8201

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 8201
• Author: Carter, J. and V. Lamarra.
• Title: An ecosystem approach to environmental management.
• USFW Year: 1983.
• USFW - Doc Type: 261-287
• Copyright Material: YES

from this state by any component should be
associated change in one or more related
sub-components.

reflec ted by an
components or

This method has distinct advantages. If valid
statistical relationships between biological/physical.
biological/biological and physical/physical parameters are
established for the oil shale tracts. the long-term
monitoring effort will be reduced in scope and cost by not
having to monitor all possible components through time.
In addition. basing the monitoring program on these
ecosystem relationships is a diagnostic procedure leading
the environmental manager closer to the probable cause of
departure from normality by statistical analysis of
observed versus expected relationships. Once probable
cause is determined. intensive effort may be expended in a
smaller area to elucidate cause and determine corrective
action.

LOGIC OF THE MONITORING PROGRAM

Using our conceptual model and the rationale
described above. the management program is able to use
logic which leads to the appropriate contingency plan.
mitigation or change in reclamation in the event of an
adverse effect. or no further action in the event the
state is normal. An integral component of the following
procedure. the computer program "MONITOR" was developed to
streamline the analytical process.

Prior to operation of the development-level
monitoring program. baseline data collection and
pre-development monitoring are used to measure
environmental (biological/physical) parameters and
construct the ecosystem model (Figures 2 and 3). This
model. which is a statistical and mathematical description
of the ecosystem. describes inter- and intra- component
structure. functional relationships. and interactions with
driving variables. These relationships then become the
definition of ecosystem "health." i.e.. state variables
against which future data are compared. This comparison
takes place as shown in Figure 12. a flow model of
contingency planning using MONITOR. The analysis employed.
should follow logically through the various levels of
resolution described below.

Level I. The on-going monitoring effort will measure
those ecosystem parameters and relationships which were
determined significant during baseline and predevelopment
data collection. These might include parameters such as
chlorophyll ~. invertebrate functional group biomass, and

282

L

Fil

an,

light vs.
are used
allowable
significaI
relationsl
parameten
no furtht
satisfy tl
contingenc

Level II.
range as
begins. J
functionaJ
(biologic~
are coml
ecologicaJ
by a ch~
other eco~
model can
deviation
step of aI

Level III: