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 125:41-47.