Abstract

ContextThe North American Waterfowl Management Plan and the Upper Mississippi River/Great Lakes Joint Venture waterfowl habitat conservation strategy provide continental and regional guidance, respectively, for waterfowl habitat conservation planning. They were not designed to guide watershed- scale waterfowl habitat delivery.ObjectiveOur goal was to develop a waterfowl habitat decision support framework for the state of Wisconsin using biological and social criteria to guide state and local-scale practitioners with an explicit link to larger scale objectives.MethodsWe engaged a core group of wetland and waterfowl experts to decide upon decision support layers relevant to biological and social objectives, evaluate variables, establish weights, and review model outputs for reasonableness and accuracy. We used spatial analyst tools, kernel density estimators, and weighted sums to create spatially explicit models to identify landscapes and watersheds important for waterfowl. We identified habitat resources that exist currently (Conservation Capital) and considered potential resources (Conservation Opportunities) which could enhance wetland restoration efforts.ResultsWe developed a transparent framework to identify and prioritize landscapes for conserving waterfowl habitat at the Hydrologic Unit Code 12 watershed scale in Wisconsin, by maintaining continental and regional priorities, and including local landscape characteristics, biological criteria, and researcher, manager, and biologist expertise.ConclusionsLocal detail is critical for implementing waterfowl habitat delivery and making efficient use of limited funds for conservation but can be more abstract in larger regional or continental conservation planning. Our models are science-based, transparent, defensible, and can be modified as social, political, biological, and environmental forces change.

Highlights

  • Understanding species distributions in landscapes requires knowledge on ecogeographical preferences (Jones 2011; Noon et al 2012), timing of seasonal biological life-history events and how these factors interact at various spatial scales (Johnson 1980; Mayor et al 2009)

  • Local detail is critical for implementing waterfowl habitat delivery and making efficient use of limited funds for conservation but can be more abstract in larger regional or continental conservation planning

  • During the subsequent planning phase, we identified a desire to align with goals identified in the recently completed 2017 Joint Ventures (JVs) regional waterfowl habitat conservation strategy (Soulliere et al 2017) and 2018 NAWMP (NAWMP 2018)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Understanding species distributions in landscapes requires knowledge on ecogeographical preferences (Jones 2011; Noon et al 2012), timing of seasonal biological life-history events and how these factors interact at various spatial scales (Johnson 1980; Mayor et al 2009). G. Kidd U.S Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 8030 Excelsior Drive, Madison, WI 53717, USA. Miller The Nature Conservancy in Wisconsin, 633 West Main Street, Madison, WI 53703, USA. K. Waterstradt U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, Wisconsin Private Lands Office, W10040 Cascade Mountain Rd, Portage WI 53901 USA

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call