Restoring a wetland complex for amphibian populations, south Okanagan Valley, British Columbia, Canada (2003 to 2014)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The arid south Okanagan Valley is a highly anthropogenic landscape experiencing intense development pressure from agriculture and urban expansion. Ecologically, wetland and riparian habitat loss now exceeds 84% of what existed since the 1800s. Based on these conditions, I tested whether species richness, distribution, and relative density of native herpetofauna among 108 wetlands surveyed during 2003 to 2006 would show significant differences among sites as defined by their land-use characteristics. I identified seven land-use stressors: water withdrawal or discharge; infilling or shoreline modification; burn pile / garbage dumping; non-native invasive species; agricultural input (e.g. pesticides, herbicides); nutrient input (unrestricted livestock, turf fertilization); and artificially constructed sites. At least one of the seven identified land-use stressors was present at 88% of sites and 74% of sites experienced nutrient inputs. The highest overall frequency of stressors occurred at agricultural sites. And yet, these agricultural sites breeding habitat value with the highest species richness of native herpetofauna and some of the highest observed densities of species early life stages. Despite repeat surveying, more than two-thirds of sites had less than two herpetofaunal species detected annually. In response to the apparent ecological degradation based on field observations, a collaborative stakeholder approach was initiated to increase the quantity and quality of lowland wetland habitat. The approach used was landscape ecological restoration, i.e. reconnecting known amphibian-breeding sites with constructed and/or enhanced small ponds. The prior herpetofauna monitoring data (2003 to 2006) determined both ecological and management based strategic locations: 1) proximity to known herpetofaunal breeding locations, 2) distance to adjacent water bodies, 3) distance to roadways, 4) historic wetland infilling, or 5) partnership with local conservation authorities. Habitat enhancement outcomes initiated as part of my research (Ntotal = 21 sites) included 10 newly constructed ponds, enhancement of 8 re-contoured ponds after historic infilling, and invasive non-native predatory species removal at 3 sites (2006 to 2011). Project ponds were monitored annually (2007 to 2014) for all life stages of herpetofauna. Over this eight year period, metamorphic success for the Great Basin spadefoot (Spea intermontana) (13 sites) and the pacific chorus frog (Pseudacris regilla) (N = 7 sites) populations has been observed. Enhancement and construction of ponds in the lower valley roughly doubled the number of available discrete breeding ponds within the study area from 13 to 31 ponds and through voluntary stewardship engaged landowners. Whether enhancement and construction of ponds have aided species recovery is unclear, because it can take multiple species generations and habitat protection to establish whether there has been a permanent ecological restoration; however the data on colonization provides early supporting evidence that some species are recovering. The project results support a “build it and they will come” action; this approach likely works because there was severe decline in available breeding habitat, hence any improvement tends to provide an initial increase in some widely distributed populations of herpetofauna. Nonetheless, the ongoing lack of critical upland habitat needed by amphibian species poses a significant threat to species movement and long-term population success. Planning and management challenges remain, namely enforcement of wetland protection measures and moving beyond like-minded collaborations and towards targeted stewardship of less motivated persons.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".