UCSB IBM ERP Related
Publications Abstracts
Selecting biodiversity
management areas
Frank W. Davis,
David M. Stoms, Richard L. Church, B. J. Okin, and K. Norman Johnson
Full
Chapter
Here we present
and evaluate a conservation strategy whose objective is to represent
all native plant communities in areas where the primary management
goal is to sustain native biodiversity. We refer to these areas
as Biodiversity Management Areas (BMAs), which we define as specially
designated public or private lands with an active ecosystem management
plan in operation whose purpose is to contribute to regional maintenance
of native genetic, species and community levels of biodiversity,
and the processes that maintain that biodiversity. Our purpose in
this chapter is to explore opportunities for siting BMAs in the
Sierra Nevada region. The strategic goal is to design a BMA system
that represents all major Sierran plant community types, which we
use as a coarse surrogate for ecosystems and their component species.
We consider a community type to be represented if some pre-defined
fraction of its mapped distribution occurs in one or more BMAs.
We use a multi-objective computer model to allocate a minimum of
new land to BMA status subject to the constraints that all community
types must be represented, and that the new BMA areas should be
located in areas of highest suitability for BMA status. Our purpose
in this exercise is not to identify the optimal sites for a Sierran
BMA system; instead it is to measure some of the likely dimensions
of plausible, alternative BMA systems for the Sierra Nevada and
to develop a rationale that would guide others in formulating such
a system. Thus we examine a wide range of possible BMA systems based
on different assumptions, constraints, target levels for representation,
and priorities.
If one ignores
current land ownership and management designations and sets out
to represent plant communities in a BMA system based on Calwater
planning watersheds (which average roughly 10,000 acres in size),
an efficient BMA system requires land in direct proportion to the
target level, at least over the range of target levels examined
in this study. In other words, it takes roughly 10% of the region
to meet a 10% goal, and 25% of the region to meet a 25% goal. The
pattern of selected watersheds is very different from the current
distribution of parks and wilderness areas, which are concentrated
at middle and high elevations in the central and southern portion
of the range.
Public lands
alone are insufficient to create a BMA system that adequately represents
all plant community types of the Sierra Nevada. Many of the foothill
community types occur almost exclusively on private lands. Terrestrial
vertebrates are reasonably well represented in a BMA system selected
for plant communities. A BMA system selected for vertebrates alone,
however, has little overlap with the one for plant communities.
Areas selected
by the BMAS model show only a modest amount of overlap with areas
selected by other SNEP working groups as focal areas for conserving
aquatic biodiversity or late successional/old growth forests. However,
the BMAS model can be formulated to favor these areas with little
loss of efficiency, especially in the northern Sierra.