Project Title: Landscape Conservation Design in the High Divide. An Analysis of Future Landscape Scenarios and Their Viability Phase 1

Similar documents
INTERMOUNTAIN WEST JOINT VENTURE Strengthening Alliances for Conservation

Collaborative Conservation across Landscapes: Experiences from the Upper Midwest and Great Lakes LCC 2/29/2016. GreatLakesLCC.org

1.16 million KM 2 5 States, 2 Provinces Integrated Partnerships with neighboring LCCs, NW and NC Climate Science Centers, PNW

Category for Proposal: Partner Forums

Photo by Carlton Ward Jr. Executive Summary

Next steps Vision and Mission Science Priorities Objective Conservation Framework Actions

BLM s Landscape Approach

Road Ecology in Practice: Building Resiliency of Urban Ecosystems through Informed Road Network Planning

Wide-ranging Species Conservation

Aquatic, Terrestrial and Landscape Conservation Design Tools and Products of the North Atlantic LCC

ANNUAL REPORT. GREAT NORTHERN Landscape Conservation Cooperative

Member Service Plan Sierra Nevada AmeriCorps Partnership

Monitoring for Ecological Integrity and State of the Parks Reporting

systems is available on the Colorado Wetland Information Center (CWIC) website.

Big Picture Protected Areas Strategy Collaborating to Protect and Conserve Nature in Ontario s Carolinian Zone

Colorado Outdoor Partnership

Great Northern LCC. Five years ago, the Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative. Activities & Accomplishments. Vision

Blue/Green Infrastructure Study Accomack County, VA

WELCOME! Four Corners and Upper Rio Grande Vulnerability Assessment Webinar Series

Northeast Conservation

Scope of Services. River Oaks Boulevard (SH 183) Corridor Master Plan

INTEGRATING PROTECTED AREAS INTO THE WIDER LANDSCAPE, SEASCAPE AND RELATED SECTORS. An Overview

2014 South Atlantic LCC

California Landscape Conservation Cooperative

ROLE OF LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION COOPERATIVES IN EVERGLADES RESTORATION

Biodiversity Action Plan Background Information for discussion purposes

Peninsular Florida Landscape Conservation Cooperative. Marine and Estuarine Priority Resources and Conservation Targets

Getting Ahead of Climate Change Land trusts taking the lead on climate change

NORTHERN LANDS NORTHERN LEADERSHIP

4. What are the goals of the Kawarthas, Naturally Connected project? 7. What are watersheds and why are they being used as the project boundaries?

Community Conservation Workshop. Lake Placid

Describing the Integrated Land Management Approach

ARISE: The Rock Renaissance Area Redevelopment & Implementation Strategy

NJ Habitat Connectivity Initiative

Arlington, Virginia is a worldclass

2011 ASLA Design Awards. Westside Creeks Restoration Plan Merit Award AECOM, Fort Collins. Planning & Urban Design

BRE Strategic Ecological Framework LI Technical Information Note 03/2016

New Tools for Land Management: A Quick Introduction to Ecological Site Descriptions

SUSTAINABILITY PLAN OTTAWA COUNTY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION FALL 2017

2040 LUP is a part of the Comprehensive Plan and carries the same legal authority. Economic Challenges

SAN RAFAEL GENERAL PLAN 2040 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

Wildlife Habitat Information as the Foundation of Land Development Regulations. The Local Perspective. RMLUI March 9, 2018

A Delta Renewed: A Guide to Science Based Ecological Restoration in the Delta

Call for Artists for: Design and Construction of Environmental Art Activation Story Mill Community Park, Bozeman, MT

Community Conservation Workshop. Saranac River Basin Communities

An Ambitious Plan: Transforming the blighted South Platte River and surrounding environment into Denver s greatest natural resource.

An Introduction to the Far North Land Use Strategy

for Biosphere Reserves

Consolidated Workshop Proceedings Report

Land Use Regional Planning in Alberta Collaborating with Stakeholders

STEWARDSHIP OF LONG ISLAND SOUND S ECOLOGICAL AND RECREATIONAL RESOURCES

Conservation by Design: Promoting Resilient Coastal Wetlands & Communities. GreatLakesLCC.org

CHAPTER 1 Introduction

Middle Mississippi River. Regional Corridor

CITY OF VAUGHAN EXTRACT FROM COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 15, 2016

National Association of Conservation Districts. Kris Hoellen Vice President, Sustainable Programs The Conservation Fund September 19, 2013

Potential Solutions to Transportation-Wildlife Conflicts An Overview. Tony Clevenger WTI Montana State University

Public Review Draft Oceanside Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan/ Natural Communities Conservation Plan

Smart Growth for Dallas

Arkansas River Corridor

Large Landscape Restoration and the National Park System

COASTAL CONSERVANCY. Staff Recommendation March 25, 2004 LOS ANGELES GREEN VISION PLAN. File No.: Project Manager: Marc Beyeler

Green Infrastructure Planning for Sustainability and Resiliency

Managing our Landscapes Conversations for Change

The Five Components of the McLoughlin Area Plan

Natural Environment White Paper & new partnerships to deliver green infrastructure. Henry Smith, Project and Policy Assistant, TCPA

Lower Columbia River and Coastal Landscape Conservation Design

Welcome to the Oakridge Centre Open House

This page intentionally blank.

Western Pennsylvania Conservancy Clairton & Harrison Community Greening Assessment Projects Request for Proposals July 2018

Alternative Routes. St. Vital to La Verendrye Station - Southern Loop Transmission Corridor. 20 different segments 4 segments common to all routes

Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE PAGE

Citywide Integrated Stormwater Management Plan (ISMP) DRAFT ACTION PLAN REVIEW Public Consultation November 16 th, 2016

IMPLEMENTING SOMERSET COUNTY S INVESTMENT FRAMEWORK

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior. Climate Change Response and Cultural Landscape Preservation

The Conservation Fund The Center for Conservation and Development

Key Elements of Successful Conservation Planning. John Paskus October 17, 2013 Pierce Cedar Creek Institute Michigan Natural Features Inventory

Consolidated Workshop Proceedings Report

COLORADO S Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy Linking Conservation and Transportation Planning August 15, 2006

Overview of Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission s (SPC) 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP)

Protected Areas: Context for Planning and Management Parks Canada Perspective

Recent Progress on Wildlife Corridor and Ecological Connectivity Policy in the United States By Robert Ament Senior Conservationist

Position Description Sierra Nevada AmeriCorps Partnership

Executive Summary. Essential Connectivity Map (Figure ES-1)

Town of Oakville Streetscape Strategy

building with nature - a new benchmark for green infrastructure

DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW. Game Plan for a Healthy City

CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA CITY COUNCIL AGENDA

RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND GREENWAYS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES

Smart City Governance URBIS Solutions. David Ludlow, Assoc. Professor European Smart Cities University of the West of England, Bristol

LANDSCAPE SCALE PLANNING AND SITING FOR SHALE DEVELOPMENT

Landscape Conservation Design April, 2014

Arctic Council s WG PAME

Preparing to Review City-owned Property

FAQ S about Restoration Planning FROM THE Department of Ecology WEBSITE:

WELCOME TO THE CHOUTEAU GREENWAY EQUITY WORKING GROUP!

Public Review Draft Encinitas Subarea Plan

2011 ASLA Design Awards. Top of the Rockies National Scenic and Historic Byway Merit Award Bluegreen. Planning & Urban Design

Landscape Conservation Design June, 2014

Objectives and Strategies for the Integration of Recreation, Parks and Open Space in Regional Plans

Transcription:

Project Title: Landscape Conservation Design in the High Divide. An Analysis of Future Landscape Scenarios and Their Viability Phase 1 Project Coordinator: Michael Whitfield, Coordinator Heart of the Rockies Initiative 1790 E 2000 S, Driggs, ID 83422 208-354-2075 Michael@heart-of-rockies.org Project PIs: Bray J. Beltrán, Spatial Ecologist Heart of the Rockies Initiative bray@fvlt.org Brent Brock, Wildlife Biologist HoloScene Wildlife Services, LLC brent@holoscenewild.org Ray Rasker, Executive Director Headwaters Economics ray@headwaterseconomics.org High Divide Collaborative Partners (name, affiliation, location): Non-governmental Organizations: Heart of the Rockies Initiative, Driggs, ID 83422 Rocky Mountain Elk Fdtn, Missoula, MT 59808 Headwaters Economics, Bozeman, MT 59715 Vital Ground Foundation, Missoula, MT 59804 Bitter Root Land Trust, Hamilton, MT 59840 The Nature Conservancy in Montana, Helena, MT The Conservation Fund, Sun Valley, ID 83353 59624; Missoula, MT 59801 Five Valleys Land Trust, Missoula, MT 59801 The Nature Conservancy in Idaho, Hailey, ID 83333; Gallatin Valley Land Trust, Bozeman, MT 59771 Coeur d Alene, ID 83816 Lemhi Regional Land Trust, Salmon, ID 83467 Central Idaho Rangeland Network, Salmon, ID 83467 Salmon Valley Stewardship, Salmon, ID 83467 Wildlife Conservation Society, Bozeman, MT 59715 Prickly Pear Land Trust, Helena, MT 59624 Greater Yellowstone Coalition, Bozeman, MT 59715 Teton Regional Land Trust, Driggs, ID 83422 Trout Unlimited, Hailey, ID 83333; Bozeman MT 59715 The Trust for Public Land, Bozeman, MT 59715 Wolverine Institute, Ennis, MT 59729 Wood River Land Trust, Hailey, ID 83333 Federal and State Partners: U.S. Forest Service, Region 4 Lands, Ogden, UT 84401; Caribou-Targhee NF, Idaho Falls, ID 83401; Salmon- Challis National Forest, Salmon, ID 83467 U.S. Forest Service, Region 1, Lands, Missoula, MT 59807; Beaverhead-Deer Lodge National Forest, Dillon, MT 59725; Gallatin National Forest, Bozeman, MT 59771 Bureau of Land Management, Idaho Falls, ID; Dillon, MT; Salmon, ID; Challis, ID U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Montana Acquisition Office, Great Falls, MT 59404; Red Rock Lakes National Wildlife Refuge, Lima, MT; National Wildlife Refuge System, Portland, OR 97232 National Park Service, Yellowstone National Park, Mammoth, WY; Craters of the Moon National Monument, Arco, ID 83213; Big Hole National Battlefield, Wisdom, MT 59761 Natural Resources Conservation Service, ID and MT Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, ID 83712; Idaho Falls, ID 83401; Salmon, ID 83467 Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, MT 59620; Bozeman, MT 59718 Project Summary: The Heart of the Rockies Initiative (HOTR), on behalf of its High Divide Collaborative partners, seeks support to identify and evaluate future landscape configurations that address the needs of local communities while conserving the High Divide s unique landscape resources. In this landscape we emphasize wildlife connectivity between large protected core areas: Yellowstone, the Crown, and central Idaho (See attached map). This project builds on our prior GNLCC-funded project to 1

deliver the latest science in connectivity and climate response and earlier stakeholder identification of lands of high conservation value (HOTR 2010). This project takes the next step by coupling socioeconomic data and trends with conservation modeling in a holistic landscape conservation design process. Project Category: C Applying Science to Management NEED When asked what conservation success looks like, a group of ranchers at the recent (February 2015) High Divide Collaborative Meeting unanimously responded, conservation success is: sustainable working lands; viable, vibrant local communities; and healthy ecosystems across the landscape. One of the biggest challenges for conservation in the High Divide is reconciling the economic needs of the local communities with conservation of wildlife habitats, river corridors, and linkage areas that depend upon both the productive lower elevation private lands and the vast public lands. Different stakeholders have different perspectives and goals for the landscape. Coalescing growth and conservation values in the High Divide will allow for long-term successful coexistence of humans, wildlife, and natural communities under land-use and climate change. We need to evaluate future scenarios to inform on-the-ground decision making, and understand the outcomes management and conservation actions would have on the long-term stability of the system; we need a Landscape Conservation Design. Conservation Design is one of the elements of the US Fish and Wildlife Service Strategic Habitat Conservation Plan (USFWS 2006) where the goal is to assess the ability of landscapes to support populations, and determine the best strategies for attaining desired conservation outcomes. We propose to create future landscape configurations based on stakeholder (e.g. local communities, conservation organizations, agencies) input and evaluate their long-term stability. This evaluation will identify the effects of potential on-the-ground conservation actions on the overall health of the landscape and the projected resilience of local communities. This will allow us to help stakeholders identify which future landscape configuration is more desirable and where conservation actions should be prioritized. At this point conservation practitioners have a limited vision of what long-term conservation success looks like on the ground. We need assessment of probable long-term outcomes for different on-theground actions (e.g county growth policies). Understanding how current decisions affect the viability and long-term stability of the landscape and the communities within it will allow land managers, policy makers, and local communities to evaluate the necessary trade-offs to attain desired future conditions, sustain ecosystem function, and achieve stakeholder goals. We propose to assess current and anticipated future conditions in the High Divide to provide stakeholders with information on the stability of future scenarios and which type of scenario provides a long-term stable state (including development, conserved land, wildlife population conditions, human population growth) in the High Divide. What is the need within the Great Northern landscape? One of the goals of the GNLCC Strategic Conservation Framework is to conserve and sustain a permeable landscape with connectivity across aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Privately owned lands in the High Divide play a key role in maintaining connectivity between the large public land blocks in the region. Many public lands are also vital to local community goals and landscape integrity. However, it is not known how much conservation and restoration action is needed in this landscape to avoid the collapse of wildlife populations and maintain genetic connectivity in the face of climate change. We propose to model current and future landscape conditions to evaluate landscape stability under different future scenarios. Understanding the feasibility of different future conditions across the landscape and their long-term stability will help land managers and conservation practitioners understand the pace and scope of conservation action needed to achieve a healthy and thriving landscape. This will also allow local communities to understand what growth policies provide long-term resilience to them and the landscape in general. 2

What landscape-level issue is this work related to and how? Why is it important? This project seeks to identify levels of development and human footprint on the High Divide that would maintain a long-term functional landscape that supports local communities and their economy while maintaining permeability for species connectivity between large intact blocks across private lands. The High Divide region provides nationally significant habitat connectivity and landscape integrity. This project will develop models of current conditions (biological and socioeconomic) and model the longterm stability of the landscape. Additionally, this project will model future conditions (biological and socioeconomic) taking into account stakeholder input to assess the viability and stability of those conditions. Based on the stability of the conditions this project will suggest which stressors are most significant to determining future outcomes and which scenarios provide long-term landscape stability and resilience. These scenarios will inform on-the-ground conservation practitioners, land managers, and local communities on desirable futures. These scenarios can catalyze the conversation among stakeholders on how to achieve those desirable futures as well as provide a common goal for all involved. This approach maximizes stakeholder buy-in by integrating important community related values and will be valuable not only for the High Divide, but could then be scaled up or transferred to other regions within the GNLCC. What science products will be provided, problem addressed, or what information or other needs will your project provide? What is the science product or direct management application? This project will produce broad and fine-scale models of current and future conditions taking into account different stakeholder visions for this landscape. Products will include: Predict future changes in water, vegetation, and human development based upon projecting current trends and climate change predictions. Vegetation type distribution models will help us predict response (e.g. Beltan et al. 2014). Develop alternative future development scenarios based on statistical analyses of trends and desired community outcomes. Identify fine-sale conservation priorities based on present and predicted landscape conditions. These models will inform and direct conservation decision making toward long-term community and ecological sustainability. This information can be applied to identify management, restoration, and protection strategies that can be implemented to address the identified resource concerns and obtain the desired future conditions. Is the need identified in other conservation, management, or other plans? The US Fish & Wildlife Service Strategic Habitat Conservation Plan identified gaps in knowledge, and information generation to address those gaps as a critical part of their Strategic Habitat Conservation process. The information generated by addressing the knowledge gap can then be used to inform and refine decision-making. In this proposal we have identified a knowledge gap (lack of understanding of the viability of future conditions in the High Divide) and we plan to produce knowledge that can inform and refine decision-making at the landscape scale to achieve a desirable future with vibrant communities in a healthy landscape. OBJECTIVE What will you accomplish? The goal of this project is to address a lack of knowledge about the sustainability of future landscape conditions created by current policy and conservation decisions. By addressing this knowledge gap we expect to provide an understanding of the cumulative effects of different stressors and decisions and influence decision-making and conservation action. Define how this project will support LCC objectives and functions: The High Divide partners intend to benefit from developing future landscape scenarios to inform conservation and restoration actions in the region. The task at hand is to provide information to stakeholders to guide decision-making and on-the-ground conservation. The High Divide is important both as a stand-alone landscape for fish and wildlife and a vital and vast linkage area of importance to 3

function of the entire Great Northern landscape. HOTR will track the effectiveness of this project by monitoring the conservation actions that result and through ongoing engagement of the High Divide Collaborative to refine and adapt conservation decisions to achieve desirable futures. METHODS HOTR will create a spatial assessment of current conditions (biological and socioeconomic) and evaluate the stability of the system. Furthermore, HOTR in collaboration with partners and stakeholders will create future scenarios and evaluate the stability of these to suggest desirable futures with vibrant local communities and a healthy landscape. In this first year, we expect to evaluate scenarios for at least three focal areas within the mapped area. 1. Spatial assessment of current and future conditions a. Biological Conditions (with Holocene Wildlife Services, Wolverine Institute) i. Target groups 1. Intact landscape blocks (public and private) a. Based on Human Modification Index (HMI) (Theobald, 2013) b. Three connectivity scenarios for each time period: i. Montane/Alpine to Montane/Alpine ii. Grassland/Shrub-steppe to Grassland/Shrub-steppe iii. Montane/Alpine to Grassland/Shrub-steppe 2. Focal species (Sage Grouse, Wolverine, Mule Deer, headwaters salmonids) 3. Ecosystem process: i. Natural wildfire and fire mitigation ii. Invasive weeds ii. Map broad-scale core habitat and connectivity needed for species survival and movement (use existing models if possible) iii. Generate fine-scale models of movement pathways and habitat cores within broad-scale linkages based on stressor landscapes. iv. Deliver these products through our existing Conservation Atlas housed on databasin.org b. Socioeconomic Conditions (with Headwaters Economics) i. Current Population levels and trends ii. Population footprint on the landscape. iii. What are the impacts of current population on natural resources (land development [urbanization and energy], and human infrastructure). iv. Current economic conditions and trends of the overall population v. Intersection of current economy and population well-being and natural resources and conservation 2. Desired future conditions (this will be constructed with stakeholder input, e.g. county growth policies, partner workshops) a. Wildlife and human population desired conditions/levels i. Likely human population/land use trends (would inform scenarios tested) ii. Wildlife targets (Sage Grouse, Wolverine, Antelope, Mule Deer) b. Future conditions under different scenarios (climate, stressors influenced by human population) i. Scenario current conditions (baseline inventory and conservation priorities) ii. Scenario X% residential development of existing parcels (no new subdivision) iii. Scenario X% conversion of ranchland to residential (new subdivision scenarios) iv. Scenario Change in land cover and surface water due to climate change 4

Landscape resilience to stressors will be evaluated using Monte Carlo simulations. For each stressor, a probability layer will define areas where a given land use/land cover (stressor) change could potentially occur and, where applicable, estimate the probability the change will occur at a given pixel relative to other potential pixels. Multiple computer trials will simulate a given scenario. Scenarios will be based on likely (following current projections) or desired (based on stated community objectives) outcomes. Each trial will measure changes in measures of landscape integrity (e.g. number of linkage pathways, landscape resistance, total core habitat area) compared with a benchmark of current conditions. Mean and variability of change in measures of landscape integrity indicate landscape resilience. Highly resilient landscape will exhibit little or no negative mean change in landscape integrity with low variance while vulnerable landscapes will show an average loss of landscape integrity or have high variability; the latter indicating that outcomes are sensitive to the actual spatial pattern of stressors. Simulations will be run for individual stressors to determine which stressors are likely to be most detrimental to landscape integrity, or in combination to test resilience to cumulative effects. Stakeholder Involvement Stakeholder engagement is vitally important to this project for learning from one another and for community ownership of results. The High Divide Collaborative has established itself as a credible platform for a broad group of stakeholders and is the venue for project engagement. We have formed subcommittees to address landscape scale sage grouse conservation, forest restoration and fire, aquatic resource management, and connectivity for wildlife. Early in the process we will conduct stakeholder workshops to present spatial assessment of current conditions and identify desired future conditions. We will present spatial results and refine analyses through stakeholder engagement in a follow-up workshop in the final months of the project. DELIVERABLES This project will develop future landscape scenarios for use by on-the-ground conservation practitioners, decision-makers, and local communities. The primary deliverables will be GIS data layers of desirable future scenarios and stressor levels acceptable to achieve a resilient landscape under land use and climate change. These layers will be made available to our partners through our existing Conservation Atlas housed on databasin.org. HOTR will provide a final narrative report on the modeling results a year from the initial award date. STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE HOTR Coordinator Michael Whitfield, and the PI(s) Bray J. Beltrán Brent Brock, and Ray Rasker have read the Great Northern Landscape Conservation Cooperative Information Management, Delivery, and Sharing Standards and agree to comply with those standards if the proposal is selected. Michael Whitfield will direct HOTR employees and/or contractors that are involved in this project to meet these standards. SCHEDULE The project will begin August 2015 and be this Phase I will be completed August 2016. Projected Workflow A S O N D J F M A M J J A Identify landscape stressors and species data Spatial assessment of current conditions * Workshops with stakeholders Spatial assessment of future conditions Refine scenarios based on feedback Final Report to GNLCC 5

ATTACHEMENTS Key activities/tasks Target date Milestone Comments Identify landscape stressors and August 31, 2015 species data Spatial assessment of current conditions November 1, 2015 Current condition assessment Collaboration with Headwater Stakeholder workshops to identify desired conditions and develop future scenarios Spatial assessment of future conditions Workshop with stakeholders to present spatial assessment of future conditions November 2015 through February, 2016 April 1, 2016 May 1, 2016 completed. Inform and engage stakeholders Complete Spatial Analysis Present desirable futures results Economics Iterative process informed by stakeholders. Stakeholder review Final Narrative report to GNLCC August 1, 2016 Final Report Project completion Citations Beltrán, B.J., J. Franklin, A.D. Syphard, H.M. Regan, L.E. Flint, and A.L. Flint. Effects of Climate Change and Urban Development on the Distribution and Conservation of Vegetation in a Mediterranean Type Ecosystem. International Journal of Geographic Information Science 28 (8): 1561 1589. Heart of the Rockies Initiative. 2010. Connecting the Landscape: A Proposal for Collaborative Conservation in the High Divide Region of Montana and Idaho. 85 pp. plus Appendices Theobald, David M. 2013. A general model to quantify ecological integrity for landscape assessments and US application. Landscape Ecol (2013) 28:1859 1874. USFWS. 2006. Strategic Habitat Conservation. Final Report of the National Ecological Assessment Team. 48pp. 6

7