Many wildlife species receive support from mountain natural areas interspersed throughout the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest. Upper elevation field sites, ranging from 6,500-8,500 ft above sea level, cover several ecoregions or ecosystems and landscapes determined by biological, geological, chemical, and physical factors.
For instance, in the uplands beyond the freshwater shorelines, dense conifer forest stands (i.e., spruce, pine, fir, cedar tree species) offer bird species such as Peregrine falcons and Lazuli buntings (see below) sufficient nesting space. Closer to riparian and semi-wet environments, tall shrubs like willow and dogwood provide moose with foraging habitat and American black bears with prey selections. In the aqueous realm, deep streams grant native cutthroat trout and numerous aquatic insects with optimal temperatures and plenty of woody material for protection.
Watershed boundaries almost always overlap with critical ecosystems and complex wildlife communities. Some of these ecosystems and ecological communities exhibit high-quality characteristics. These characteristics drive highly functional ecological processes forward and sustain ‘regular’ or ‘normal’ wildlife behaviors. Habitat that has high-quality characteristics steadily grows wildlife populations, and they do not hinder ecological processes from normally progressing. A lot of physical space, high-quality habitat, clean water resources, and high functional biodiversity, with many interacting micro, meso, and macro scale communities indicate high-quality habitat characteristics.
Small holes in riparian trees, streamside puddles (see below), and countless unseen microbial spaces make up our micro-ecosystems. These systems do not boast large scales, but they drive many ecological processes forward, often serving as food-chain foundations. Intermediate-sized systems comprise small backwaters from streams, shoreline boulder fields, groupings of 5-10 trees, and streamside ponds. Macro scale systems span entire streams, much larger forest patches, and long shorelines. Regardless of the scale, each of these ‘levels’ facilitates key ecological functions, and depending on their qualities and stressor pools (i.e., level of recreation or spreading roadway noise), they display high-quality characteristics.
Conversely, poorer-quality ecosystems may boast one or none of these elements. They likely inhibit ecological processes responsible for the expected development of lifeforms. For instance, a subalpine lake that only receives water when rainfall occurs likely suits a modicum of wildlife, especially if the lake is entirely disconnected from other flowing or non-flowing waters. All of my field sites receive flowing water from Big Cottonwood Creek, but I sampled around one disconnected subalpine lake. This waterbody does not support free-swimming fish, and it only temporarily provides a cover habitat for geese, ducks, and other transient wildlife. Although a departure from my work, these disconnected water features likely offer attractive conditions for a suite of microorganisms when water is ice-free and in pooling form.
Ecological communities form in extreme, harsh, and poor environments, and despite the overall system quality (e.g., limited nutrient stores, minimal cover habitat) find a way to survive. We must remember that organism survival does not equate to a high-quality, comfortable life, or one that sustains and provides outdoor recreationists with excellent resource conditions.
It is paramount to consider the ecosystem and habitat quality associated with outdoor recreation areas. Understanding if an area is suitable for wildlife populations can help us understand how recreation stressors might influence species behavior, habitat quality, and general resource conditions like shoreline integrity. Moreover, some amphibian species (i.e., Ambystoma tigrinum, tiger salamander) health conditions immediately decline in the presence of outdoor recreationists. These salamanders irregularly behave and fail to transition to critical habitats (see below). Wildlife species variably react to recreational uses and patterns, so management prescriptions must align with unique organism understandings. One size (prescription) never fits all.
Asking these questions about scale and ecological function also greatly matters when designing nature-based recreation experiences for visitors. Practitioners must know which sites and habitats deliver key services for plants and wildlife, and in the perfect world, stewardship agencies (e.g., United States Forest Service) and scholars would collaborate. Collaborative recreation ecosystem management strengthens conservation plans and initiatives. The minds of multiple scholars and practitioners will always outweigh one.