01905nas a2200157   4500008004100000020001400041245007000055210006900125260001500194300001300209490000800222520142200230100002601652700002301678856004601701       2019                        eng d  a1573-148000aAdaptations to extreme storm events by conservation organizations0 aAdaptations to extreme storm events by conservation organization  c2019/01/01  a85 - 1010 v1523 aExtreme precipitation events are associated with increased runoff of sediment and nutrients into surface waters, exacerbating water quality problems and creating challenges for soil and water managers. This change in the hydrologic cycle is expected to intensify under future climate change. Soil and water conservation professionals responsible for advising farmers and other land managers are on the front lines of adaptation to these climate change impacts. This study uses a survey of Soil and Water Conservation District staff (n = 260) in the United States Upper Midwest to better understand adaptation planning and implementation and the factors influencing adaptations by public organizations. In contrast to a typical planning-implementation gap finding, our respondents report a greater emphasis on some kinds of adaptation actions over planning. We find that the concerns of individual government employees about climate change have a greater association with adaptation planning strategies (e.g., planning document updates) compared to implemented adaptations on-the-ground (e.g., stream buffer installation). Also, weather projections were being used in conjunction with both adaptation planning and implementation. This study contributes to efforts to open up the black box of adaptation decision-making in the public sector, revealing the important role of individual concerns and information use.1 aWardropper, Chloe, B.1 aRissman, Adena, R.  uhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2342-802863nas a2200241   4500008004100000020001400041245008600055210006900141300001400210490000700224520215000231653001302381653002802394653002202422653001802444653001902462653001802481100001902499700002102518700002002539700002302559856003902582       2017                        eng d  a1939-558200aAnnual precipitation regulates spatial and temporal drivers of lake water clarity0 aAnnual precipitation regulates spatial and temporal drivers of l  a632 - 6430 v273 aUnderstanding how and why lakes vary and respond to different drivers through time and space is needed to understand, predict, and manage freshwater quality in an era of rapidly changing land use and climate. Water clarity regulates many characteristics of aquatic ecosystems and is responsive to watershed features, making it a sentinel of environmental change. However, whether precipitation alters the relative importance of features that influence lake water clarity or the spatial scales at which they operate is unknown. We used a dataset of thousands of north temperate lakes and asked: (1) How does water clarity differ between a very wet versus dry year? (2) Does the relative importance of different watershed features, or the spatial extent at which they are measured, vary between wet and dry years? (3) What lake and watershed characteristics regulate long-term water clarity trends? Among lakes, water clarity was reduced and less variable in the wet year than in the dry year; furthermore, water clarity was reduced much more in high-clarity lakes during the wet year than in low-clarity lakes. Climate, land use/land cover, and lake morphometry explained most variance in clarity among lakes in both years, but the spatial scales at which some features were important differed between the dry and wet years. Watershed percent agriculture was most important in the dry year, whereas riparian zone percent agriculture (around each lake and upstream features) was most important in the wet year. Between 1991 and 2012, water clarity declined in 23% of lakes and increased in only 6% of lakes. Conductance influenced the direction of temporal trend (clarity declined in lakes with low conductance), whereas the proportion of watershed wetlands, catchment-to-lake-area ratio, and lake maximum depth interacted with antecedent precipitation. Many predictors of water clarity, such as lake depth and landscape position, are features that cannot be readily managed. Given trends of increasing precipitation, eliminating riparian zone agriculture or keeping it <10% of area may be an effective option to maintain or improve water clarity.10aland use10aland-water interactions10alandscape ecology10aprecipitation10aremote sensing10aWater quality1 aRose, Kevin, C1 aGreb, Steven, R.1 aDiebel, Matthew1 aTurner, Monica, G.  uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.147103039nas a2200277   4500008004100000020001400041245012200055210006900177260000900246300001200255490000700267520216600274653002002440653001802460653002002478653002002498653002402518653002502542653004202567100002102609700002402630700002202654700002402676700002302700856003802723       2016                        eng d  a1939-558200aAlternative scenarios of bioenergy crop production in an agricultural landscape and implications for bird communities0 aAlternative scenarios of bioenergy crop production in an agricul  c2016  a42 - 540 v263 aIncreased demand and government mandates for bioenergy crops in the United States could require a large allocation of agricultural land to bioenergy feedstock production and substantially alter current landscape patterns. Incorporating bioenergy landscape design into land-use decision making could help maximize benefits and minimize trade-offs among alternative land uses. We developed spatially explicit landscape scenarios of increased bioenergy crop production in an 80-km radius agricultural landscape centered on a potential biomass-processing energy facility and evaluated the consequences of each scenario for bird communities. Our scenarios included conversion of existing annual row crops to perennial bioenergy grasslands and conversion of existing grasslands to annual bioenergy row crops. The scenarios explored combinations of four biomass crop types (three potential grassland crops along a gradient of plant diversity and one annual row crop [corn]), three land conversion percentages to bioenergy crops (10%, 20%, or 30% of row crops or grasslands), and three spatial configurations of biomass crop fields (random, clustered near similar field types, or centered on the processing plant), yielding 36 scenarios. For each scenario, we predicted the impact on four bird community metrics: species richness, total bird density, species of greatest conservation need (SGCN) density, and SGCN hotspots (SGCN birds/ha ≥ 2). Bird community metrics consistently increased with conversion of row crops to bioenergy grasslands and consistently decreased with conversion of grasslands to bioenergy row crops. Spatial arrangement of bioenergy fields had strong effects on the bird community and in some cases was more influential than the amount converted to bioenergy crops. Clustering grasslands had a stronger positive influence on the bird community than locating grasslands near the central plant or at random. Expansion of bioenergy grasslands onto marginal agricultural lands will likely benefit grassland bird populations, and bioenergy landscapes could be designed to maximize biodiversity benefits while meeting targets for biomass production.10abioenergy crops10agrass biomass10agrassland birds10aland-use change10alandscape scenarios10arow-crop agriculture10aspecies of greatest conservation need1 aBlank, Peter, J.1 aWilliams, Carol, L.1 aSample, David, W.1 aMeehan, Timothy, D.1 aTurner, Monica, G.  uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1890/14-149002496nas a2200181   4500008004100000245009000041210006900131520186900200653002902069653003202098653002202130653003002152653002802182653002002210100002302230700001802253856004302271       2015                        eng d00aAccounting for Results: How Conservation Organizations Report Performance Information0 aAccounting for Results How Conservation Organizations Report Per3 aEnvironmental program performance information is in high demand, but little research suggests why conservation organizations differ in reporting performance information. We compared performance measurement and reporting by four private-land conservation organizations: Partners for Fish and Wildlife in the US Fish and Wildlife Service (national government), Forest Stewardship Council—US (national nonprofit organization), Land and Water Conservation Departments (local government), and land trusts (local nonprofit organization). We asked: (1) How did the pattern of performance reporting relationships vary across organizations? (2) Was political conflict among organizations’ principals associated with greater performance information? and (3) Did performance information provide evidence of program effectiveness? Based on our typology of performance information, we found that most organizations reported output measures such as land area or number of contracts, some reported outcome indicators such as adherence to performance standards, but few modeled or measured environmental effects. Local government Land and Water Conservation Departments reported the most types of performance information, while local land trusts reported the fewest. The case studies suggest that governance networks influence the pattern and type of performance reporting, that goal conflict among principles is associated with greater performance information, and that performance information provides unreliable causal evidence of program effectiveness. Challenging simple prescriptions to generate more data as evidence, this analysis suggests (1) complex institutional and political contexts for environmental program performance and (2) the need to supplement performance measures with in-depth evaluations that can provide causal inferences about program effectiveness.10aEnvironmental governance10aEvidence-based conservation10aLand conservation10aMonitoring and evaluation10aPerformance measurement10aPolicy outcomes1 aRissman, Adena, R.1 aSmail, Robert  uhttps://wsc.limnology.wisc.edu/node/88