Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/191475
COMPARTIR / EXPORTAR:
logo share SHARE logo core CORE BASE
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL | DATACITE

Invitar a revisión por pares abierta
Título

Save water or save wildlife? Water use and conservation in the central Sierran foothill oak woodlands of California, USA

AutorHuntsinger, Lynn; Hruska, Tracy V.; Oviedo Pro, José Luis CSIC ORCID; Shapero, Matthew W. K.; Nader, Glenn A.; Ingram, Roger S.; Beissinger, Steven R.
Palabras claveAgroforestry
Conservation trade-offs
Ecosystem services
Endangered species
Irrigation
Social-ecological systems
Water systems
Wetlands
Fecha de publicación2017
EditorResilience Alliance
CitaciónEcology and Society 22(2):12 (2017)
ResumenMore frequent drought is projected for California. As water supplies constrict, and urban growth and out-migration spread to rural areas, trade-offs in water use for agriculture, biodiversity conservation, fire hazard reduction, residential development, and quality of life will be exacerbated. The California Black Rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus), state listed as “Threatened,” depends on leaks from antiquated irrigation district irrigation systems for much of its remnant small wetland habitat in the north central Sierra Nevada foothills. Residents of the 1295 km² foothill habitat distribution of the Black Rail were surveyed about water use. Results show that the most Black Rail habitat is owned by those purchasing water to irrigate pasture, a use that commonly creates wetlands from leaks and tailwater. Promoting wildlife, agricultural production, and preventing wildfire are common resident goals that call for abundant and inexpensive water; social and economic pressures encourage reduction in water use and the repair of leaks that benefit wildlife and greenery. Broad inflexible state interventions to curtail water use are likely to create a multitude of unintended consequences, including loss of biodiversity and environmental quality, and alienation of residents as valued ecosystem services literally dry up. Adaptive and proactive policies are needed that consider the linkages in the social-ecological system, are sensitive to local conditions, prevent landscape dewatering, and recognize the beneficial use of water to support ecosystem services such as wildlife habitat. Much Black Rail habitat is anthropogenic, created at the nexus of local governance, plentiful water, agricultural practices, historical events, and changing land uses. This history should be recognized and leveraged rather than ignored in a rush to “save” water by unraveling the social-ecological system that created the landscape. Policy and governance needs to identify and prioritize habitat areas to maintain during drought.
Versión del editorhttps://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol22/iss2/art12/
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/191475
DOI10.5751/ES-09217-220212
ISSN1708-3087
Aparece en las colecciones: (CCHS-IPP) Artículos




Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato
Save water or save wildlife.pdf10,7 MBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir
Mostrar el registro completo

CORE Recommender
sdgo:Goal

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

15
checked on 29-mar-2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

13
checked on 29-feb-2024

Page view(s)

243
checked on 22-abr-2024

Download(s)

166
checked on 22-abr-2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Este item está licenciado bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons