Research Natural Areas: Contributors to Environmental ... · Research programs on environmental quality will require studies of conditions in natural environments. Numerous protected

Reprinted from the Journal of Environmental QualityVolume 1, no. 2, April-June 1972

Copyright © 1972, ASA, CSSA, SSSA677 South Segoc Rd., Madison, Wis. 53711 USA

Purchased by the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, for official use

Research Natural Areas: Contributors to Environmental Quality Programs/

Jerry F. Franklin', Robert E. Jenkins 3 , and Robert M. Romancier2

ABSTRACT

Research programs on environmental quality will require studiesof conditions in natural environments. Numerous protected naturalecosystems, known as Research Natural Areas, are available forsuch studies. The Research Natural Area concept and history andscope of present programs are outlined. These tracts are particular-ly valuable sites for baseline and monitoring programs, for eco-system studies, as in situ preserves of gene pools, and for selectededucational purposes.

Additional Index Words: ecosystem studies.

1 Contribution from USDA Forest Service, Pacific NorthwestForest & Range Exp. Sta., Portland, Ore. Received Dec. 21, 1971.

2 Principal Plant Ecologist and Assistant Director, respectively,Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, ForestService, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Portland, Ore. 97208.

3 Ecology Advisor, The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia.

The Nation's attention and energies are increasingly fo-cused on the development and maintenance of a highquality environment. This concern with environmentalquality is reflected in the creation of an EnvironmentalProtection Agency and the President's Council on En-vironmental Quality, and passage of an EnvironmentalPolicy Act. The heightened interest and expanded en-vironmental programs will require far more ecological datathan are now available; consequently, rapid expansion ofresearch in areas relating to the quality of man's environ-ment is needed and planned in the next few years.

Much of the environmental research will involve identi-fication and solution of problems in urban and agricul-tural environments. But baseline information on levels ofpollutants and resource qualities in natural environments

J. Environ. Quality, Vol. 1, no. 2, 1972 133

must also be collected, and long-term changes in back-ground levels of pollutants must be monitored. Collec-tion of baseline information and much of the monitoringis best carried out on permanently protected sites, tractswhich are not subject to the day-to-day, direct influencesof man.

Over a period of years, a Federal system of protectednatural ecosystems, known as Research Natural Areas, hasbeen created in the United States. Although far fromcomplete, this series of preserves encompasses many ofthe important terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems and isundergoing rapid expansion. It is our purpose to makethese areas, as well as similar areas being protected byStates, universities, and private institutions, known toscientists and administrators concerned with environ-mental quality. We will discuss the Research Natural Areaconcept, its historical development, and the scope of pres-ent programs, and suggest ways in which these areas cancontribute to environmental quality programs.

RESEARCH NATURAL AREAS

Definition and Criteria for Selection and Management4

Land management terminology is far from standard-ized, and the term "natural area" has been variously ap-plied to everything from rigorously protected, pristine re-search areas to parks and open space devoted to mass rec-reation. For this reason, the Federal Committee on Re-search Natural Areas has chosen a more restrictive name,Research Natural Areas, to focus attention on a specifictype of area which it defines as follows: "A ResearchNatural Area consists of a naturally occurring physical orbiological unit where natural conditions are maintainedinsofar as possible." Although regulations differ amongFederal agencies, all have a common purpose and similarcriteria for selection, protection, and management.

The purpose of Research Natural Areas is to preservesome natural feature(s), physical or biological or both, inas nearly an undisturbed state as possible for research andeducational purposes. These can be important or uniqueterrestrial or aquatic ecosystems, geological formations,paleontological sites, or habitats of rare or endangeredorganisms.

Most tracts selected as Research Natural Areas are thosewhere the features of interest are in as nearly an undis-turbed or natural conditions as can be found. ResearchNatural Areas do not necessarily have to be pristine, how-ever. Examples of many ecosystems which are essentiallyfree of human influences are no longer available. Otherkinds of ecosystems are dependent on recurrent disturb-ances, such as fire or flood, for their maintenance. Inso-far as size is concerned, Research Natural Areas are, ideal-ly, sufficiently large to protect the features of interestfrom significant unnatural influences. Accessibility andpast history of research are also considered (7).

The overriding guideline for management is that natural

'In this section, we will rely very heavily upon the concepts andcriteria underlying Research Natural Areas in the Federal program,the largest such natural area program. This program is coordinatedthrough the interagency Federal Committee on Research NaturalAreas, which will he discussed later.

processes are allowed to dominate, to the degree consist-ent with preservation of the natural features of interest.On many Research Natural Areas, protection from out-side disturbances, such as logging, grazing, and fire, is theonly management required. However, deliberate manipu-lation is allowed and may be necessary in order to main-tain desired communities or organisms. Prescribed burn-ing or grazing of sonic grassland types is an example. Useof Research Natural Areas for research or education mustalso be consistent with maintenance of natural processesand features. For this reason, only research which is non-destructive in character is generally allowed. Often re-search of this type can be complemented with manipula-tive research on adjacent experimental tracts.

The goal of the Federal Research Natural Area systemcan be described as preservation of the maximum diversityof natural systems. It can be likened to an informationstorage system, or library, of enormous complexity andincomparable significance. The information stored pro-vides research and educational opportunities for the studyof natural ecosystems or any of their parts. Like a library,Research Natural Areas are intended for use, but the usermust not consume or damage the materials.

The standardization of terminology and regulationachieved among the Federal landholding agencies has notyet spread to other groups involved in preserving ResearchNatural Areas. As a result, such tracts may be labeled asnatural area, nature center, research station, preserve,sanctuary, living museum, etc. This should not obscurethe commonality of intent.

Historical Perspective

In the United States, scientists working in the fields ofnatural resources and natural sciences have been the lead-ers in recognizing the need for natural areas for scientificpurposes. In 1917, Victor E. Shelford, working throughthe Ecological Society of America, stated the need for in-ventorying the remnants of wild, natural America. Hisactivities culminated in a listing of preserved and preserv-able areas in a Naturalist's Guide to the Americas (17), amajor collaboration among 75 scientists which was sup-ported by three scientific societies, the National ResearchCouncil, and the Forest Service. In 1922, W. W. Ashe (3)pointed out the utility of natural areas in developing silvi-cultural methods, and E. N. Munns played a key role inestablishment of the first Research Natural Area on theCoronado National Forest in Arizona in 1927.

In ensuing years, interest in Research Natural Areas hascontinued and intensified, with the involvement of in-numerable scientists, institutions, professional societies,and Government agencies. The preliminary inventory ofnature sanctuaries in the United States and Canada, pre-pared by Kendeigh (10) in 1950 to succeed Shelford'sguide, listed 691 sanctuaries, with 634 of these found inthe United States. The most comprehensive study ofnatural areas undertaken in the United States was con-ducted and published by the American Association for theAdvancement of Science in 1963 (1). This report calledfor an enlarged and better coordinated natural area pro-gram and listed 2,400 scientific papers based on researchwithin natural areas.

134 J. Environ. Quality, Vol. 1, no. 2, 1972

The importance of Research Natural Areas has beenrecognized outside of the scientific community as well.The Public Land Law Review Commission recommendedthat Congress provide for creation and preservation of anatural area system for science and education (23). TheNational Environmental Policy Act of 1969 specificallymentions the need to "...preserve important historic, cul-tural, and natural aspects of our national heritage..." (20).

Present and Proposed Programs

Today the major resource managing agencies of theFederal government, more than 20 states, uncountedschools and universities, half a dozen professional so-cieties, and several private foundations have programs fornatural area preservation (9, 11, 24). The InternationalBiological Program, through its Conservation of Eco-systems Section, is giving additional impetus to nationaland worldwide efforts to preserve examples of natural ter-restrial and aquatic ecosystems of all types (13, 15, 22).Russia, Great Britain, and Canada have or are developingnatural area systems.

FEDERAL RESEARCH NATURAL AREA PROGRAM

In the United States, the Federal landholding agenciesare leaders in Research Natural Area programs. Their ac-tivities are coordinated through the interagency FederalCommittee on Research Natural Areas; establishment of asystem of preserves representing all significant natural eco-systems in the United States is the Committee's long-

range objective. The Federal Committee issued in 1968a directory which provides a brief but useful guide to theextensive Federal system (21). The number of preserveshas now increased from the 336 Research Natural Areaslisted in the guide to over 500.

The Federal Committee is actively involved in an in-tensive program to greatly expand the number of ResearchNatural Areas in the next several years, in order to haveat least a minimal system incorporating all major eco-system types. Unfortunately, Federal lands are unevenlydistributed, with the bulk lying in the western states andAlaska, and this is reflected in the distribution of existingResearch Natural Areas (Fig. 1). Consequently, theFederal Research Natural Area system is most inadequatein areas where man's activities have been most intense,such as the eastern seaboard, Great Plains, and westernvalleys. Estuaries and aquatic ecosystems are also poorlyrepresented. Because Federal lands are essentially unavail-able in such areas, the Federal Committee is workingclosely with other natural area programs, particularly withthe International Biological Program's Conservation ofEcosystems Section, to see that these deficiencies are cor-rected.

OTHER PROGRAMS

Many of the more than 20 States which have legallyestablished natural area systems have modeled them afterthe system pioneered in Illinois. The following provisionsare generally included. A commission oversees the systemand is empowered to acquire, control, and maintain State

Fig. 1—Location of established Federal Research Natural Areas as of 1968; additional areas have been added since that time.


"nature preserves" and, in some instances, to assist non-governmental groups in similar endeavors. Most Statesaccord designated natural areas special status, regardlessof ownership, which extends certain legal protections suchas a requirement for public hearings before any action canbe taken which would adversely affect their natural areavalues. There is also a set of rules detailing the sorts ofuses which arc appropriate or which can be permitted onthese areas. Generally, the definition of natural area issomewhat broader than that used by the Federal Com-mittee, but there is often a specific subcategory whichapproximates a Research Natural Area. Scientific andeducational uses are customarily recognized as primary inthe case of the best and least disturbed preserves.

In the private sector, The Nature Conservancy is theonly major organization which specifically focuses its at-tention on natural areas suitable for research. It has had along and successful history of acquiring scientifically valu-able areas. Due to the Conservancy's efforts, over 650natural areas have been preserved in nearly every Stateand the West Indies. These areas total over 250,000 acres,mostly of considerable ecological significance. Althoughmany of these areas have been transferred to other agen-cies, most are still under The Nature Conservancy's own-ership and management. There is a current guide to theirfeatures and locations (12). All of these areas are avail-able for research and educational use by universities andother appropriate groups of individuals, and many havebeen used in this fashion.

A fourth United States program which we will cite hereis that of the Conservation of Ecosystems Section of theU. S. Committee for the International Biological Program(22). This section is conducting a nationwide inventoryof protected, scientifically valuable natural areas on landsoutside Federal ownership. The purpose is to assess howadequately various types of ecosystems are presently pro-tected and managed in non-Federal natural areas and toassist in developing a cohesive national system. These ef-forts will synthesize the information which is presentlywidely scattered, erratic in quality, and often unintel-ligible.

There are many other organizations or institutions play-ing significant roles in the natural areas movement. Out-standing among these are several professional societiessuch as the Society of American Foresters, which has hada formal program since 1947, and the Society for RangeManagement, which sponsors a program of "Range Refer-ence Areas" (11). These groups have encouraged estab-lishment of areas, developed criteria for their managementand use, and periodically published listings of naturalareas. Other organizations are involved in local efforts orcontribute to natural area activities as a part of broaderprograms.

There is obviously a need for coordination and mutualassistance between the welter of groups and agencies in-volved in preservation of natural ecosystems in the UnitedStates. There are indications that Congress may initiate aprogram which could lead to a national system of naturalareas, as has been proposed by many scientists (5) andthe Public Land Law Review Commission (23). In themeantime, scientists interested in using Research NaturalAreas or their non-Federal equivalents will have to look to

several sources for information on their availability anduse.

UTILITY OF RESEARCH NATURAL AREAS INENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY PROGRAMS

Two key features make Research Natural Areas invalu-able in environmental quality programs. First, they pro-vide examples of ecosystems in essentially natural condi-tion. Measurements and studies made in natural systemsare essential parts of environmental quality programs, andthe necessary sampling sites are increasingly difficult tofind. Second, Research Natural Areas are permanentlyprotected by regulation and, therefore, suitable for long-term studies. On unprotected areas, there is always a highrisk of disruptions which can destroy many years of work.The value of sites committed to research and protectedfrom outside influences cannot be overestimated, even inshort-term research programs.

It appears to us that Research Natural Areas can makemajor contributions to environmental quality programs infour ways: (i) by providing sites for collection of baselihedata and for long-term monitoring of various aspects ofenvironmental quality; (ii) by providing sites for studies ofthe structure and function of natural ecosystems; (iii) bypreserving gene pools of natural organisms, including thosethat are rare or endangered; and (iv) by serving selectedfunctions in educational and training programs. We willelaborate on each of these functions in following sections.

Baseline and Monitoring Sites

Research Natural Areas allow us to examine parametersof environmental quality in an undisturbed system, andcompare them with those encountered in systems whichhave been affected by man. Such parameters can bemeasured directly or indirectly by the use of biologicalindicators. Necessary baseline data may be collected onResearch Natural Areas as part of a monitoring programinvolving repeated samplings or as part of a comparisonof environmental conditions in untreated (or natural)areas and in areas directly influenced by man—i.e., ascontrols in comparative studies. The latter approach mayinvolve essentially "instantaneous" comparison or may beso long-term as to resemble a monitoring program.

MONITOR ING

Most environmental quality monitoring programs willbe directed toward observing conditions and trends andinsuring compliance with laws where human beings live,work, and recreate, rather than within relatively undis-turbed ecosystems. The U. S. water quality monitoringnetwork is an example of this type; its primary purposeis measurement of various parameters of water qualitywithin the Nation's rivers and streams, not the determina-tion of natural baselines (16).

It is essential to environmental quality programs, how-ever, that changes in background levels of various materi-als and pollutants be observed throughout the biosphere.Examples of such substances include atmospheric CO2,radionuclides, pesticides, and heavy metals in soil, water,


and organisms. Research Natural Areas are eminentlysuited for long-term monitoring of background levels ofmany such materials. Although the direct impact of manin such areas is minimal, Research Natural Areas are allaffected to some degree by human activities. For ex-ample, various pollutants will be present at levels whichreflect human activities throughout the world, as well asin adjacent areas. Some tracts, particularly those whichare larger and more remote, are especially suited to moni-toring general regional or continent-wide backgroundlevels. Others are particularly suited to observing morelocalized trends in pollutant levels.

Monitoring programs utilizing Research Natural Areaswill vary in their purpose and, consequently, in theirscope and methods. Some of the monitoring can be rela-tively straightforward—i.e., chemical or physical measure-ments aimed at specific problems such as novel moleculesin the environment or changes in concentrations of naturalmolecules which are increasing or decreasing at markedrates. Samples of soil, water, or plant materials collectedfrom permanent locations can be analyzed directly fordata on concentrations of specific heavy metals (e.g.,mercury, lead, arsenic, or copper), radionuclides, or pesti-cides. Fatty tissues from widespread animals, such as thedeermouse (Peromyscus maniculatus) can be periodicallycollected and analyzed for pesticides and pesticide deriva-tives. In comprehensive monitoring programs, it might bedesirable to collect and preserve small samples of soil ororganic materials for future reference, i.e., analysis atsome later date for materials not presently of interest orperhaps even known. Such "voucher" collections canassist in evaluating the duration and seriousness of recent-recognized pollutants such as mercury and polycholori-nated biphenols (PCB's).

Of equal importance are monitoring activities involvingbiological measurements of changes in numbers, distribu-tion, or status of certain kinds of organisms. Jenkins haselaborated in detail the types of organisms and measure-ments presently known as useful for indicating changes inenvironmental conditions, including concentrations ofman-produced contaminants. (Dale W. Jenkins. 1971.Biological monitoring of the global chemical environment.Unpublished Report, Smithsonian Institution. 54 p.) Herecognizes "sentinel, bioassay, indicator, and bioaccumu-lator organisms," each group being useful in specific waysfor assessing effects of those environmental contaminantswhich cannot be monitored as well by physical or chem-ical methods alone. A major advantage of the biologicalapproach is that it utilizes the ability of organisms tointegrate effects of the various environmental factors andthus avoids some difficult problems in relating simplechemical or physical measurements to biological effects.

Specific monitoring activities on Research NaturalAreas might involve periodic observations of populationlevels or reproductive success in avian populations, a groupof organisms long known for their sensitivity to variouspesticides. Observed changes in the composition of theplant component of ecosystems may also reflect changesin background levels of pollutants; conifers, in particular,and higher plants in general, react to low levels ofozone and SO2. The epiphyte communities, whichgrow on branches, stems, and leaves of higher plants, are

also known to be particularly sensitive to some types ofair pollution (8, 18).

Because some Research Natural Areas are situated inagricultural or urban areas, they will more clearly reflectlocal trends in environmental quality than region- or con-tinent-wide trends. Such areas are also useful in monitor-ing programs. For example, the Cogswell-Foster Reserveof The Nature Conservancy (12) is located near the siteof a new paper mill. The various communities of epiphyt-ic mosses, lichens, and liverworts found on the oaks(Quercus) and ashes (Fraxinus) at this site were observedand described, and chemical analyses of various specieswere carried out before the mill began operation. Trendsin air quality should be reflected in changes in both chem-ical and community composition.

The kinds of studies outlined here will provide neces-sary background or baseline data on environmental pa-rameters and indications of trends under essentially natu-ral conditions. However, there are some limitations.Foremost is the necessity of collecting sufficient data overlong enough time spans so that the amount and nature ofthe variation inherent in natural systems in the absence ofinterference can be identified. In interpreting long-termchanges in populations or community composition, it isnecessary to understand and take account of those dueto natural successional processes. These must be dis-tinguished from changes which are responses to altera-tions in environmental quality or the consequence of ac-tivities on adjacent landscapes.

NATURAL CONTROLS

Monitoring, as used in this article, implies an intent ofobserving change in some aspect of an ecosystem over aperiod of time. However, Research Natural Areas mayalso be used in short-term studies relating to environ-mental quality. Of course, some of these "one-time"measurements may, if properly collected, be repeated atsome future date and provide evidence of trends.

The most common short-term use of Research NaturalAreas in environmental quality programs will be as a natu-ral control in comparisons with other systems which havebeen disturbed. For example, Research Natural Areas canprovide the natural controls in determining the effects oflogging, roadbuilding, or grazing on suspended sediment,bedload, nutrient loads, and temperatures in streams. Ithas been suggested that Research Natural Areas be specif-ically established as part of large public works or similarprojects. Their effectiveness as experimental controlswould be enhanced by choosing tracts having maximumsimilarity to the areas to be altered, and the necessarymonitoring could be borne as a cost of the project; en-vironmental impact statements and predictions could bebetter evaluated as well. Such an approach seems to us tohave considerable promise in implementing the Nation'senvironmental quality policies.

Sites for Integrated Ecosystem Research Programs

Rational decision on matters involving environmentalquality, at all levels, is dependent upon a thorough under-standing of the structure and functioning of natural eco-systems. As Snow (19) has stated:


One of the most formidable obstacles to the develop-ment of ecostrategies is the absence of sufficientquantitative data and theoretical understanding ofthe natural environment. Yet, without adequateknowledge of the structure and resiliency of thenatural ecosystems that support life, it is hard toassess the impact of technological stresses. Particu-larly crucial is whether nature can find new points ofstability under the stresses imposed by man, orwhether modern technology must itself give way.Unraveling the complex aspects of this enormoussystem of trade-offs is, however difficult, one of themost essential tasks that modern man must under-take.

Many of our environmental problems have stemmed fromunexpected side effects of man's activities. Developmentof the ability to predict or anticipate the effects of man'sactivities beforehand is the essential requirement. Re-search of the type needed has begun only within the lastfew years; it is exemplified by the Biome programs withinthe U. S. International Biological Program's Analysis ofEcosystems Activities (22).

Research Natural Areas provide sites suitable forintegrated research programs on natural ecosystems. Be-cause these areas are permanently protected, the body ofknowledge accumulated from them in such studies takeson special meaning. For several reasons there are fewnatural areas being used for such studies at present: theearliest studies are, in many respects, experimental andoften involve destructive sampling; the large numbers ofscientists and masses of equipment involved also can haveconsiderable detrimental impact on natural conditions,particularly on the more fragile Research Natural Areas.

However, as early programs reach fruition with thedevelopment of ecosystem and subsystem models, therewill be more and more opportunity and need to usenatural areas for validation or testing of these models.In many cases the natural areas will be used to examineecosystem model components in systems different fromthose initially studied. The use of two pristine tracts bythe Coniferous Forest Biome (a component of the U. S.International Biological Program) in the development andvalidation of their ecosystem models, exemplifies theirpotential. On one of these (the Wildcat Mountain Re-search Natural Area) selected system compartments, ma-terial transfers, and environmental variables are being non-destructively studied as part of a characterization of conif-erous forest responses across a broad environmental field.On the other, a subalpine lake basin not formally recog-nized as a natural area, the material and energy transfersbetween the terrestrial and aquatic subsystems are beingquantified and modeled.

Gene Pools

Research Natural Areas serve in situ as reservoirs fortwo distinct but related kinds of gene pools. First, someserve as preserves of rare or endangered species, andsecond, most act as gene pools for ordinary wild or un-altered organisms.

Any species of organism may be potentially importantto man. There are numerous examples of species oncebelieved useless, but later found to have exceptional im-

portance in solving human problems. California's citrusindustry depends on rootstalks from a hybrid variety onceconsidered worthless, but which later proved to have theonly obtainable resistance to a pathogenic root rot. TheCactoblastis moth was the previously unvalued agent forcontrolling the outbreak of pricklypear cactus in Australia.Only recently a primitive corn was discovered in SouthAmerica which may be utilized to improve the nutritionalvalue of present hybrid corns (2).

There are equally pragmatic reasons for preservingabundant germ plasm of organisms not necessarily indanger of extinction, and natural areas provide a practicalmeans for in-place preservation of genetic diversity. Theneeds are particularly apparent in the case of specieswhich are extensively cultivated or are ancestral stock ofdomestic cultivars. Even laymen intuitively recognize thedangers of very narrow genetic bases for our domesticanimals and crops. Agronomists fret over the breedingsystem that gave us the male-sterile corn so recently at-tacked by the southern corn blight; foresters worry overthe dangers of pine and poplar monocultures; wheatfarmers hope geneticists can keep one step ahead of rapid-ly mutating strains of wheat rust.

Obviously, we will have future use or need of thegenetic diversity preserved within Research Natural Areas.Extensive use of the Harvey Monroe Hall Research NaturalArea has already been made for basic genecological studiesof climate races of several plant groups (6). More suchuses are appropriate and can be expected in the future.Research Natural Areas may provide the genetic stockneeded as geneticists search for desirable traits among theancestral species of highly bred domesticated plants andanimals.

Educational Function of Research Natural Areas

Research Natural Areas serve as educational or trainingfacilities in environmental quality. Central to the themeof educational utility is the need to train future genera-tions of natural scientists, biologists, and environmental-ists to carry on the research activities which our societyincreasingly requires. For this reason, observational ornondestructive research activities associated with advancededucational programs in natural sciences would be en-couraged within Research Natural Areas.

Furthermore, students and practitioners in the naturalsciences professions need to see examples of natural en-vironments and communities and know first hand theinitial conditions and changes, both beneficial and detri-mental, which have been wrought in our environment.Generations of scientists and land managers now owe theirappreciation and understanding of natural ecosystems,their complex interrelationships and their diversity, to thevital educational resources represented in natural areas.

Research Natural Areas also stimulate public apprecia-tion of natural phenomena. Although parts of naturalareas may be closed to the public, many other parts areopen for nondestructive activities such as hiking. Simpleinterpretive displays, signs, or printed materials are some-times provided. These opportunities to utilize naturalareas in public informational programs should not beunderestimated.


INTRINSIC CONTRIBUTION OF RESEARCH NATURALAREAS TO ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

Although we have emphasized the utilitarian values ofResearch Natural Areas, it is important to recognize thatthese tracts also contribute to environmental qualitysimply by existing. Natural areas may act as ecologicalbuffers, helping sustain and modulate the biosphere andthe environments within which man lives. Some ResearchNatural Areas are important hydrologically, contributingto flood control or aquifer recharge. Odum (14) has sug-gested a certain proportion of such "protective" areas isessential to maintenance of a stable urban-industrial en-vironment. Although Research Natural Areas cover a rela-tively small acreage, they may be disproportionately im-portant because of the maximal degree to which they areprotected.

Aside from practical uses, the organisms preservedwithin Research Natural Areas are important to theaesthetic and psychological needs of man. Our society isincreasingly concerned with preserving the rare and en-dangered organism; what is rare is treasured, and werealize that the wanton destruction of a species is anact of extreme arrogance. Our attempts at preservationmay have elements of altruism, curiosity, or nostalgia. Inany case, humans do have significant emotional links towildlife, and activities which contribute to the mainten-ance of biological diversity also contribute to the qualityof our lives.

Perhaps the intrinsic contributions of Research NaturalAreas to environmental quality can be summarized in thecontext of the National Environmental Policy Act of1969. This act states that our policy is to "...preserve im-portant historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our na-tional heritage, and maintain, wherever possible, an en-vironment which supports diversity, and variety of in-dividual choices" (20).

Research Natural Areas make major contributions tosuch lofty goals, while at the same time serving both lifeand natural scientists as living laboratories. We havestressed the numerous and diverse uses to which suchareas have and can be put. Other unforeseen uses willno doubt develop in the future. So, while today's Re-search Natural Areas are underutilized, we actively seek toenlarge the program and to fill in gaps. We seek as wellto relate existing natural areas programs one to another;such coordination may lead to a national system of Re-search Natural Areas. However they are structured ororganized, Research Natural Areas will be invaluable forthe collection of ecological baseline data essential in anyeffort to improve the quality of man's environment.

LITERATURE CITEDI. American Association for the Advancement of Science. 1963.

Natural areas as research facilities. Amer. Ass. Advan. Sci.,Washington, D. C. 193 p., appendices.Anonymous. 1971. Retrieving genes for space-age corn.Agr. Res. 20(5):3-4, illus.Ashe, W. W. 1922. Reserved areas of principal forest types

as a guide in developing American silviculture. J. Forest 20:276-283.Borissoff, Vladimir A. 1971. Soviet system of protectednatural areas. Nat. Parks and Conserv. Mag. 45(6):8-14,illus.Bormann, F. H. 1966. The need for a Federal system ofnatural areas for scientific research. Bioscience 16(9):585-586.Clausen, Jens. 1969. The Harvey Monroe Hall Natural Arca.Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. 459,48 p., illus.Franklin, Jerry F., and James M. Trappe. 1968. Naturalareas: Needs, concepts, and criteria. J. Forest. 66:456-461,illus.Hawksworth, D. L., and F. Rose. 1970. Qualitative scale forestimating sulphur dioxide air pollution in England and Walesusing epiphytic lichens. Nature 227:145-148, illus. .Johnson, Huey D. 1970. Role of the private sector in naturalarea activities. p. 43-45. In William J. Dittrich and James M.Trappe (ed.). Natural areas-needs and opportunities. Con-tinuing Education Publications, Corvallis, Oregon.Kendeigh, S. Charles, et al. 1950. Nature sanctuaries in theUnited States and Canada-a preliminary inventory. LivingWilderness 15(35):1-46, illus.Lynch, Donald W. 1970. The natural area programs of threeprofessional societies. p. 47-49. In William J. Dittrich andJames M. Trappe (ed.). Natural areas-needs and opportuni-ties. Continuing Education Publications. Corvallis, Oregon.Nature Conservancy. 1970. Checklist of Nature ConservancyPreserves. Nature Conservancy News 21(2):3-41.Nicholson, E. M. 1968. Handbook to the Conservation Sec-tion of the International Biological Programme. Int. Biol.Programme Handb. no. 5. Blackwell Sci. Publ., Oxford andEdinburgh. 96 p., illus.Odum, Eugene P. 1971. Fundamentals of ecology. 3rd Ed.W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia. 574 p., illus.Peterken, G. F. 1967. Guide to the check sheet for IBPareas. Int. Biol. Programme Handb. no. 4. Blackwell Sci.Publ., Oxford and Edinburgh. 133 p., illus.Sayers, William T. 1971. Water quality surveillance: The

illus.Federal-State network. Environ. Sci. Technol. 5:114-119,I lu Shelford, Victor. E. (ed.). 1926. Naturalist's guide to theAmericas. Williams & Williams Co., Baltimore. 761 p., illus.Skye, E. 1968. Lichens and air pollution: a study ofcryptogamic epiphytes and environment in the Stockholmregion. Acta Phytogeogr. Suecica 52:1-123, illus.Snow, Joel A. 1971. Ecostrategies and ecotactics. Environ.Sci. Technol. 5:99.U. S. Council on Environmental Quality. 1970. Environ-mental quality: the first annual report of the Council onEnvironmental Quality together with the President's messageto Congress. Supt. Documents. Washington, D. C. 326 p.,illus.U. S. Federal Committee on Research Natural Areas. 1968.A directory of research natural areas on Federal lands of theUnited States of America. Supt. Documents. Washington,D. C. 129 p.U. S. National Committee for the International BiologicalProgram. 1971. Research programs constituting U. S. partic-ipation in the International Biological Program. NationalAcademy of Sciences. Washington, D. C. 121 p., illus.U. S. Public Land Law Review Commission. 1970. One thirdof the Nation's land. Supt. Documents. Washington, D. C.342 p., illus.

24. Zinke, Paul J. 1970. Use and management of natural areasby educational institutions. p. 27-29. In William J. Dittrichand James M. Trappe (ed.). Natural areas-needs and op-portunities. Continuing Education Publications, Corvallis,Oregon.
