Background Private land conservation is an essential strategy for biodiversity protection in the USA, where half of the federally listed species have at least 80% of their habitat on private lands. We investigated the alignment between private land protection conducted by the world's largest land trust (The Nature Conservancy) and the science driven identification of priority areas for conservation. This represents the first quantitative assessment of the influence of defining priority areas on the land acquisitions of a conservation non-governmental organization (NGO). Methodology/Principal Findings The lands acquired by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) were analyzed using GIS to determine to what extent they were in areas defined as priorities for conservation. The spatial analysis of TNC lands was broken up into land known to be acquired in the last five years, five to ten years ago, prior to ten years ago, and anytime during the last sixty years (including previous sets of data plus acquisitions lacking a date). For the entire history of TNC the proportion of TNC lands within the priority areas was 74%. Prior to 10 years ago it was 80%, 5–10 years ago it was 76%, and in the last five years it was 81%. Conservation easements were found to have lower alignment with priority areas (64%) than outright fee simple acquisitions (86%). Conclusions/Significance Overall the location of lands acquired was found to be well aligned with the priority areas. Since there was comparable alignment in lands acquired before and after formalized conservation planning had been implemented as a standard operating procedure, this analysis did not find evidence that defining priority areas has influenced land acquisition decisions.
References
[1]
United States Department of the Interior (2009) Our endangered species program and how it works for landowners. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USDI. Available: http://www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-librar？y/pdf/landowners.pdf.U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USDI. Accessed 2012 May 8.
[2]
Hayward MW (2011) Using the IUCN Red List to determine effective conservation strategies. Biodivers Conserv 20: 2563–73.
[3]
Short J, Smith A (1994) Mammal decline and recovery in Australia. J Mammal 75 (2) 288–297.
James A, Gaston KJ, Balmford A (2001) Can we afford to conserve biodiversity? Bioscience 51 (1) 43–52.
[6]
Carwardine J, Wilson KA, Watts M, Etter A, Klein CJ, et al. (2008) Avoiding costly conservation mistakes: the importance of defining actions and costs in spatial priority setting. PLoS ONE 3 (7) e2586 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002586.
[7]
Murdoch W, Polasky S, Wilson KA, Possingham H, Kareiva P, et al. (2007) Maximizing return on investment in conservation. Biol Conserv 139: 375–388.
[8]
Underwood EC, Klausmeyer KR, Morrison SA, Bode M, Shaw MR (2009) Evaluating conservation spending for species return: A retrospective analysis in California. Conserv Lett 2 (3) 130–137.
[9]
Halpern BS, Pyke CR, Fox HE, Haney JC, Schlaepfer MA, et al. (2006) Gaps and mismatches between global conservation priorities and spending. Conserv Biol 20 (1) 56–64.
[10]
Knight AT, Cowling RM, Rouget M, Balmford A, Lombard AT, et al. (2008) Knowing but not doing: selecting priority conservation areas and the research–implementation gap. Conserv Biol 22 (3) 610–617.
[11]
Bottrill M, Morena M, Pressey R, Game E, Groves C (2012) Evaluating perceived benefits of ecoregional assessments. Conserv Biol In press.
[12]
Prendergast JR, Quinn RM, Lawton JH (1999) The gaps between theory and practice in selecting nature reserves. Conserv Biol 13 (3) 484–492.
[13]
Grantham HS, Wilson KA, Moilanen A, Rebelo T, Possingham HP (2009) Delaying conservation actions for improved knowledge: how long should we wait? Ecol Lett 12 (4) 293–301.
[14]
Armsworth PR, Fishburn IS, Davies ZG, Gilbert J, Leaver N, et al. (2012) The size, concentration and growth of biodiversity-conservation nonprofits. Bio Science 62 (3) 271–281.
[15]
Davies ZG, Kareiva P, Armsworth PR (2010) Temporal patterns in the size of conservation land transactions. Conserv Lett 3 (1) 29–37.
[16]
The Nature Conservancy (1997) Designing a geography of hope: Guidelines for ecoregion-based conservation in The Nature Conservancy. Arlington: The Nature Conservancy. 84 p.
[17]
Soulé ME, Terborgh J (1999) Conserving nature at regional and continental scales: A scientific program for North America. Bio Science 49 (10) 809–817.
[18]
Haila Y, Margules CR (1996) Survey research in conservation biology. Ecography 19: 323–331.
[19]
Pressey RL, Possingham HP, Day JR (1997) Effectiveness of alternative heuristic algorithms for identifying indicative minimum requirements for conservation reserves. Biol Conserv 80: 207–219.
[20]
Possingham H, Ball I, Andelman S (2000) Mathematical methods for identifying representative reserve networks. In: Ferson S, Burgman M, editors. Quantitative methods for conservation biology. New York: Springer-Verlag. pp. 291–305.
[21]
van Jaarsveld AS, Freitag S, Chown SL, Muller C, Koch S, et al. (1998) Biodiversity assessment and conservation strategies. Science 279: 2106–2108.
[22]
Williams PH, Araujo MB (2000) Using probability of persistence to identify important areas for biodiversity conservation. Proc R Soc London B 267: 1959–1966.
[23]
Cowling RM, Pressey RL, Sims-Castley R, le Roux A, Baard E, et al. (2003) The expert or the algorithm?—comparison of priority conservation areas in the Cape Floristic Region identified by park managers and reserve selection software. Biol Cons 112 (1–2) 147–167.
[24]
Groves CR, Valutis L, Vosick D, Neely B, Wheaton K, et al.. (2000) Designing a Geography of Hope: a Practitioner's Handbook for Ecoregional Conservation Planning (Volume 1, Second Edition). Available: http://conserveonline.org/docs/2000/11/G？OH2-v1.pdf. Accessed 2012 Feb 2.
[25]
Groves CR, Beck MW, Higgins JV, Saxon EC (2003) Drafting a conservation blueprint: A practitioner's guide to planning for biodiversity. Washington (DC): Island Press. 457 p.
[26]
Dinerstein E, Powell G, Olson D, Wikramanayake E, Abell R, et al.. (2000) A workbook for conducting biological assessments and developing biodiversity visions for ecoregion-based conservation. Part 1: Terrestrial Ecoregions. Available: http://conserveonline.org/coldocs/2003/1？0/13wkbk.pdf. Accessed 2012 Feb 2.
[27]
Abell R, Thieme M, Dinerstein E, Olson D (2002) A sourcebook for conducting biological assessments and developing biodiversity visions for ecoregion conservation. Volume 2: Freshwater Ecoregions. Available: http://conserveonline.org/coldocs/2004/0？4/FWsourcebook.pdf. Accessed 2012 Feb 2.
[28]
The Nature Conservancy and World Wildlife Fund (2006) Standards for Ecoregional Assessments and Biodiversity Visions. Available: http://conserveonline.org/docs/2006/02/E？A%20Standards%201-26-06.pdf. Accessed 2012 Feb 2.
[29]
The Conservation Measures Partnership (2004) Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. Version 1.0. Available: http://www.forest-trends.org/documents/f？iles/doc_632.pdf. Accessed 2012 Aug 17.
[30]
The Conservation Measures Partnership (2007) Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation. Version 2.0. Available: http://www.conservationmeasures.org/wp-c？ontent/uploads/2010/04/CMP_Open_Standard？s_Version_2.0.pdf. Accessed 2012 Aug 17.
[31]
Fishburn IS, Kareiva P, Gaston KJ, Armsworth PR (2009) The growth of easements as a conservation tool. PLoS One 4 (3) e4996 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0004996.
[32]
Fishburn IS, Kareiva P, Gaston KJ, Evans KL, Armsworth PR (2009) State-level variation in conservation investment by a major nongovernmental organization. Conserv Lett 2 (2) 74–81.
[33]
Floberg J, Goering M, Wilhere G, MacDonald C, Chappell C, et al.. (2004) Willamette Valley-Puget Trough-Georgia Basin Ecoregional Assessment, Volume One: Report. Available: http://east.tnc.org/east-file/2/WPG_Ecor？egional_Assessment.pdf. Accessed 2012 May 9.
[34]
Knight AT, Grantham HS, Smith RJ, McGregor GK, Possingham HP, et al. (2011) Land managers' willingness-to-sell defines conservation opportunity for protected area expansion. Biol Cons 144 (11) 2623–2630.
