The habitat hectares approach to vegetation assessment: An evaluation and suggestions for improvement

Summary  The habitat hectares approach is an explicit, quantitative method for assessing the quality of vegetation by adding scores that are assigned to 10 habitat attributes. We believe it will be more repeatable and transparent than other methods that rely on subjective judgement. However, we have four principal criticisms of the method as it is currently proposed: (i) measurement of some of the attributes may be subject to considerable error that varies among assessors; (ii) the comparison of each measure with a single benchmark does not accommodate appropriate disturbance regimes; (iii) the proposed combination of attributes leads to some apparent internal inconsistencies; and (iv) it is not clear how the method will actually be used in practice. We suggest modifications to address these concerns and improve the proposed method. Finally, we make additional suggestions about the method's potential application, including: separate reporting of the extent and quality of different vegetation types to avoid the inappropriate combination of measures of area and quality; valuing appropriate disturbance regimes in natural areas; and considering very carefully the application of compensation or mitigation measures.

[1]  P. White,et al.  The Paradigm Shift in Ecology and Its Implications for Conservation , 1997 .

[2]  Helen M. Regan,et al.  A TAXONOMY AND TREATMENT OF UNCERTAINTY FOR ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION BIOLOGY , 2002 .

[3]  Judith L. Anderson.  Embracing Uncertainty: The Interface of Bayesian Statistics and Cognitive Psychology , 1998 .

[4]  V. T. Parker,et al.  The New Paradigm in Ecology: Implications for Conservation Biology Above the Species Level , 1992 .

[5]  P. Attiwill,et al.  Ecological disturbance and the conservative management of eucalypt forests in Australia , 1994 .

[6]  W. Niering.  Vegetation Dynamics (Succession and Climax) in Relation to Plant Community Management , 1987 .

[7]  S. Ferson,et al.  Different methods are needed to propagate ignorance and variability , 1996 .

[8]  Brean W. Duncan,et al.  SETTING RELIABILITY BOUNDS ON HABITAT SUITABILITY INDICES , 2001 .

[9]  S. Pickett,et al.  Changing perspectives in community dynamics: A theory of successional forces. , 1989, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[10]  Robert H. Whittaker,et al.  A Consideration of Climax Theory: The Climax as a Population and Pattern , 1953 .

[11]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  SIMPLE CONNECTIVITY MEASURES IN SPATIAL ECOLOGY , 2002 .

[12]  A. Gill,et al.  The role of fire regimes in temperate lowland grasslands of southeastern Australia. , 2002 .

[13]  David Cheal,et al.  Assessing the quality of native vegetation: The 'habitat hectares' approach , 2003 .

[14]  J. M. Sykes,et al.  USE OF VISUAL COVER ASSESSMENTS AS QUANTITATIVE ESTIMATORS OF SOME BRITISH WOODLAND TAXA , 1983 .

[15]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Tree Hollows and Wildlife Conservation in Australia , 2002 .

[16]  Hugh P. Possingham,et al.  OPTIMAL FIRE MANAGEMENT FOR MAINTAINING COMMUNITY DIVERSITY , 1999 .

[17]  Stephen Bernow,et al.  An Evaluation of Integrated Climate Protection Policies for theUnited States , 1998 .

[18]  A. Gill,et al.  Intervals between prescribed fires in Australia: what intrinsic variation should apply? , 1998 .

[19]  C. Elzinga,et al.  Monitoring Plant and Animal Populations , 2001 .