North American Bird Conservation Initiative: Bird conservation region descriptions, a supplement to the North American Bird Conservation Initiative Bird Conservation Regions Map
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Book↗
SEARCH · Search USGS
Results for “Conservation”
Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Strategic conservation planning for the Eastern North Carolina/Southeastern Virginia Strategic Habitat Conservation Team
The Eastern North Carolina/Southeastern Virginia Strategic Habitat Conservation Team (ENCSEVA) is a partnership among local federal agencies and programs with a mission to apply Strategic Habitat Conservation to accomplish priority landscape-level conservation within its geographic region. ENCSEVA seeks to further landscape-scale conservation through collaboration with local partners. To accomplish this mission, ENCSEVA is developing a comprehensive Strategic Habitat Conservation Plan (Plan) to provide guidance for its members, partners, and collaborators by establishing mutual conservation goals, objectives, strategies, and metrics to gauge the success of conservation efforts. Identifying common goals allows the ENCSEVA team to develop strategies that leverage joint resources and are more likely to achieve desired impacts across the landscape. The Plan will also provide an approach for ENCSEVA to meet applied research needs (identify knowledge gaps), foster adaptive management principles, identify conservation priorities, prioritize threats (including potential impacts of climate change), and identify the required capacity to implement strategies to create more resilient landscapes. ENCSEVA seeks to support the overarching goals of the South Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative (SALCC) and to provide scientific and technical support for conservation at landscape scales as well as inform the management of natural resources in response to shifts in climate, habitat fragmentation and loss, and other landscape-level challenges (South Atlantic LCC 2012). The ENCSEVA ecoregion encompasses the northern third of the SALCC geography and offers a unique opportunity to apply landscape conservation at multiple scales through the guidance of local conservation and natural resource management efforts and by reporting metrics that reflect the effectiveness of those efforts (Figure 1). The Environmental Decision Analysis Team, housed within the North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at North Carolina State University, is assisting the ENCSEVA team in developing a scientifically sound basis for the Plan though the elicitation of expert knowledge and the organization of that knowledge using the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. The Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation is a framework that is well suited to incorporating decision-making tools such as Structured Decision Making and provides a multi-step process to conceptually organize conservation projects in a manner that enhances the rigor and transparency of expert and knowledge-based plans. It helps define explicit pathways from 2 planned conservation activities and ultimate impact, as well as indicators to measure success (Stem et al. 2005). Specifically, the framework identifies conservation targets, key ecological attributes, threats, and associated indicators to monitor responses given the implementation of a conservation action (Conservation Measures Partnership 2007). This report serves to provide a scientific foundation for the Plan by summarizing the expert opinion of wildlife biologists, ecologists, hydrologists, researchers, natural resource managers, and conservation practitioners regarding five environments (wetlands, riverine systems, estuaries, uplands, and barrier islands) within the ENCSEVA geography. Specifically, this report describes (1) the approach to elicit expert knowledge meant to support the strategic plan, (2) how this knowledge can inform collaborative conservation planning, and (3) a summary of opportunities available for the ENCSEVA team to address threats and impacts associated with climate change within the ecoregion.
Technical Bulletin↗
A case study of assigning conservation value to dispersed habitat units for conservation planning
Resource managers are increasingly tasked with developing habitat conservation plans in the face of numerous, sometimes competing, objectives. These plans must often be implemented across dispersed habitat conservation units that may contribute unequally to overall conservation objectives. Using U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service waterfowl production areas (WPA) in western Minnesota as our conservation landscape, we develop a landscape-scale approach for evaluating the conservation value of dispersed habitat conservation units with multiple conservation priorities. We evaluated conservation value based on a suite of variables directly applicable to conservation management practices, thus providing a direct link between conservation actions and outcomes. We developed spatial models specific to each of these conservation objectives and also developed two freely available prioritization tools to implement these analyses. We found that some WPAs provided high conservation value across a range of conservation objectives, suggesting that managing these specific areas would achieve multiple conservation goals. Conversely, other WPAs provided low conservation value for some objectives, suggesting they would be most effectively managed for a distinct set of specific conservation goals. Approaches such as ours provide a direct means of assessing the conservation value of dispersed habitat conservation units and could be useful in the development of habitat management plans, particularly when faced with multiple conservation objectives.
Journal of Conservation Planning↗
Closing the conservation gap in the sagebrush biome: Spatial targeting and coordination are needed for conservation to keep pace with sagebrush losses
Core sagebrush areas (CSAs), patches of high sagebrush ecological integrity, continue to decline despite significant conservation and restoration investments across the sagebrush biome. Historically, conservation decisions in the biome have been driven by wildlife species-specific demands, but increasing recognition of the scale of threats and the pace of ecosystem degradation has compelled a shift towards threat-based ecosystem management. Therefore, there is a need to evaluate the scale of conservation implementation relative to the rate of degradation or loss from specific threats to the biome to assess whether a conservation deficit exists. To this end, we: 1) quantified and compared the average hectares of conservation practices implemented annually relative to the hectares of CSA loss attributed to each threat; 2) evaluated the relative amount of conservation actions in core sagebrush areas, growth opportunity areas, and other rangeland areas; and 3) assessed how much additional conservation may be needed to stop CSA declines. We then quantified how better spatial targeting and enhanced coordination might reduce the total additional amount of future conservation needed, and evaluated how an influx of resources can close the conservation gap, or the deficit between the conservation needed to offset annual loss and degradation and the capacity for conservation implementation. We found that current rates of conservation (e.g., hectares treated annually) are markedly lower than rates of CSA loss (∼10% of average annual loss). Furthermore, most conservation actions, ∼90% for some treatment types, occurred outside of CSAs likely reducing the efficacy of these conservation actions at retaining and restoring intact sagebrush rangelands. Additionally, we found that conservation efforts will need to increase by more than an order of magnitude (at least 10x) annually to halt CSA declines. However, through better spatial targeting of conservation actions, the increase in conservation needed to stop CSA loss could be reduced by 70% or more. This analysis demonstrates the divergent futures that may await the sagebrush biome pending key decisions regarding conservation targeting, stakeholder cooperation, and the strategic addition of resources.
Rangeland Ecology and Management↗
Defining conservation priorities for freshwater fishes according to taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity
To date, the predominant use of systematic conservation planning has been to evaluate and conserve areas of high terrestrial biodiversity. Although studies in freshwater ecosystems have received recent attention, research has rarely considered the potential trade-offs between protecting different dimensions of biodiversity and the ecological processes that maintain diversity. We provide the first systematic prioritization for freshwaters (focusing on the highly threatened and globally distinct fish fauna of the Lower Colorado River Basin, USA) simultaneously considering scenarios of: taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity; contemporary threats to biodiversity (including interactions with nonnative species); and future climate change and human population growth. There was 75% congruence between areas of highest conservation priority for different aspects of biodiversity, suggesting that conservation efforts can concurrently achieve strong complementarity among all types of diversity. However, sizable fractions of the landscape were incongruent across conservation priorities for different diversity scenarios, underscoring the importance of considering multiple dimensions of biodiversity and highlighting catchments that contribute disproportionately to taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity in the region. Regions of projected human population growth were not concordant with conservation priorities; however, higher human population abundance will likely have indirect effects on native biodiversity by increasing demand for water. This will come in direct conflict with projected reductions in precipitation and warmer temperatures, which have substantial overlap with regions of high contemporary diversity. Native and endemic fishes in arid ecosystems are critically endangered by both current and future threats, but our results highlight the use of systematic conservation planning for the optimal allocation of limited resources that incorporates multiple and complementary conservation values describing taxonomic, functional, and phylogenetic diversity.
Ecological Applications↗
Breeding season ecology: Chapter 6 in Status, ecology and conservation of the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher (RMRS-GTR-60)
The willow flycatcher ( Empidonax traillii ) breeds across much of the conterminous United States and in portions of extreme southern Canada. As might be expected in such a wide-ranging species, willow fly- catchers in different portions of the range exhibit differences in appearance, song, and ecological characteristics. The intent of this chapter is to provide information on the breeding-season ecology of the southwestern subspecies, E.t. extimus . However, most ecological studies to date have dealt with other willow flycatcher subspecies. Relatively few studies have been published on E.t. extimus , and much of what is currently known is presented in unpublished literature (e.g., agency and consulting firm reports); these sources are relied upon heavily in this chapter. This chapter does not address habitat characteristics in depth, other than for nest sites (refer to A Survey of Current Breeding Habitats for additional details). Although southwestern willow flycatchers are frequent victims of nest parasitism by brown-headed cowbirds ( Molothrus ater ), this chapter will not address the topic of parasitism and its effect on breeding ecology (refer to The Ecology of Brown-headed Cowbirds and their Effects on Southwestern Willow Flycatchers for details). Readers interested in more details of willow flycatcher biology and ecology are encouraged to read McCabe’s (1991) treatise, which is based on over a decade of willow flycatchers research in Wisconsin and includes comparisons with other populations and subspecies.
General Technical Report↗
Sagebrush conservation strategy—Challenges to sagebrush conservation
The sagebrush ( Artemisia spp.) biome, its wildlife, and the services and benefits it provides people and local communities are at risk. Development in the sagebrush biome, for many purposes, has resulted in multiple and often cumulative negative impacts. These impacts, ranging from simple habitat loss to complex, interactive changes in ecosystem function, continue to accelerate even as the need grows for the resources provided by this biome. This “Sagebrush Conservation Strategy—Challenges to Sagebrush Conservation,” is an overview and assessment of the challenges facing land managers and landowners in conserving sagebrush ecosystems. This strategy is intended to provide guidance so that the unparalleled collaborative efforts to conserve the iconic greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) by State and Federal agencies, Tribes, academia, nongovernmental organizations, and stakeholders can be expanded to the entire sagebrush biome to benefit the people and wildlife that depend on this ecosystem. This report is organized into 3 parts. “Part I. Importance of the Sagebrush Biome to People and Wildlife” introduces the biome and a subset of the more than 350 species of plants and animals associated with sagebrush for which there is some level of conservation concern. These include several sagebrush obligates that have been petitioned for listing under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including greater sage-grouse, Gunnison sage-grouse ( C. minimus ; listed as threatened), and pygmy rabbit ( Brachylagus idahoensis ). Other sagebrush-dependent species, such as pronghorn ( Antilocapra americana ) and mule deer ( Odocoileus hemionus ), have experienced significant population declines. “Part II. Change Agents in the Sagebrush Biome—Extent, Impacts, and Effort to Address Them” is an overview of the variety of change agents that are causing the continued loss and degradation of sagebrush. Topics covered include altered fire regimes, invasive plant species, conifer expansion, overabundant free-roaming equids, and human land uses, including energy development, cropland conversion, infrastructure, and improper livestock grazing. Climate changes, including warmer temperatures and altered amounts and timing of precipitation, have and will likely increasingly compound negative effects to sagebrush ecosystems from all these threats. “Part III. Current Conservation Paradigm and Other Conservation Needs for Sagebrush” begins with an overview of how sage-grouse conservation, and the associated efforts and collaborations, may be able to address threats to and restoring degraded sagebrush and habitat for other sagebrush-dependent and -associated species. Meeting conservation goals for sage-grouse, mule deer, pygmy rabbits, and other sagebrush-associated wildlife will require extensive restoration of sagebrush communities already converted or degraded by the change agents outlined in Part II of this report. Concepts, considerations, techniques for restoration, and adaptive management and monitoring are discussed to help set the stage for potential strategies to improve conditions throughout the sagebrush biome. Communication, outreach, and engagement can enhance grassroots conservation efforts and build the next generation of managers, practitioners, scientists, and communicators who will care for the sagebrush ecosystem and stimulate or sustain public participation in sagebrush conservation issues.
Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Neb↗
Using a distribution and conservation status weighted hotspot approach to identify areas in need of conservation action to benefit Idaho bird species
Identification of biodiversity hotspots (hereafter, hotspots) has become a common strategy to delineate important areas for wildlife conservation. However, the use of hotspots has not often incorporated important habitat types, ecosystem services, anthropogenic activity, or consistency in identifying important conservation areas. The purpose of this study was to identify hotspots to improve avian conservation efforts for Species of Greatest Conservation Need (SGCN) in the state of Idaho, United States. We evaluated multiple approaches to define hotspots and used a unique approach based on weighting species by their distribution size and conservation status to identify hotspot areas. All hotspot approaches identified bodies of water (Bear Lake, Grays Lake, and American Falls Reservoir) as important hotspots for Idaho avian SGCN, but we found that the weighted approach produced more congruent hotspot areas when compared to other hotspot approaches. To incorporate anthropogenic activity into hotspot analysis, we grouped species based on their sensitivity to specific human threats (i.e., urban development, agriculture, fire suppression, grazing, roads, and logging) and identified ecological sections within Idaho that may require specific conservation actions to address these human threats using the weighted approach. The Snake River Basalts and Overthrust Mountains ecological sections were important areas for potential implementation of conservation actions to conserve biodiversity. Our approach to identifying hotspots may be useful as part of a larger conservation strategy to aid land managers or local governments in applying conservation actions on the ground.
Idaho↗
Assessing conservation and management actions with ecosystem services better communicates conservation value to the public
Fish and wildlife populations are under unprecedented threats from changes in land use and climate. With increasing threats comes a need for an expanded constituency that can contribute to the public support and financial capital needed for habitat conservation and management. Using an ecosystem services approach can provide a framework for a more holistic accounting of conservation benefits. Our objective here is to provide a greater understanding of the role that taking an ecosystem services approach can have in expanding the public constituency that supports the use of financial capital required to conserve and manage the nation’s natural capital. To demonstrate a methodology and the usefulness of taking an ecosystem services approach when communicating the value of conserving and managing fish and wildlife habitats, we performed an evaluation of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service-owned Waterfowl Production Areas, National Wildlife Refuges, and easement lands (both wetland and grassland) in Stutsman County, North Dakota. We quantified amphibian habitat, grassland bird habitat, floral resources for pollinators, and carbon storage services under various scenarios of conservation. While we did not include all possible ecosystem services in our model, our case study shows how this process can provide a more complete picture of the collateral benefits of conservation directed primarily toward waterfowl. Using this ecosystem services approach, we documented marked losses in all services modeled if current conservation lands were developed for the production of agricultural crops. By having access to a more complete picture of benefits provided by conservation lands, decision makers can better communicate their value. By garnering greater public support through a more accurate accounting of societal benefits, conservation and management of dwindling natural capital may someday attain the same level of thought and consideration that is put into the conservation and management of the nation’s financial capital.
North Dakota↗
Setting priorities for private land conservation in fire-prone landscapes: Are fire risk reduction and biodiversity conservation competing or compatible objectives?
Although wildfire plays an important role in maintaining biodiversity in many ecosystems, fire management to protect human assets is often carried out by different agencies than those tasked for conserving biodiversity. In fact, fire risk reduction and biodiversity conservation are often viewed as competing objectives. Here we explored the role of management through private land conservation and asked whether we could identify private land acquisition strategies that fulfill the mutual objectives of biodiversity conservation and fire risk reduction, or whether the maximization of one objective comes at a detriment to the other. Using a fixed budget and number of homes slated for development, we simulated 20 years of housing growth under alternative conservation selection strategies, and then projected the mean risk of fires destroying structures and the area and configuration of important habitat types in San Diego County, California, USA. We found clear differences in both fire risk projections and biodiversity impacts based on the way conservation lands are prioritized for selection, but these differences were split between two distinct groupings. If no conservation lands were purchased, or if purchases were prioritized based on cost or likelihood of development, both the projected fire risk and biodiversity impacts were much higher than if conservation lands were purchased in areas with high fire hazard or high species richness. Thus, conserving land focused on either of the two objectives resulted in nearly equivalent mutual benefits for both. These benefits not only resulted from preventing development in sensitive areas, but they were also due to the different housing patterns and arrangements that occurred as development was displaced from those areas. Although biodiversity conflicts may still arise using other fire management strategies, this study shows that mutual objectives can be attained through land-use planning in this region. These results likely generalize to any place where high species richness overlaps with hazardous wildland vegetation.
California↗
Mechanistic invasive species management models and their application in conservation
Management strategies to address the challenges associated with invasive species are critical for effective conservation. An increasing variety of mathematical models offer insight into invasive populations, and can help managers identify cost effective prevention, control, and eradication actions. Despite this, as model complexity grows, so does the inaccessibility of these tools to conservation practitioners making decisions about management. Here, we seek to narrow the science-practice gap by reviewing invasive species management models (ISMMs). We define ISMMs as mechanistic models used to explore invasive species management strategies, and include reaction-advection–diffusion models, integrodifference equations, gravity models, particle transport models, nonspatial and spatial discrete-time population growth models, cellular automata, and individual-based models. For each approach, we describe the model framework and its implementation, discuss strengths and weaknesses, and give examples of conservation applications. We conclude by discussing how ISMMs can be used in concert with adaptive management to address scientific uncertainties impeding action and with multiple objective decision processes to evaluate tradeoffs among management objectives. We undertook this review to support more effective decision-making involving invasive species by providing conservation practitioners with the information they need to identify tools most useful for their applications.
Conservation Science and Practice↗
Economic impacts of Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative Conservation projects in Wyoming
Executive Summary This report estimates the economic impacts on the Wyoming economy from investments made by the Wyoming Landscape Conservation Initiative (WLCI) on conservation and restoration projects. The WLCI has been working in southwestern Wyoming since 2007 to coordinate science and management decisions among government and private entities that invest in conservation projects aimed at restoring and enhancing wildlife habitat. These investments support jobs and generate business activities within the Wyoming economy. WLCI conservation and restoration projects occur on both publicly managed and privately owned lands and are supported by leveraging funds from Federal bureaus, Wyoming State and local government agencies, and private contributions. During 2007–2018, the WLCI invested a total of more than $ 69,100,000 (in 2018 dollars) on conservation projects within the State of Wyoming. These pooled funds have been used to purchase conservation easements and hire business contractors to complete restoration projects, with 98 percent of project funds awarded to Wyoming-based businesses. Including both direct and secondary effects, the U.S. Geological Survey estimates that local spending on these conservation and restoration projects during 2007–2018 supported an estimated 1,055 job-years (the number of annualized full- and part-time jobs generated or supported), more than $ 30,500,000 in labor income, almost $ 40,900,000 in value added, and almost $ 68,200,000 in economic output within the Wyoming economy. These results demonstrate how investments in WLCI conservation projects support jobs, livelihoods, small businesses, and rural economies in Wyoming.
Wyoming↗
Incorporating established conservation networks into freshwater conservation planning results in more workable prioritizations
Resources for addressing stream fish conservation issues are often limited and the stressors impacting fish continue to increase, so decision makers often rely on tools to prioritize locations for conservation actions. Because conservation networks already exist in many areas, incorporating these into the planning process can increase the ability of decision makers to carry out management actions. In this study we aim to identify priority areas within established networks to provide an approach which allows managers to focus efforts on the most valuable areas they control, while identifying areas outside of the network, which support species with minimal representation within the network, for acquisition or conservation partnerships. The goal of this approach is to prioritize sites to achieve high levels of species representation while also developing workable solutions. We applied a methodology incorporating established networks into a systematic conservation planning process for fish in temperate wadeable streams located in Missouri, USA. We compared how well species were represented in our approach with two commonly used alternatives: A blank slate approach which used the same systematic conservation planning technique but did not incorporate established networks, and a habitat integrity approach based solely on anthropogenic threat data. Relative to the blank slate approach, our approach required 210% more segments for representation of all species, and contained an average of 0.5 additional occurrences for the least well-represented species. Although the blank slate solution was more efficient in achieving species representation, 77% of segments in this solution were not already protected. This would likely pose a challenge for implementing conservation actions. Relative to habitat integrity-based priorities, our approach required only 38% of the number of stream segments to achieve representation of all species and contained an average of 5 additional occurrences of the least represented species, representing a substantial gain in representation. Incorporating established networks may allow managers to focus resources on areas with the greatest conservation value within established networks and to identify the most valuable areas complementary to the established networks, resulting in priorities which may be more actionable and effective than those developed by alternative approaches.
Missouri↗
Waterfowl populations of conservation concern: learning from diverse challenges, models, and conservation strategies
There are 30 threatened or endangered species of waterfowl worldwide, and several sub-populations are also threatened. Some of these species occur in North America, and others there are also of conservation concern due to declining population trends and their importance to hunters. Here we review conservation initiatives being undertaken for several of these latter species, along with conservation measures in place in Europe, to seek common themes and approaches that could be useful in developing broad conservation guidelines. While focal species may vary in their life histories, population threats and geopolitical context, most conservation efforts have used a systematic approach to understand factors limiting populations and o identify possible management or policy actions. This approach generally includes a priori identification of plausible hypotheses about population declines or status, incorporation of hypotheses into conceptual or quantitative planning models, and the use of some form of structured decision making and adaptive management to develop and implement conservation actions in the face of many uncertainties. A climate of collaboration among jurisdictions sharing these birds is important to the success of a conservation or management programme. The structured conservation approach exemplified herein provides an opportunity to involve stakeholders at all planning stages, allows for all views to be examined and incorporated into model structures, and yields a format for improved communication, cooperation and learning, which may ultimately be one of the greatest benefits of this strategy.
Wildfowl↗
Conservation Action Planning: Lessons learned from the St. Marys River watershed biodiversity conservation planning process
Conservation Action Planning (CAP) is an adaptive management planning process refined by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and embraced worldwide as the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. The CAP process facilitates open, multi-institutional collaboration on a common conservation agenda through organized actions and quantified results. While specifically designed for conservation efforts, the framework is adaptable and flexible to multiple scales and can be used for any collaborative planning effort. The CAP framework addresses inception; design and development of goals, measures, and strategies; and plan implementation and evaluation. The specific components of the CAP include defining the project scope and conservation targets; assessing the ecological viability; ascertaining threats and surrounding situation; identifying opportunities and designing strategies for action; and implementing actions and monitoring results. In 2007, TNC and a multidisciplinary graduate student team from the University of Michigan's School of Natural Resources and Environment initiated a CAP for the St. Marys River, the connecting channel between Lake Superior and Lake Huron, and its local watershed. The students not only gained experience in conservation planning, but also learned lessons that notably benefited the CAP process and were valuable for any successful collaborative effort—a dedicated core team improved product quality, accelerated the timeline, and provided necessary support for ongoing efforts; an academic approach in preparation for engagement in the planning process brought applicable scientific research to the forefront, enhanced workshop facilitation, and improved stakeholder participation; and early and continuous interactions with regional stakeholders improved cooperation and built a supportive network for collaboration.
Michigan, Ontario↗
A multi-species framework for landscape conservation planning
 Rapidly changing landscapes have spurred the need for quantitative methods for conservation assessment and planning that encompass large spatial extents. We devised and tested a multispecies framework for conservation planning to complement single-species assessments and ecosystem-level approaches. Our framework consisted of 4 elements: sampling to effectively estimate population parameters, measuring how human activity affects landscapes at multiple scales, analyzing the relation between landscape characteristics and individual species occurrences, and evaluating and comparing the responses of multiple species to landscape modification. We applied the approach to a community of terrestrial birds across 25,000 km 2 with a range of intensities of human development. Human modification of land cover, road density, and other elements of the landscape, measured at multiple spatial extents, had large effects on occupancy of the 67 species studied. Forest composition within 1 km of points had a strong effect on occupancy of many species and a range of negative, intermediate, and positive associations. Road density within 1 km of points, percent evergreen forest within 300 m, and distance from patch edge were also strongly associated with occupancy for many species. We used the occupancy results to group species into 11 guilds that shared patterns of association with landscape characteristics. Our multispecies approach to conservation planning allowed us to quantify the trade-offs of different scenarios of land-cover change in terms of species occupancy.
Conservation Biology↗
Evaluating the role of Farm Bill conservation program participation in conserving America’s grasslands
Grasslands are one of the most imperiled ecosystems in the world and the majority of the grassland ecosystem in the United States is privately owned and used for agriculture. Conversion of grasslands to row crops is expanding, fueled by commodity price increases, technological improvements, and agricultural policy. The U.S. government primarily uses voluntary incentive-based conservation programs to address the environmental impacts of agriculture and encourage conservation on private land. To investigate the utility of these programs to conserve grasslands, we surveyed private landowners in the Plains and Prairie Pothole Ecoregion (PPPE), one of America’s most at-risk grassland areas, about their land use, environmental attitudes and values, and reasons for or against participating in a Farm Bill conservation program. Agricultural landowners with large land holdings, who value hunting, and have positive environmental values, attitudes, and behaviors, were more likely to participate in a program. Financial considerations and a desire for autonomy limited participation. While program participants had less land in grass than nonparticipants and were more likely to convert planted grass to row crops and/or remove wetlands, they were also less likely to convert virgin sod to row crops. These findings signal the need for additional research and tools other than FBCPs to conserve the PPPE grasslands.
Land Use Policy↗
Ecosystem Services Derived from Wetland Conservation Practices in the United States Prairie Pothole Region with an Emphasis on the U.S. Department of Agriculture Conservation Reserve and Wetlands Reserve Programs
Implementation of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) has resulted in the restoration of approximately 2,200,000 ha (5,436,200 acres) of wetland and grassland habitats in the Prairie Pothole Region. These restored habitats are known to provide various ecosystem services; however, little work has been conducted to quantify and verify benefits on program lands (lands enrolled in the CRP and WRP) in agriculturally dominated landscapes of the Prairie Pothole Region. To address this need, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in collaboration with the USDA Farm Service Agency and Natural Resources Conservation Service, initiated a study to develop and apply approaches to quantify changes in ecosystem services resulting from wetland restoration activities funded by the USDA. To accomplish this goal, the USGS conducted a comprehensive, stratified survey of 204 catchments (wetland and surrounding uplands contributing runoff to the wetland) in 1997 and 270 catchments in 2004 to gather data necessary for estimating various ecosystem services. In 1997 and 2004, the surveys included catchments with seasonal and semipermanent wetlands that were restored as part of USDA conservation programs, as well as nonprogram catchments in native prairie. Additionally, in 2004 data collection was expanded to include temporary wetlands for all treatments and nonprogram cropped catchments for all wetland classes: temporary, seasonal, and semipermanent. A key element in the sample design is that catchments span an alteration gradient ranging from highly altered, such as cropland, to minimally altered, such as native prairie. Therefore, we evaluated restoration programs by comparing changes in program (restored) catchments to nonprogram (cropland and native prairie) catchments. Information collected during both surveys included easily measured soil, vegetation, and morphological variables that were used to estimate the following ecosystem services: plant community quality and richness, carbon sequestration, floodwater storage, sediment and nutrient reduction, and potential wildlife habitat suitability. In this report, we evaluate the extent that these ecosystem services changed in restored wetlands relative to cropland and native prairie baselines. In most cases, our results indicate restoration activities funded by the USDA have positively influenced ecosystem services in comparison to a cropped wetland baseline; however, most benefits were only considered at a site-specific scale, and better quantification of off-site benefits associated with conservation programs will require detailed spatial data on all land areas enrolled in conservation programs.
Professional Paper↗