Search

Search Results

• 11. [Article] Petrokofsky-Group work activities.pdf

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Petrokofsky-Group work activities.pdf Author: Creighton, Janean, Behan, Jeff, Johnson, Jim, Gaines, Lisa, Petrokofsky, Gillian, Avery, Bonnie E., Wirth, Andrea A., Frueh, W. Terry Title: Petrokofsky-Group work activities.pdf Author: Creighton, Janean, Behan, Jeff, Johnson, Jim, Gaines, Lisa, Petrokofsky, Gillian, Avery, Bonnie E., Wirth, Andrea A., Frueh, W. Terry Close

• 12. [Article] Wirth-SER database.pdf

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Wirth-SER database.pdf Author: Creighton, Janean, Behan, Jeff, Frueh, W. Terry, Gaines, Lisa, Petrokofsky, Gillian, Avery, Bonnie E., Wirth, Andrea A., Johnson, Jim Title: Wirth-SER database.pdf Author: Creighton, Janean, Behan, Jeff, Frueh, W. Terry, Gaines, Lisa, Petrokofsky, Gillian, Avery, Bonnie E., Wirth, Andrea A., Johnson, Jim Close

• 13. [Article] Avery-Wirth-Data sources for SERs.pdf

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Avery-Wirth-Data sources for SERs.pdf Author: Creighton, Janean, Behan, Jeff, Frueh, W. Terry, Gaines, Lisa, Petrokofsky, Gillian, Avery, Bonnie E., Wirth, Andrea A., Johnson, Jim Title: Avery-Wirth-Data sources for SERs.pdf Author: Creighton, Janean, Behan, Jeff, Frueh, W. Terry, Gaines, Lisa, Petrokofsky, Gillian, Avery, Bonnie E., Wirth, Andrea A., Johnson, Jim Close

• 14. [Article] Behan Presentation version1.pdf

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Behan Presentation version1.pdf Author: Creighton, Janean, Behan, Jeff, Johnson, Jim, Gaines, Lisa, Petrokofsky, Gillian, Avery, Bonnie E., Wirth, Andrea A., Frueh, W. Terry Title: Behan Presentation version1.pdf Author: Creighton, Janean, Behan, Jeff, Johnson, Jim, Gaines, Lisa, Petrokofsky, Gillian, Avery, Bonnie E., Wirth, Andrea A., Frueh, W. Terry Close

• 15. [Article] Innovation in environmental streamlining and project delivery: Oregon State bridge delivery program : final report

  This report examines the Bridge Program efforts undertaken, methods used, obstacles encountered, accomplishments, and lessons learned. It is not a performance evaluation; it is a case study focusing on ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Innovation in environmental streamlining and project delivery: Oregon State bridge delivery program : final report Author: Institute for Natural Resources, Lurie, Susan, Gaines, Lisa This report examines the Bridge Program efforts undertaken, methods used, obstacles encountered, accomplishments, and lessons learned. It is not a performance evaluation; it is a case study focusing on the social, organizational and institutional dynamics of transforming a vision for environmental streamlining into a working program. The Bridge Program is complex as well as innovative. The report therefore emphasizes particular innovative aspects of the program, requiring significant collaborative relationships, rather than describing all program facets in detail. Title: Innovation in environmental streamlining and project delivery: Oregon State bridge delivery program : final report Author: Institute for Natural Resources, Lurie, Susan, Gaines, Lisa This report examines the Bridge Program efforts undertaken, methods used, obstacles encountered, accomplishments, and lessons learned. It is not a performance evaluation; it is a case study focusing on the social, organizational and institutional dynamics of transforming a vision for environmental streamlining into a working program. The Bridge Program is complex as well as innovative. The report therefore emphasizes particular innovative aspects of the program, requiring significant collaborative relationships, rather than describing all program facets in detail. Close

• 16. [Article] Climate change outreach project : final report

  INR’s mission is to provide Oregonians with ready access to current, science‐based information and methods for better understanding resource management challenges and developing solutions and after the ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Climate change outreach project : final report Author: Institute for Natural Resources, Yaden, David, Gaines, Lisa, Orscheln, Nell, Davis-Born, Renee, Achterman, Gail, Rice, Bronwen INR’s mission is to provide Oregonians with ready access to current, science‐based information and methods for better understanding resource management challenges and developing solutions and after the 2004 release of the Governor’s Advisory Group on Global Warming (GAGGW’s) extensive report, The Oregon Strategy for GHG Reductions, INR recognized the need for a grassroots understanding of the issues surrounding climate change in Oregon. INR subsequently was funded to implement Phase I of a three‐phased strategy to address the scientific information issue of climate change. 4 Climate Change Outreach Project Final Report This final report documents the efforts of the INR project team. Section 2 provides the project background, goals, and objectives. Section 3 describes how each of the objectives was achieved and their subsequent impacts. Section 4 highlights some of the overall lessons learned, while Sections 5 and 6 conclude the report by focusing on the project management and the report conclusions. Title: Climate change outreach project : final report Author: Institute for Natural Resources, Yaden, David, Gaines, Lisa, Orscheln, Nell, Davis-Born, Renee, Achterman, Gail, Rice, Bronwen INR’s mission is to provide Oregonians with ready access to current, science‐based information and methods for better understanding resource management challenges and developing solutions and after the 2004 release of the Governor’s Advisory Group on Global Warming (GAGGW’s) extensive report, The Oregon Strategy for GHG Reductions, INR recognized the need for a grassroots understanding of the issues surrounding climate change in Oregon. INR subsequently was funded to implement Phase I of a three‐phased strategy to address the scientific information issue of climate change. 4 Climate Change Outreach Project Final Report This final report documents the efforts of the INR project team. Section 2 provides the project background, goals, and objectives. Section 3 describes how each of the objectives was achieved and their subsequent impacts. Section 4 highlights some of the overall lessons learned, while Sections 5 and 6 conclude the report by focusing on the project management and the report conclusions. Close

• 17. [Article] Integrated Landscape Assessment Project final report

  Many ILAP spatial datasets and models are accessible from the Western Landscapes Explorer: http://westernlandscapesexplorer.info/AccessILAPDataMapsModelsandAnalyses

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: Integrated Landscape Assessment Project final report Author: Gaines, Lisa, Kagan, Jimmy, Hemstrom, Miles, Salwasser, Janine Many ILAP spatial datasets and models are accessible from the Western Landscapes Explorer: http://westernlandscapesexplorer.info/AccessILAPDataMapsModelsandAnalyses Title: Integrated Landscape Assessment Project final report Author: Gaines, Lisa, Kagan, Jimmy, Hemstrom, Miles, Salwasser, Janine Many ILAP spatial datasets and models are accessible from the Western Landscapes Explorer: http://westernlandscapesexplorer.info/AccessILAPDataMapsModelsandAnalyses Close

• 18. [Article] The heritage program: 25 years old and looking ahead assessing the future of the heritage program : final report

  Over the last 25 years numerous approaches, understandings, and perceptions about natural areas have changed – changes which affect the relevance of programs such as the Heritage Program. As one participant ...

  Citation × Citation Citation Abstract Copy Title: The heritage program: 25 years old and looking ahead assessing the future of the heritage program : final report Author: Gaines, Lisa, Kagan, Jimmy Over the last 25 years numerous approaches, understandings, and perceptions about natural areas have changed – changes which affect the relevance of programs such as the Heritage Program. As one participant stated, “the complexity of science in general has been humbling”. The last 25 years has shown many assumptions and premises upon which the Heritage Program were founded have changed. Most important has been the recognition that to focus primarily on pristine areas is not the only way to conserve, that pristine ecosystems do not exist, and that management and restoration are needed in much of the landscape. Nature is much more dynamic and less easily compartmentalized than once assumed. Habitat needs are more complex, context (e.g., capacity for seed dispersal and fire) is becoming more important, and species are often quite tenacious instead of fragile. There is a better understanding that the survival of many species occurs outside of our influence and control. Aside from habitat loss, the major threats most impacting Oregon’s natural heritage, global climate change and exotic species invasions, were not viewed as important when the program was created. Twenty-five years ago meta-population theory did not exist. Technology, including the prevalence and advancement of computers and database management, has progressed. Institutions such as watershed councils, land trusts, and water trusts either did not exist when the Heritage Program began have come into being, or were not considered very important to conservation. Socially, there is a greater sense that biodiversity is now “on the edge”, that more has been lost than we had thought. Also, there is the appreciation that ecosystems provide services and functions other than what can be provided by small “islands” of natural areas. In essence, the Heritage Program needs to accommodate these and other changes by working with a broader context of conservation strategies. Title: The heritage program: 25 years old and looking ahead assessing the future of the heritage program : final report Author: Gaines, Lisa, Kagan, Jimmy Over the last 25 years numerous approaches, understandings, and perceptions about natural areas have changed – changes which affect the relevance of programs such as the Heritage Program. As one participant stated, “the complexity of science in general has been humbling”. The last 25 years has shown many assumptions and premises upon which the Heritage Program were founded have changed. Most important has been the recognition that to focus primarily on pristine areas is not the only way to conserve, that pristine ecosystems do not exist, and that management and restoration are needed in much of the landscape. Nature is much more dynamic and less easily compartmentalized than once assumed. Habitat needs are more complex, context (e.g., capacity for seed dispersal and fire) is becoming more important, and species are often quite tenacious instead of fragile. There is a better understanding that the survival of many species occurs outside of our influence and control. Aside from habitat loss, the major threats most impacting Oregon’s natural heritage, global climate change and exotic species invasions, were not viewed as important when the program was created. Twenty-five years ago meta-population theory did not exist. Technology, including the prevalence and advancement of computers and database management, has progressed. Institutions such as watershed councils, land trusts, and water trusts either did not exist when the Heritage Program began have come into being, or were not considered very important to conservation. Socially, there is a greater sense that biodiversity is now “on the edge”, that more has been lost than we had thought. Also, there is the appreciation that ecosystems provide services and functions other than what can be provided by small “islands” of natural areas. In essence, the Heritage Program needs to accommodate these and other changes by working with a broader context of conservation strategies. Close