In concert with Warren's response, I would speculate that as the
wilderness designation tends to protect large areas with a range of
biological productivity, they are unique in their high *gamma* diversity.
Ross Conover

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 11:41 PM, Warren W. Aney <[email protected]> wrote:

> As a field ecologist, my observations are not entirely scientific or
> empirical but I hope they are objective.  First, a Wilderness designation
> does not generally prevent mining since the Federal Mining Act of 1872
> precedes and supersedes the Wilderness Act of 1964.
> Second, designated Wilderness Areas vary so much ecologically it is
> difficult to generalize about conditions of air, water, and biota.
> Generally, however, it has been my observation that designated Wilderness
> Areas tend to have these qualities in comparison to adjacent non-wilderness
> lands:
>
> 1. Wilderness tends to be structurally and biologically more diverse and
> resilient.
> 2. Wilderness source streams and lakes tend to be cleaner in terms of
> pathogens, pollutants and silt (but grazing is still allowed in wilderness
> areas, so don't drink downstream from the sheep herd -- and even high
> altitude wilderness streams may contain giardia).
> 3. The greatest risks to headwaters are from soil disturbance due to road
> construction and mining, steep slope soil movement due to tree removal,
> chemical-laden seepages and runoff from mined areas, over-grazing, and
> riparian area disturbances.  Except for mining and grazing, these
> activities
> do not occur in designated Wilderness Areas.
> 4. Certain species assemblages are much more likely to exist and be
> productive in designated Wilderness Areas or in areas with wilderness
> conditions, e.g., wolverine, fisher, lynx, brown and grizzly bears,
> Capercaillie, Northern Spotted Owl and some of its prey species, bull
> trout.
> 5. Several species are less likely to conflict with humans and human
> enterprises when they inhabit large, contiguous wilderness areas, e.g.,
> cougar, grizzly bear, wolves.
>
> Hope this helps a little, and I'm sure others on this list will provide
> more
> specific information.
>
> Warren W. Aney
> Senior Wildlife Ecologist
> 9403 SW 74th Ave
> Tigard, OR  97223
> (503) 539-1009
> (503) 246-2605 fax
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Brown
> Sent: Thursday, 28 April, 2011 14:15
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Media Inquiry: Wilderness
>
> Hello-
>
> My name is Jonathan Brown. I'm a reporter with Colorado Public Radio and
> I'm
>
> working on a story about federal designations of wilderness.
>
> I'm trying to get a scientific/empirical response to this question:
>
> "What do federal wilderness designations do?"
>
> We  already know they prevent road building, construction of any kind,
> motorized
> use,  drilling, mining, timber harvesting and humans can only visit, not
> remain.
> But  what - if anything - is the result of all this? Are the air and water
> cleaner? Fauna and flora healthier somehow? Do wilderness areas protect
> headwaters, as many proponents claim?
>
>
> Again,  I'm looking for an empirical response to these questions and I'm
> hoping
> someone out there can  provide substantive answers.
>
> Thank you-
>
> Jonathan Brown
> Colorado Public Radio
> (303) 871-9191 x 456
> [email protected]
>



-- 
Ross R. Conover

"In the end, our society will be defined not only by what we create, but by
what we refuse to destroy" --John Sawhill

Reply via email to