Defining alternative futures and projecting their effects on the spatial distribution of wildlife habitats Export

@article{citeulike:1087725, abstract = {This study had two purposes: (1) to inform a public process that would propose land use zoning for the Chico Creek Watershed in Washington State, USA and (2) to develop and demonstrate the use of readily accessible analytical tools and data for similar public processes across Washington. Three development alternatives (Planned Trend, Moderate, and Conservation) were designed by local citizens and county planners. We created artificial landscapes that depicted how land use zoning and land management practices would effect the spatial distribution of vegetation types. Wildlife-habitat relationship models were constructed for nine focal species. Using computer software known as HABSCAPES, the spatial distributions of habitats were mapped for each species. Under all alternatives the amount of forest vegetation decreased but the amount of mature conifer forest increased relative to current conditions. The relative habitat area index was 0.75, 0.69, 0.71, and 0.71 for the current condition, Planned Trend, Moderate, and Conservation alternatives, respectively. For six species, all future alternatives resulted in less habitat than the current condition, but for three species, all future alternatives resulted in more habitat. When species status was used to weight outcomes, the moderate alternative provided slightly more conservation benefit than the conservation alternative. Lessons learned about public land use planning processes are discussed.}, author = {Wilhere, George F. and Linders, Mary J. and Cosentino, Brian L.}, citeulike-article-id = {1087725}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.05.001}, citeulike-linkout-1 = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V91-4K5SSW5-1/2/5d2dff13013c0588f5e7971bdffedd77}, day = {2}, doi = {10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.05.001}, journal = {Landscape and Urban Planning}, keywords = {landscape, planning, urban}, month = {March}, number = {3-4}, pages = {385--400}, posted-at = {2007-02-05 00:07:53}, priority = {2}, title = {Defining alternative futures and projecting their effects on the spatial distribution of wildlife habitats}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.05.001}, volume = {79}, year = {2007} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:1087725 L3 - citeulike-article-id:1087725 N2 - This study had two purposes: (1) to inform a public process that would propose land use zoning for the Chico Creek Watershed in Washington State, USA and (2) to develop and demonstrate the use of readily accessible analytical tools and data for similar public processes across Washington. Three development alternatives (Planned Trend, Moderate, and Conservation) were designed by local citizens and county planners. We created artificial landscapes that depicted how land use zoning and land management practices would effect the spatial distribution of vegetation types. Wildlife-habitat relationship models were constructed for nine focal species. Using computer software known as HABSCAPES, the spatial distributions of habitats were mapped for each species. Under all alternatives the amount of forest vegetation decreased but the amount of mature conifer forest increased relative to current conditions. The relative habitat area index was 0.75, 0.69, 0.71, and 0.71 for the current condition, Planned Trend, Moderate, and Conservation alternatives, respectively. For six species, all future alternatives resulted in less habitat than the current condition, but for three species, all future alternatives resulted in more habitat. When species status was used to weight outcomes, the moderate alternative provided slightly more conservation benefit than the conservation alternative. Lessons learned about public land use planning processes are discussed. IS - 3-4 JF - Landscape and Urban Planning EP - 400 TI - Defining alternative futures and projecting their effects on the spatial distribution of wildlife habitats VL - 79 SP - 385 KW - landscape KW - planning KW - urban AU - Wilhere, George AU - Linders, Mary AU - Cosentino, Brian PY - 2007/03/02/ UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.05.001 ER -