Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, January 2, 2013, vol. 110 no. 1
J. David Allan, Peter B. McIntyre, Sigrid D. P. Smith, Benjamin S. Halpern, Gregory L. Boyer, Andy Buchsbaum, G. A. Burton, Jr., Linda M. Campbell, W. Lindsay Chadderton, Jan J. H. Ciborowski, Patrick J. Doran, Tim Eder, Dana M. Infante, Lucinda B. Johnson, Christine A. Joseph, Adrienne L. Marino, Alexander Prusevich, Jennifer G. Read, Joan B. Rose, Edward S. Rutherford, Scott P. Sowa, and Alan D. Steinman
“With increasing pressure placed on natural systems by growing human populations, both scientists and resource managers need a better understanding of the relationships between cumulative stress from human activities and valued ecosystem services. Societies often seek to mitigate threats to these services through large-scale, costly restoration projects, such as the over one billion dollar Great Lakes Restoration Initiative currently underway. To help inform these efforts, we merged high-resolution spatial analyses of environmental stressors with mapping of ecosystem services for all five Great Lakes. Cumulative ecosystem stress is highest in near-shore habitats, but also extends offshore in Lakes Erie, Ontario, and Michigan. Variation in cumulative stress is driven largely by spatial concordance among multiple stressors, indicating the importance of considering all stressors when planning restoration activities.
“In addition, highly stressed areas reflect numerous different combinations of stressors rather than a single suite of problems, suggesting that a detailed understanding of the stressors needing alleviation could improve restoration planning. We also find that many important areas for fisheries and recreation are subject to high stress, indicating that ecosystem degradation could be threatening key services. Current restoration efforts have targeted high-stress sites almost exclusively, but generally without knowledge of the full range of stressors affecting these locations or differences among sites in service provisioning. Our results demonstrate that joint spatial analysis of stressors and ecosystem services can provide a critical foundation for maximizing social and ecological benefits from restoration investments.”