{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021136683889149837, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006575857209957727, 'mean_word_length': 5.435045317220544, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Research and cumulative watershed effects

The mandate for land managers to address cumulative watershed effects (CWEs) requires that planners evaluate the potential impacts of their activities on multiple beneficial uses within the context of other coexisting activities in a watershed. Types of CWEs vary with the types of land-use activities and their modes of interaction, but published studies illustrate both descriptive and predictive evaluations of many of these types. Successful evaluations have generally used geomor-phological and ecological approaches based on the understanding of the processes involved. In contrast, most generalized " cookbook " analysis procedures are shown to be unable to assess accumulations of impacts through time, usually cannot evaluate the range of activities and uses that are necessary, and are rarely validated. A general approach to evaluation is proposed, and the types of information available for assessments are reviewed. This version differs from the final report to the Department primarily in editing details, omission of two appendices, addition of two figures, revisions to tables, and inclusion of more detail about cited studies. Trade names and commercial enterprises are mentioned solely for information and do not imply the endorsement of those products or organizations. This publication neither recommends any pesticide uses reported nor implies that they have been registered by appropriate government agencies. Costick provided extremely helpful reviews of the manuscript, and innumerable scientists and land managers (listed, in part, in the Appendix) gave freely of their time for lengthy discussions of ideas, research, and the challenges confronting conscientious land management. Note: This publication was reprinted December, 1998 from a reconstructed layout. It closely resembles the original printing, but a difference in text style has caused a slight shift in pagination. The Table of Contents has been revised to reflect the changes. Also, Figure 4, (previously on page 29) now appears on page 28, and Tables 5 (previously on page 28) appears on page 29.