UVM Theses and Dissertations
Format:
Print
Author:
Johnson, Michelle L.
Dept./Program:
Natural Resource Planning Program
Year:
2004
Degree:
M.S.
Abstract:
We examined reserve design scenarios for a watershed (199,759 ha) in northern New England, USA, to address the questions of (1) how much of the watershed should be managed as habitat to protect wildlife diversity, and (2) can adequate protection for wildlife habitat exist in concert with other land uses. Goals of this reserve design exercise were to maximize habitat diversity, maintain species persistence, ensure feasibility, and limit economic impacts to the greater region. Because there were no consistent species occurrence data across the watershed, we collected presence/absence data on bird species as a surrogate for wildlife diversity. We used these data to model distributions of 104 species of birds across the study area. In C-Plan, a reserve design software package, we created four alternate scenarios for highlighting areas that could adequately protect wildlife habitat.
We set two types of targets for reserve design algorithms: area-based and presence-based. Targets were weighted, with more emphasis assigned to species of greater concern and species with higher model accuracy. We included masks for land ownership and forest management activities in some scenarios, to assess whether incorporating land use constraints could provide a solution that still met the targets. The area- and presence-based targets resulted in dramatically different selections. Area-based targets selected 15% of the study area for protection in a spatially connected manner; presence-based targets selected 8% of the study area without any spatial cohesion. These percentages are estimates of the amount of land needed for persistence of wildlife populations in northern New England. Targets were still met or nearly met when preferred forest management and unsuitable land ownership planning units were excluded from selection for wildlife habitat conservation. Thus, ensuring that habitat needs are met for species in this watershed of study does not appear to be incompatible with competing land uses.
We set two types of targets for reserve design algorithms: area-based and presence-based. Targets were weighted, with more emphasis assigned to species of greater concern and species with higher model accuracy. We included masks for land ownership and forest management activities in some scenarios, to assess whether incorporating land use constraints could provide a solution that still met the targets. The area- and presence-based targets resulted in dramatically different selections. Area-based targets selected 15% of the study area for protection in a spatially connected manner; presence-based targets selected 8% of the study area without any spatial cohesion. These percentages are estimates of the amount of land needed for persistence of wildlife populations in northern New England. Targets were still met or nearly met when preferred forest management and unsuitable land ownership planning units were excluded from selection for wildlife habitat conservation. Thus, ensuring that habitat needs are met for species in this watershed of study does not appear to be incompatible with competing land uses.