An Ecological Land Survey
for Fort Wainwright, Alaska
M. TORRE JORGENSON, JOANNA E. ROTH, MARTHA K. RAYNOLDS,
MICHAEL D. SMITH, WILL LENTZ, ALLISON L. ZUSI-COBB, AND CHARLES H. RACINE
distribution and sensitivity, disturbance regimes,
INTRODUCTION
and wildlife habitat use (Jorgenson et al., in prep.).
In response to the need for information on the
The structure and function of ecosystems
natural resources on Fort Wainwright by the Inte-
largely are regulated along energy, moisture,
grated Training Area Management Program
nutrient, and disturbance gradients, and these
being implemented by the U.S. Army, we per-
gradients are affected by climate, physiography,
formed an ELS (ecological land survey) of land
soils, hydrology, flora, and fauna (Barnes et al.
within the base's boundaries. This report presents
1982, ECOMAP 1993, Bailey 1996). These ecosys-
the rationale and methods used to classify and
tem components can be viewed as state factors
map ecosystems on the base, describes the nature
that affect ecological organization (Jenny 1941,
and dynamics of these ecosystems, and docu-
Van Cleve et al. 1990, Vitousek 1994, Bailey 1996,
ments the structure of the GIS (geological Infor-
Ellert et al. 1997) (Fig. 1a). Accordingly, we used
mation system) databases used in mapping and
the state factor approach to partition the varia-
aggregating ecosystems at several spatial scales.
tions in independent factors (e.g., climate, organ-
In an ELS, an attempt is made to view land-
isms, topography, parent material, and time) to
scapes not just as aggregations of separate biologi-
facilitate ecosystem classification and mapping
cal and earth resources, but as ecological systems
(Fig. 1a). While thematic maps of individual eco-
with functionally related parts (Rowe 1961, Bailey
system components (e.g., geomorphology and
1980, 1996, Wiken and Ironside 1977, Driscoll et
vegetation) have their particular uses, this link-
al. 1984). The goal of ELS, then, is to provide a con-
ing and aggregating of components into ecosys-
sistent conceptual framework for modeling, ana-
tems with covarying climate, geomorphology,
lyzing, interpreting, and applying ecological
surface forms, hydrology, and biota can provide
knowledge. To provide the information required
a spatial stratification that conveys a much
for such a wide range of applications, an ELS
broader range of information required for ecosys-
involves three types of efforts: (1) an ecological
tem management.
land survey that inventories and analyzes data
An ELS also involves the organization of eco-
obtained in the field, (2) an ecological land classi-
system components at various scales (Wilken
fication that classifies and maps ecosystem distri-
1981, O'Neil et al. 1986, Bailey 1996, Klijn and Udo
bution, and (3) an ecological land evaluation that
de Haes 1994) based on the recognition that the
assesses the capabilities of the land for various
state factors operate within a hierarchy of differ-
land management practices. Our emphasis in this
ing spatial and temporal scales (Allen and Starr
report is on the ELS and classification efforts. A
1982, Delcourt and Delcourt 1988, Forman 1995).
companion report evaluates some of the potential
This hierarchical linkage reveals that smaller scale
land evaluation applications, such as permafrost
features, such as vegetation, are nested within
Previous Page
