This article was downloaded by: [Boston University]On: 07 October 2014, At: 19:21Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of GeographyPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjog20

A Landscape Guide in Environmental EducationKimberly E. Medley & Lori M. Gramlich-kaufmanPublished online: 16 Aug 2007.

To cite this article: Kimberly E. Medley & Lori M. Gramlich-kaufman (2001) A Landscape Guide in Environmental Education, Journal ofGeography, 100:2, 69-77, DOI: 10.1080/00221340108978419

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221340108978419

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations orwarranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsedby Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings,demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectlyin connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

A Landscape Guide in Environmental Education

Kimberly E. Medley and Lori M. Gramlich-Kaufman

ABSTRACT The interpretation of landscapes is

an important way to learn about geogra- phy in environmental education. A Landscape Guide to the Bachelor Reserve applies geographic/historical and biologi- cal/ecological perspectives to the interpre- tation of ten landscape scenes along a three-mile walking tour. For each scene, the guide describes the environmental set- ting, the composition and structure of the vegetation, and the history of human influences. Questionnaire and field assessments document a well-received interpretive tool, and the need to guide participants across land transitions and interpret land use history clearly. Landscape guides can be used in school/community land labs and con- tribute to holistic learning and multidisci- plinary exercises in formal and informal environmental education programs.

Key Words: geographic education, holistic learning, land labs, landscape ecology, nature interpretation

Kimberly E. Medley is associate professor in the Department of Geography where she teaches courses in physical geography, conser- vation of natural resources, plant geography, landscape ecology, and women, gender, and the environment.

Lori M. Gramlich-Kaufman graduated from Miami University with degrees in geography and scientific/technical communication in May 1996, and in 1998 completed require- ments for biology certification in grades 7-12 at Ohio Dominican College, Columbus, Ohio. She teaches earth science at a high school in southern Indiana.

Geography has much to contribute to environmental education because the discipline takes a holistic approach toward learning about human-environ- ment relationships (Knight 1992; Geography Education Standards Project 1994; Archer 1995; National Research Council 1997). Most environmental education programs focus on learning natural history or conducting directed studies of environmental problems (e.g., Orr 1992; chapters in Hale 1993). These pro- grams may use guides to trees, wildflowers, birds, and other "natural compo- nents," or run monitoring experiments of environmental change, respectively. Humans are viewed as separate from the natural world and an impact on its pristine condition. From a geographic perspective, however, humans are a part of all landscapes, shaping the diversity of scenes across a regon and defining their particular structure at a location (Lewis 1979; McDonnell and Pickett 1993; National Research Council 1997). Landscapes are not simply natural or human, they are humans and nature. The interpretation of landscapes is an important way to learn about geography (e.g., Herman 1996), and provides a useful activity in environmental education to better understand the role of human activities in modifying natural areas.

Learning about nature through the interpretation of landscape scenes is holistic when various perspectives are each considered individually, and then considered in relation to one another (Salter 1995). Biological/ecologcal per- spectives are necessary to measure plants and animals, analyze their interrela- tionships, and interpret the composition and structure of a natural scene (e.g., Hale 1993; Nabhan 1994). Plants provide important clues to the environmental setting and habitats for other organisms (e.g., Goldsmith 1994). Each scene in a landscape represents an ecosystem that responds to the physical-environmental setting and is influenced by natural and human disturbances (Forman and Godron 1986). Geographic/historical perspectives are necessary to identify how landscape scenes relate to one another across space and to interpret the role of humans through time (Geography Education Standards Project 1994). Different land management practices and human constructions throughout history pro- duce strikingly different tracts of land adjacent to one another in similar envi- ronmental settings. Humans may directly influence an ecosystem, such as when they clear a forest, or their effects may be more subtle, like low tree regen- eration during a brief history of grazing in a farm woodlot, edge effects across a forest boundary, or an introduced non-native plant (McDonnell and Pickett 1993; Whitney 1994). Biological/ecological and geographic/historical perspec- tives are necessarily integrated into a holistic view through the interpretation of different scenes across a landscape.

We report on the development and assessment of A Landscape Guide to the Bachelor Reserve. The goal of this project was to develop an interpretive key to landscape scenes along a three-mile (5 km) walking tour through a protected land mosaic. A Landscape Guide to the Bachelor Reserve serves as a tool for course instruction, a reference for independent study projects, and an informal inter- pretative key for the general public. We present the landscape guide as an example, and show how it may be developed and applied to the educational activities at any school or community land lab (e.g., Adams 1993; Landis et al. 1995).

journal of Geography 100:69-77 02001 National Council for Geographic Education

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bos

ton

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:21

07

Oct

ober

201

4

70 Medley and Grarnlich-Kaufman

ISR732 , 3

us 21

Figure 1. Location of Bachelor Reserve on the campus of Miami University, Oxford, Ohio.

THE BACHELOR RESERVE

pus of Miami University, just east of Oxford, Ohio (Figure 1). Harker’s Run flows north to south through the approxi- mate center of the reserve, bordered by floodplain, sloping, and flat-upland topographic settings. Dr. Bachelor acquired 400 acres (162 ha) during his teaching career, which were donated to the university upon his death in 1947. Later the university acquired 261 acres (106 ha) in adjacent tracts, forming a contiguous natural area of 661 acres (268 ha).

The Bachelor Reserve is located adjacent to the cam-

The land use of the Bachelor Reserve over seven time periods was entered into a geographic information system, using air photos from 1938, 1950, 1962, 1968, 1976, 1983, and 1988 (Chatfield 1991). Vegetation structural character- istics observed on the black and white photos were used to identify differences in land-cover and accordingly land use activities through time. We updated the 1988 map through a field survey in 1995, noting changes in the stature of the vegetation (from successional to forest), and changes in land-cover boundaries. From these maps we computed proportions for six land-cover types: forest (deciduous woodlots), successional (early and late successional with eastern red cedar), grazed/wooded, grazed/pasture, conifer plantings (red and white pine), and agriculture (Figure 2). Other land uses (e.g., pond and streams, coal storage, resi- dential), which occupied from 5.4 percent to much less of the land, were dropped from the analyses.

We documented that between 1938 and 1995, row crops dropped from 46 percent to 11 percent, cattle pasture and grazed-forest dropped from 15 percent to 0 percent, and un-managed successional and forest lands increased from 20 percent (old-regrowth forest) to over 80 percent of the land area (Figure 2). The university established a pine plantation on about 3.2 acres (8 ha) in 1950 and construct- ed two ponds between 1957 and 1958 that were used as a water source for over 80 beef cattle. These intensive-man- agement practices continued on the lands through 1958, when those concerned with Dr. Bachelor’s will changed I

policy to support a protected area better. Today, about 11 percent of the land is used for agriculture/horticulture, pas- ture, recreational fields, and a university/community com- post pile, and the rest is managed as a nature reserve with hiking trails for recreation.

1 ooo/,

80%

60%

40%

20%

0% t t

forest

EB conifer plantings

successional

Ill grazed/wooded

c3 grazed/pasture

0 agriculture

1938195019621968197619831995 Figure 2. Land-cover composition of the Bachelor Reserve from 1938 to 1995. These data, derived from air photos, are used to identify the historical changes for each scene examined in the landscape guide.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bos

ton

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:21

07

Oct

ober

201

4

Environmental Education 71

DEVELOPMENT OF THE GUIDE The landscape guide was developed under the 1995

Miami University Undergraduate Summer Scholars pro- gram, which supported student-faculty collaboration on a research project. We chose a project that would combine our skills in technical writing, photography, and geography with a guide that showed the role of humans and the phys- ical environment in creating diverse scenes in the Bachelor Reserve. The guide was designed to provide an interpre- tive tool for the Bachelor Reserve that could be used by stu- dents and the general public, thereby enhancing learning opportunities in the Miami University Natural Areas. Moreover, the project provided a learning tool that would show the contributions of training in geography to nature interpretation and environmental education.

Much of early May 1995 was spent hiking the trail system in the Bachelor Reserve and using the land-cover maps described above to interpret the diversity of vegeta- tion types. We then selected and compiled data for ten dis- tinctive scenes, capturing a range of land-cover types along a three-mile (5 km) loop trail in the reserve (Figure 3). Each scene was distinguished by its environmental setting, vege- tation composition and structure, and history of human influences. Environmental characteristics included topog- raphy, natural disturbances (e.g., periodic flooding), soils, and boundaries with different land-use types. Vegetation composition and structure were evaluated visually at the site and in permanent nested plots where we measured

trees >10 cm diameter at breast height (dbh) in 0.1 ha plots and saplings more than 1 m in height and less than 10 cm dbh in 0.03 ha plots. These measurements quantified the largest and most dense trees at the canopy and understory forest layers.

Scene histories relied on the land-cover maps com- piled by Chatfield (1991) for the seven time periods between 1938 and 1988, field surveys showing the location of fence lines (Figure 3) and observed land-cover changes in 1995, archives available from the Hefner Zoology Museum, and the stories of experts who have watched the reserve change through time. Of particular importance were the recollections of Dr. Paul and Lois Daniel, who have lived and worked in Oxford since World War I1 and spent considerable time conducting field research and hik- ing in the region’s natural areas. Also, Ken Havens, retired from supervising the management of university grounds and employed under contract as the trail supervisor, pro- vided much insight on changes in land management and plant cover through time. From walks and conversations with these local experts, for example, we were able to detail the approximate numbers of cattle on the property and their management, the actual date the pond was con- structed and its heavy use by students during the 1960s until the mid 1970s, the approximate year when non-native garlic mustard became abundant in the floodplain herb layer and when one non-native shrub, amur honeysuckle, became abundant in the open lands and another non-

, / . c I BACHELOR RESERVE

1 1 St. Rt. 73

WALKING TOUR

~ $ 1 Natural Area

- streams

- roads

- trail

A scenes

.--.-. fencerows

km

A

0 .5 1

Figure 3. The guide follows a walking tour through the Bachelor Reserve that begins at the entrance of S.R. 73. The trail is approxi- mately 3 miles (5 km) long, where two suspension bridges cross between the east and west banks of Harker’s Run. Trail signs identify 10 landscape scenes @..lo) and 2 ecotones (ecotone 1 and ecotone 2). The map also shows the addition to the original Bachelor lands donated by the Reinhart family and considered in the overview of land-cover change.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bos

ton

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:21

07

Oct

ober

201

4

72 Medley and Grarnlich-Kaufman

native shrub, multiflora rose, declined. These local experts helped to explain the reasons for management changes and also the relative impacts of past land use practices.

The objectives of the guide were to point out, inter- pret, and provide explanations for variations among scenes across a landscape. We used text and graphics to intro- duce the reader to a landscape perspective in environmen- tal education, showing the contributions of the biological/ecological and geographical/historical perspec-

Table 1. Outline of A Landscape Guide to the Bachelor Reserve with topical headings and descriptive titles for the ten landscape scenes and two ecotones.

Acknowledgments Preface-Lori M. Gramlich Introduction Environmental Education History of the Joseph M. Bachelor Reserve Using the Guide

Environmental Setting Composition and Structure Human Influences Interpreting the Graphs

Ten Landscape Scenes Ten Landscape Scenes and Ecotones

Scene 1: Floodplain Forest Scene 2: Southwest Slope Forest Scene 3: Pine Stand Scene 4: Young Floodplain Forest Scene 5: Successional Forest Scene 6: The Pond Scene 7: Open Juniper Scene 8: Closed Juniper Scene 9: Grazed Forest Scene 10: Upland Forest

Ecotone 1: Pine and Deciduous Two Ecotones

Forest Transition Ecotone 2: Forest-Successional Transition

Selected Readings Appendix Afterword For More Information

tives. An introductory section also provided a background to the Bachelor Reserve and gave tips on how to use the guide (Table 1). For each scene, we established a perma- nent photo point where the direction of the camera view and tripod height were recorded for future reference. This ”scene” photo was included with the scene description, along with a second photo that emphasized a distinguish- ing attribute and a historical chart that plotted the changes in land use over the seven time periods between 1938-1995 (see Figure 2). The text focused on the relationships between what is viewed at a scene and what is known about a site from the spatial and historical data (Appendix shows Scene 1).

laser prints and presented the guide as a spiral bound letter-sized (8%-inch by 11-inch) document. After the assessment of this draft (see below), a second version was compiled, where we printed the original photos and all other information into a 7-inch by 8lh-inch booklet. Each scene interpreted in the guide was marked with a wooden post in the reserve (Figure 3), and a sign and mailbox with free guides at the trail head alerts the public to the walking tour.

For the first draft, we used scanned images and

ASSESSMENT OF THE GUIDE We conducted questionnaire and small-group field

surveys to measure how users comprehended the informa- tion provided in the guide and were able to apply it to their own interpretation of the landscape scenes. Of particular interest was whether the guide effectively translated geo- graphic concepts and showed their contribution to land- scape interpretation. Questionnaires asked participants to the rank the value of the guide as a teaching tool, while field tests focused on whether the guide contributed to learning a holistic view of nature that included a geographic perspective for landscape interpretation.

ences: (a) professionals with training in ecology and famil- iarity with the multidisciplinary content of the guide, and (b) general educators who can judge the accessibility of information in the guide to a broad audience. We received 12 questionnaires back from the survey of ecologists (4) and educators (8), which represented more than 50 percent of the originally sent surveys. The total number was low because of our original decision to direct the question- naires to individuals that had a background and interest in the region (i.e., deciduous forests in Southwest Ohio) and/or those with an interest in looking at the legacies of human influences on the land and/or landscape ecology. A 10-point scale served to rank the quality of the text and graphics, while short-answer responses provided thought- ful qualitative evaluation and pointed to some important changes for the guide.

Both the ecologists and general educators ranked the overall communication of information in the guide as favorable and clear (How easily could you draw information

For the questionnaire, we compared two audi-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bos

ton

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:21

07

Oct

ober

201

4

Environmental Education 73

from the guide?; mean= 2.4 on a scale of 1-very easily to 10- not easily). The responses to questions regarding the abili- ty to connect the information between the scene pho- tographs and the land-use history graphs were lower (How easily could you connect the written information with the scene photographs?; mean = 3.3; and How easily could you connect the written information with the land-use history graphs?; mean= 5.8). Two ecologists suggested that the guide should show more directly the changes between scenes by including the interpretation of transitions (i.e., ecotones) into the guide, and several educators commented on the difficulty they had interpreting the land-use history graphs. In the second version of the guide, we included two eco- tone scenes between the pine stand and broad leaved- deciduous forest (ecotone 1) and between young and old- regrowth forest (ecotone 2; Figure 3). We also added a sec- tion “Interpreting the Graphs” to the introductory section of the guide (see Table 1).

The questionnaire survey was complemented by three focus-group field assessments where, for each group, four students and/or educators were asked to prepare an interpretation for Scene 4 in the guide (see Figure 3). Our objective was to evaluate whether the guide facilitated holistic learning about nature, which included a geograph- ic/historical perspective on changes across space and through time. Each group was taken to the site and pro- vided with a sheet that showed the two scene photos and the land-use history graph. For two of the focus groups, the participants were introduced to the guide and showed how it interpreted Scenes 1-3; and for the third group, the participants had no knowledge of the guide and were only provided the photos and graph for Scene 4.

The field assessment documented the number and diversity of attributes the participants identified in Scene 4, a young floodplain forest site. These attributes were identi- fied as biological/ecological (e.g., species present; structur- al layers), and geographical/historical (e.g., human influ- ences, land-cover transitions). For the first two focus groups, all individuals identified from 7 to16 attributes at the site and those attributes showed the integration of mul- tiple perspectives. On average, the participants identified 4 to 8 attributes that were related to changes across space (e.g., boundaries) and/or an interpretation of past human influences. The third focus group identified 5 to 7 attribut- es at the site and of these 2 to 3 were related to changes across space and/or human influences.

The two groups that were shown how the guide interpreted Scenes 1-3 were particularly sensitive to the spatial setting of the Scene 4, identifying the surrounding land uses and describing boundaries between the land uses. Whereas the first two focus groups showed difficulty in interpreting the land-use history graphs, no one in the third group incorporated an explanation of land-use histo- ry into their interpretation of the scene. These results sug- gest that the guide can be used to promote a more holistic view of the environment in a natural setting, which

includes the identification of changes across space and the modifying influences of humans over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Reserve is well received and a useful component to our environmental education activities at Miami University. Currently we have distributed over 1000 guides that were printed in 1996, received additional funding from the Molyneaux Foundation, the Bachelor Reserve Endowment, and the Turrell Herbarium Fund for a second printing of 2500 guides in 1998, and have distribution sites at commu- nity (e.g., Chamber of Commerce) and campus locations (botany, zoology, and geography departments; Outdoor Pursuit Center; Alumni Center). The guide is used by stu- dents who are setting up research projects in the reserve, providing insight to the land-use history, environmental setting, and spatial context of their study sites (Medley 1996, Medley and Eynon 1997). In the continuing educa- tion class, “Walks/Hikes in Natural Areas“ the guide pro- vides an interpretive tool for informal instruction. Over the long term, the guide serves as an important document for the measurement of environmental change. These changes are already apparent in the recorded photo views, with the loss of several large trees, and can be quantitative- ly documented in the permanent vegetation plots at each location.

ceived as a strong contribution to the learning environment of the university and local community, the process of creat- ing a landscape guide shows tremendous potential as an interdisciplinary learning exercise. In the example we describe, the guide was created as an undergraduate research project, where a focus on faculty-student collabo- ration provided an opportunity to share skills in nature interpretation, geographic information systems, photogra- phy, technical writing, and technical presentation. Methods used to prepare the guide and its assessment were incorpo- rated into a senior seminar paper on environmental educa- tion in geography, a paper presentation at the East Lakes Association of American Geographers, and poster presen- tations at the annual meeting of the Association of American Geographers and the Miami University Undergraduate Poster Presentation. The study provided a synthesis for training geography and botany, and an oppor- tunity to apply this training to environmental education through technical communication.

We conclude that A Landscape Guide to the Bachelor

While the distribution and use of the guide is per-

AI’PLICATION AND ADAPTATION OF THE LANDSCAPE GUIDE TO NEW LOCATIONS

serves as a reference for other students and schools, who are working on the interpretation of different sites. At Miami University, students enrolled in the course “Ecologcal Foundations of Vegetation-North America” in Fall 1999 completed interpretive nature guides to two nat-

A Landscape Guide to the Bachelor Reserve now

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bos

ton

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:21

07

Oct

ober

201

4

74 Medley and Gramlich-Kaufman

ural areas: the Ruder Preserve, recently acquired by the local Four Mile Valley Conservation Trust; and Peffer Park, a multi-purpose recreational area within the Miami University Natural Areas. In A Guide to the Ruder Preserve, Its Natural and Human History, the students interpret mapped communities, describing typical scenes for areas that are similar in their history and environmental setting. In the Peffer Park Field Notebook, the students describe the structure and composition of the vegetation at locations along a walking trail, focusing on indicator plant species that reflect differences among the sites. In both examples, the guides apply an understanding of human history to the interpretation of local ecology- a holistic view of nature as modified by human activities.

We encourage the transfer of our model for a land- scape guide to new locations, and now can report on its use in the development of class activities by the American School-Antananarivo, Madagascar, at the Angavokely Forest Station. In 1998-1999, students from the Grade 8 class compiled an overview of the land-use history and cur- rent land cover at the site, using a large-scale map provided by the forest station. The history of forest clearing priori- tized the restoration of natural corridors, which these stu- dents are now working on through the establishment of a tree nursery. The long-term goal of the school is to create an outdoor/environmental education center for students from the city of Antananarivo. In 2000, seniors enrolled in a full-year environmental science course will focus their work on the forest station, with the goal of creating a land- scape guide for a portion of the land area.

LANDSCAPE hlI3U"TEETATION AS A TOOL FOR GEOGRAPHIC AND

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION

versity are working on the acquisition and/or active use of land labs for environmental education (e.g., Landis et al. 1995). We propose the development of a landscape guide as a thematic area and group of activities that will meet teaching-learning objectives across the curriculum. Class activities may be designed that focus on the development and integration of geographic/historical and biological/eco- logical perspectives, which can meet performance objec- tives in social studies and science, respectively (e.g., Science: Ohio's Model Competency-Based Program 1994, Social Studies: Ohio's Model Competency-Based Program 1994). Landscape interpretation necessarily requires teach- ers and students to explore and ask questions about a new area, and to base that inquiry on multiple sources of infor- mation that will include field measurements of the physical environment and the contributions of local informants from the community. Whereas the composition and struc- ture of nature at a location is an essential area of discovery in the biological sciences, the understanding of spatial pat- terns as they may be explained by human-environment relations is an important integrative theme in social studies education.

Many schools from the elementary level to the uni-

Within geography, exercises directed at the inter- pretation of a local landscape may be used to address each of the six essential elements of the National Geography Standards. For example, students can work with existing maps or photos as they identify the diversity of landscape scenes across the land area ("The World in Spatial Terms"), and use field surveys to distinguish and measure the physi- cal and human attributes at the site ("Places and Regions"). They can then reflect on the physical and human processes that create those patterns ("Physical Systems" and "Human Systems"), and use these data to interpret human-environ- ment relationships ("Environment and Society") and show how geography may be used to "interpret the past and plan for the future" ("The Uses of Geography," Geography Education Standards Project 1994, 34-35). The materials used in the creation of the guide (e.g., air photos for a his- torical review, camera and tripod, plot measuring tapes) are inexpensive and accessible to most schools. New land- scape scenes may be added through time, adding resolu- tion to the guide, or existing scenes may be examined over time. Landscape studies can provide a long-term theme for classroom activities and field study in geography.

Moreover, the development and use of a guide to local landscapes provides many ways to integrate geogra- phy into environmental education (cf. McKeown-Ice 1994). Participants creating and using a landscape guide are asked to view carefully the vertical structure at a scene location and the lateral relationship among the scenes across the landscape (National Research Council 1997). Nature inter- pretation is balanced by the clear recognition that humans are a part of all ecosystems, shaping the patterns of diversi- ty viewed in natural and modified landscapes. Environmental education programs are thereby more geo- graphic and holistic through the process of learning about a landscape and communicating that message to a broad audience. Landscape interpretation is an important tool for learning about the world.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank Miami University's Office for the Advancement of Scholarship and Teaching and the Department of Geography for granting Lori a 1995 Undergraduate Summer Scholar award. We also thank the many students, faculty, environmental professionals, and community mem- bers who assisted with the preparation and assessment of the guide, as well as The Molyneaux Foundation, the Bachelor Reserve Endowment, and the Turrell Herbarium Fund for providing funds to print the guide and develop the walking tour. John Klink, two anonymous reviewers, and the editor kindly provided comments on the manu- script.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bos

ton

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:21

07

Oct

ober

201

4

Environmental Education 7E

REFERENCES

Adams, E. 1993. Learning through landscapes. In Ecology in Education, M. Hale, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 122-130.

Archer, K. 1995. A folk guide to geography as a holistic science. Journal of Geography 94(3): 404-411.

Chatfield, T. 1991. Creation of a Computer-based Geographic Information System Database of the Joseph M. Bachelor Wildlife and Game Reserve, 1938 to 1988. Unpublished independent study report. Oxford, Ohio: Miami University, Department of Geography.

Forman, R.T.T., and M. Godron. 1986. Landscape Ecology. New York: Wiley.

Goldsmith, F. B., eds. 1994. Monitoring for Conservation and Ecology. New York: Chapman and Hall.

Geography Education Standards Project. 1994. Geography for Life: National Geography Standards. Washington, DC: National Geographic Research and Exploration.

Hale, M., ed. 1993. Ecology in Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Herman, D. 1996. Developing a spatial perspective: Using the local landscape to teach students to think geographically. Journal of Geography 95(4): 162-167.

Knight, G. C. 1992. Geography’s worlds. In Geography’s h e r Worlds, eds. R. F. Abler, M. G. Marcus and J. M. Olson. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 9-26.

Landis, D., D. C. Cantrell, and J. E. Heimlich. 1995. Habitats for Learning: A Planning Guide for Using and Developing School land Labs. Ohio Department of Natural Resources. Columbus: Ohio Environmental Education Fund, Ohio EPA.

Lewis, P. F. 1979. Axioms for reading the landscape: Somc guides to the American scene. In The Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes: Geographical Essays, ed. D.W. Meinig. New York: Oxford University Press, 11-32.

McDonnell M. J., and S.T.A. Pickett, eds. 1993. Humans as Components of Ecosystems. New York: Springer-Verlag.

McKeown-Ice, R. 1994. Environmental education: A geo- graphical perspective. Journal of Geography 93(1): 40-42.

Medley, K. E. 1996. An integrative approach to studying landscapes. Abstract. 11th Annual Meeting, US. International Association of Landscape Ecology Symposium. Galveston, Texas.

Medley, K. E., and M. E. Eynon. 1997. Community invasion by Amur honeysuckle in a land mosaic. Abstract. Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers. Fort Worth, TX.

Nabhan, G. P. 1994. The Geography of Childhood: W h y Children Need Wild Places. Boston: Beacon Press.

National Research Council. 1997. Rediscovering Geography: New Relevance for Science and Society. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Orr, D. W. 1992. Ecological Literacy: Education and the Transition to a Postmodern World. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Salter, Christopher. 1995. The geographic imperative. Journal of Geography 94: 471-478.

Science: Ohio’s Model Competency-Based Program. 1994. Columbus, Ohio: State Board of Education.

Social Studies: Ohio’s Model Competency-Based Program. 1994. Columbus, Ohio: State Board of Education.

Whitney, G. 1994. From Coastal Wilderness to Fruited Plain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bos

ton

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:21

07

Oct

ober

201

4

76 Medley and Gramlich-Kaufnian

The photo at right was taken looking

north at a compass angle of 4" and a

tripod height of 1.6 rn (4.6 ft).

May, 199s

Environment a I Setting : The floodplain forest forms a

coi-riclor about 50 i i i ( 150 f t ) wide

agricultural fields to the \vest. The corridor is an ecotone. or transition zone. bct\vcen the aquatic (stream) c n \, iron iiic 11 t ;in ti t tit. t errcs t r i ;i I ( II p I mi d I cii \,i ronmcn t . Thc floodplain tol>ography. soils. and \,eget:ition all rcc pond to \v;i t c r- I c ve I 11 iic t uat i o m and changes i n the stream course. The floodplain occurs at an elevation of 260 m (780 f t ) . The trail niiis along ;I flat levee ( ; I landform above the stream crcatcd by stream deposits). The h t r c a m erodes and deposits debris oil

thc h a n k ;IS i t flo\vs through the fl( )od p l i i in. Floodpl;ii n di.~turhanccs occiir after large amounts of 1) rcc i p i t a t ion. 'I'hc f oodp I ai n forest soils chanse froin sands near to the strcam to clays ;IS distance from the bank i iicrcases.

hct\veen Harker's Run 10 the e;ir;t illid

Striicttire and Composition: Three vegetation layers doininate the

floodplain forest scene: the canopy (a). sub- canopy (b) . and herb (cj layers. The largest trces (canopy hyer) i n the forest are primarily s yc aiiiore . S ycil1i1o re trees ; ~ I Y f'ou 11 d a1011 g Harker's K u n i n the Bachelor liescrvc because they are specially adapted to floodplains. Sycamore bark is light grey or white and peels at the tops of the II'CCS. The t\vo large sycamore tninks i n the scene. pictured above. have diameters of about 1 .4 111 (4.2 f t ) ; they grow ;is one tree from ;I single base, ;I typical sycamore growth form. The siixiller sub-canopy trces have diumctrrs between I0 and 25 cm (4 anti 10 i n ) . Hackberry (thick. chunky, ridged bark), elm ifurro\ved. corky bark) . and box elder (the only three-to five-leafed iiiaple with green twigs) are most co111mo11.

Light is the major factor that allows for successful growth at the herb layer. Light eiitcrs the floodplain from three areas: the top through the open canopy. the stream cdgc, and the ag r i cu 1 tu re fie Id. Coin petit i o 11 is i i i tense between native and exotic species. Native herbs include

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bos

ton

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:21

07

Oct

ober

201

4

Environmental Education 77

The graph below shows thc inaintcnance of the

scciie 3s a forest throughout history.

h,liiimi mist (which has small purple 1'1 owe rs ) , I? i g- I e a f u ~ i t c r I e a f, ;in d niap I c- lea f n.aterlcaf. All three herbs bloom i n late spr-ing and early suiiiiiicr. Recent es t a bl is hmen t o f gar1 ic mustard , i i n c x o t ic herb, is evident. Garlic mustard occupies OS% of thc ground cover in the floodplain.

Hurnan Influences: Located along Fliirker's Run. human

i 11 fluc nccs we re m in i ma1 i n the flood p I ain l.orest. The foi-cst \v;is not grazed or fiirmed at'tcr 1938. Flooding ant1 changes i n the c(iiirse of' Hnrkcr's R u n are the iixijor disturbances to this floodplain. The large

clues that the scene was not cut or drastically disturbed by humans. The graph sliows that the corridor w a s a mature forest since at least 193s.

c\.idence for indirect human influences and/ o r d i s t u rba lice s . T tic. es t ;i b I is h I iie n t of y r l i c mustard throughout the floodplain scene may he explained by the scene's

syc;iinores :ind presence of deild trees are

However. exotic species provide

Garlic mustard: an exotic herb, Map, 1995 ~~ ~

location hc.t\\.ccn [N'O disturhcd ;irc;is. Garlic mustard i i io\w i n f r o m the edge and invades the herb layc" o f the t1ootlpl;iin. The cstahlishmcnt ( 0 1 :I plant iicross ;I boundary is called ;in ed2c el'fect. Currently. garlic mustard is so widcsprcod i n the herb layer that it appcars to be out-competing the native plants, Resrarc h on plant cstabl is ti inen t and succession correlate the establishnient of new plants with the removal of existing plants. According to l l r . Paul and Mrs. Lois Daniel, the native Miaini mist covered the tloodplnin since 1946. hut now they observe that garlic mustard is replacing Miami mist. Honeysuckle is ;in exotic shnib also found i n the 11 oodplai 11.

A human disturbance, like the removal of existing plants to create ;I field for agi-iculture. lragments the landscape. Fragmentation provides exotic plants with estnbl ishment opportunities. Landscape fragmentation and the types of adjacent land uses appcar l o promote disturbance within this iilreatly dyn;iiiiic forest scene.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Bos

ton

Uni

vers

ity]

at 1

9:21

07

Oct

ober

201

4