Santa Cruz Island (SCI) is the largest, most topographically diverse, most speciose, least disturbed, and most intensively researched of the eight California Channel Islands. However, this natural laboratory has itself changed significantly in the recent past, and determining where limited research and management funds should be allocated is a significant issue that will determine the course of research and conservation on all of the Channel Islands.
Santa Cruz Island has undergone a significant transformation in the past two decades. Large introduced herbivores such as cattle, sheep and pigs that roamed the island for over a century have been completely removed. As such, the island is in a transition phase from one where vegetation communities and their associated fauna are controlled and limited by ungulate impacts to one where the vegetation is largely controlled by bottom- up processes such as edaphic controls, weather events, and interspecific competition. The fauna is likewise adapting to the removal of a significant terrestrial predator in feral pigs. The response of amphibians, reptiles, ground-nesting birds, and small mammals to the removal of pigs is likely to be significant, and in many cases surprising. While many decades of research have been conducted, the island is now significantly changed, and new questions and management issues will need to be addressed.
A wide diversity of literature has been produced from studies of the island over the past fifty years, including island biogeography (Diamond 1971, Jones and Diamond 1976), vegetation community evolution (Axelrod 1965), and even the biocontrol of native species (Goeden et al. 1967, Goeden and Ricker 1980). Klinger and Van Vuren (2000) reviewed and analyzed the articles published in the four symposia on California Islands that had been held. They provided a series of recommendations including 1) place research and management projects in an appropriate theoretical framework; 2) link genetic, demographic, and evolutionary studies across all of the islands; 3) continue basic life history studies of both plant and animal species; and 4) conduct ecosystem studies that integrate community and single species studies at multiple scales. The need for the fourth recommendation was recently demonstrated by the finding that restoration methods suitable at small scales had different results at larger scales (Ogden and Rejmanek 2005).
In our analysis and recommendations below, we are mindful of the importance of long-term research, and of the value of studies that provide datasets that have lasting utility. Therefore, while it is important to recognize the latest conceptual paradigms in a given field, we feel that scarce conservation-oriented funding for island projects are best spent answering specific questions that have practical conservation and management utility. We also feel that management dollars are best spent conducting long-term monitoring of species and communities, rather than short-term small-scale studies. One method for extending out the time frame of a study is by using historical papers and other data sets as comparisons for recently collected data. For instance, Yeaton (1974) provides abundance estimates for bird species in pine forest and chaparral habitats that could be compared with more recent values, and Bjorndalen (1978) provides vegetation community data that could be compared to more recent, post-ungulate samples.
A significant finding of this research effort was that a substantial amount of data exists in various institutions, but has yet to be analyzed due to lack of funding. For instance, many thousands of Channel Island plant specimens exist in some collections that have yet to be catalogued due to insufficient funding and staff time. Likewise, entomological collections at several institutions contain untold numbers of Santa Cruz Island specimens, yet these institutions have not electronically databased their collections. These collections are organized systematically, and retrieving the data for a given geographic area such as Santa Cruz Island entails examining all the specimens for each systematic group of organisms that may occur on the island. Providing financial support for efforts to make these data available to researchers—data that have already been collected during past field work—would provide a substantial contribution to our understanding of the ecology of the island, at relatively low cost.