Download file - Conservation Gateway

Conservation Targets
the building blocks
Key points to introduce this step
• Importance of step
• SCALE – spatial? biological? Where do
you actions need to “land?”
• Coarse-filter (nested targets) and fine-filter
approach
• Iterative nature
• Project boundary based on targets
• Linkage with Ecoregional Assessment
Critical questions to ask team
• Do they have the common ecological systems?
• Do the species targets warrant target status or are they
indicators of system health?
• Do you see any targets that are not of critical
importance?
• To lump or to split, that is the question.
“To lump or to split? That is the question”
• If you save the system, do you save the species?
• Do the different species co-occur in the same
locale?
• Do they require similar processes?
• Are they likely being affected by similar threats?
• Species of the same general “type” but with very
different habitat requirement and/or threats should
not be “lumped” (e.g. wading birds and song birds)
Common Issues &
Recommendations
Very large project area... or more than 8 targets
– Try defining the large project using just the major system types
– Consider doing a separate process for finer scale components (e.g.
rare species)
– Consider breaking the area into logical units and go through the
process quickly for each of these (e.g. plan for each of the large
tributaries of a major river system) and then look for shared threats
where an over-arching strategy could benefit the system)
– Identify a wide ranging species or species guild that might provide
for some contiguity across the vast area and/or may use a broad
range of habitats across the area (e.g. bear species that travels river
corridors, feeds in multiple habitats in different seasons, dens in
upland hardwoods)
Common Issues &
Recommendations
(Continued…..)
• What about non-biological targets like groundwater, open
space, rural lifestyle, archeological sites, etc.?
– Basic logic of the process works for anything that the group values
…..natural or cultural “target”
– Up to the team whether to include a diversity of types of targets… but
very important that everyone is clear on the plan’s purpose
• Does process work for socio-economic targets as well (e.g.
“profitable family ranches”)?
– Critically important to add a shared vision statement to help unify
process
– May need a final step to resolve conflicting strategies between
biodiversity targets and other types of targets if these emerge
Common Issues &
Recommendations
(Continued…..)
Team wants to include a wide-ranging species as a target
in their project area when the area is only part of its range
– If the project has an important nesting beach, feeding grounds,
staging area, etc for this species... Ok, recognizing that the “target”
is not going to be “protected” at your site but you are planning for
your project being able to service this one aspect of the target’s life
cycle OR
– Consider a larger effort with other teams where the wide ranging
species needs can be met if you work together. In this case the
“targets” may become critical areas for each stage in the life cycle
(e.g. wintering grounds, migration path, nesting grounds)
Helpful Hints...
• Map your target occurrences! Even a “cartoon” map adds
value.
• Enter a target twice as two distinct occurrences if viability,
land use history and threats are dramatically different
– e.g. Longleaf pine (public lands) & Longleaf pine
(private lands)
• Probe “Corridors” as targets – need to understand--corridor
for what? The answer to this will greatly influence size,
shape, location, threats, etc.