Applying Biodiversity Metrics within An Ecosystem Services framework to a habitat conservation plan: a Case Study in Partner Engagement Kenneth G. Boykin 1, William G. Kepner 2, Alexa J. McKerrow 3, and Anne C. Neale 4
1 Center for Applied Spatial Ecology, Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Ecology, New Mexico Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM 2 Retired - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Las Vegas, NV 3 U.S.G.S Core USGS Core Science Analytics, Synthesis & Library, Raleigh, NC 4 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC
In Cooperation with: Lori Lamson 5 and Heidi Brannon 6 5 Town of Apple Valley, CA 6 Solutions Strategies, Culver City, CA
ACES 2018
December 3-7, 2018 Washington DC Ecosystem Services
• The benefits humans derive from ecosystems (MEA 2005)
• Provisioning services such as food, water, timber, habitat, and fiber • Regulating services that affect climate, floods, disease, wastes, and water quality • Cultural services that provide recreational, aesthetic, and spiritual benefits • Supporting services such as soil formation, photosynthesis, and nutrient cycling BIODIVERSITY-
The variability among living organisms from all sources, including terrestrial*, marine, and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems.
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 1993; Article 2 - Use of Terms.
* For the purposes of this project we are dealing with Terrestrial Vertebrate Biodiversity Benefit of Wildlife
Hohensee et al. 2017. For What It’s Worth: Appreciating the Economic Value of Wildlife. The Wildlife Professional January/February 2017: 40-43. EnviroAtlas
An online tool giving users the ability to view, analyze, and download geospatial data and other resources; designed to inform decision-making, education, and research.
Serving data around a common theme:
• Geospatial indicators/indices of ecosystem goods and services • Supplemental data (e.g., boundaries, land cover, soils, hydrography, impaired water bodies, wetlands, demographics, built infrastructure, roads) • Analytic and interpretive tools • Ecosystem marketplace data www.epa.gov/enviroatlas (EPA/600/C-14/372) Biodiversity Clean Conservation Air
Climate Stabilization
Clean & Recreation, Plentiful Food, Culture, & Water Fuel, & Aesthetics Materials Natural Hazard Mitigation
EnviroAtlas data are organized into 7 ecosystem service benefit categories. EnviroAtlas www.epa.gov/enviroatlas
The EnviroAtlas is multi-scaled • National: Wall-to-wall coverage for conterminous U.S.; summarized by ~85,000 drainage basins (12-digit HUCs- approx. 40 mi2 or 105 km2 in size) • Over 300 data layers Our Conceptual Model for Incremental Approach to Multi-scale Analysis
Develop and produce quantifiable habitat metrics & maps based on ecosystem services and available data for place-based, regional, and national scales of interest.
Biodiversity Conservation, Recreation, & Food Resources Gap Analysis Products and Data Sources
Deductive Habitat Models/Terrestrial Vertebrates (1590 spp)
• Knowledge based/expert based • Wildlife Habitat Relationships • Habitat based • Top down - general to specific
Land Ownership/Stewardship
Terrestrial Vertebrate Habitat Models
Land Cover (583 classes) 556 Natural; 27 Land use Terrestrial Vertebrate Species Distribution Models
1590 Species • 621 Birds • 365 Mammals • 322 Reptiles • 282 Amphibians Bird Species Richness
Taxon Richness
Total Species Richness Total Harvestable Species Stakeholder Meetings Total Terrestrial Vertebrate Richness (A, C) Total Mammal Richness (A) National Biodiversity Total Reptile Richness (A) Total Amphibian Richness (A) Total Bird Richness (A, C) Metrics Winter Bird Richness (A, C) Summer Bird Richness (A, C)
Total Harvestable Species Richness (B, C) Total Big Game Species Richness (B, C) Total Small Game Species Richness (B, C) Furbearer Species Richness (B, C) Waterfowl Species Richness (B, C) A)Biodiversity Conservation Rarity Index; Total Terrestrial Vertebrates (A) Rarity Index; Total Mammals (A) Rarity Index; Total Reptiles (A) B) Food, Fiber, and Rarity Index; Total (A) Amphibians Materials Rarity Index; Total Birds (A)
T & E Terrestrial Vertebrate Richness (A, C) Global Rank Species Richness; G1, G2, and G3 (A) C) Recreation, Culture, & IUCN Threatened Terrestrial Vertebrate Species Richness (A)
Aesthetics Audubon Climate-endangered Bird Species Richness (A) Audubon Climate-threatened Bird Species Richness (A) Partners in Flight Watch List Species Richness (A, C) Birds of Conservation Concern Species Richness; State of the Birds 2016 (A, C) Common Birds in Steep Decline (A, C) Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation (PARC) Species Richness (A) Apple Valley Multispecies Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Conservation Plan (MSHCP/NCCP) Case Study
• Town of Apple Valley and San Bernardino County (CA) • Address impacts to natural communities and federal and state listed species from local development over next 30-years. • Developed with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). • Plan is under review by the Permitting Agencies (USFWS and CDFW). Study Area
Mojave Desert Nevada
Utah California
Arizona Apple Valley Plan Area: 222,367 acres
• Private, Town of Apple Valley: 47,349 acres • Private, County of San Bernardino: 78,728 acres • Federal: 86,406 acres • State: 7,881 acres • Utilities and Other Special Districts: 1,992 acres MSHCP Plan Purpose • Protect natural resources while allowing economic growth of Town and County. • Allow for the orderly build out of the Town and County General Plans. • Establish a landscape-scale conservation approach vs a project-by-project mitigation. • Minimize and mitigate for impacts to sensitive species and natural communities. • One-stop for project approval and receipt of environmental permits at local level. • Protect quality of life and environmental and scenic values for future generations. Proposed Covered Species
Covered Species Common Name Scientific Name State Status Federal Status • June 5, 2018 Birds SSC Burrowing owl Athene cunicularia BLM Sensitive FGC Sec. 3503.5 Protected under BEGEP Fully Protected Golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos Act and MBTA Watch List BLM Sensitive Least Bell’s vireo Vireo bellii pusillus Endangered Endangered Southwestern willow flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus Endangered Endangered Threatened Western yellow-billed cuckoo Coccyzus americanus occidentalis Endangered BLM Sensitive Mammals Bighorn sheep Ovis canadensis Fully Protected BLM Sensitive Protected Furbearing Desert kit fox Vulpes macrotis arsipus Mammal Reptiles Agassiz’s desert tortoise Gopherus agassizii Threatened Threatened Plants Joshua tree Yucca brevifolia Under Status Review Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act Migratory Bird Treaty Act Landscape-Level Linkages • Plan’s proposed conservation strategy is based on establishment of landscape level linkages. • Landscape-level linkages • Large open space areas that contain natural habitat and provide a connection between at least 2 larger adjacent open spaces or habitat areas. • Plan has identified 3 important landscape-level linkages. • 2 “Desert Linkages” - connect the plan area • San Bernardino National Forest to the south • 3 designated critical habitat units for desert tortoise (east and west). • The Mojave River Corridor • Important riparian area in the arid environment • includes designated critical habitat for southwest willow flycatcher. Landscape-Level Linkages • The Plan proposes to conserve and manage the lands within these linkages since most of the Plan’s proposed covered species do not have core populations within the Plan Area. • The Plan’s ”Linkage Design” will help connect 6.5 million acres of federal lands designated for conservation Application of Biodiversity Index to MSHCP/NCCP Total Amphibians
Plan Area
Desert Linkages Birds Mammals
Mojave River Corridor Reptiles
Metric Name Cat Hectares MEAN MAX Plan: Mojave NIB Mojave Total Plan 90004 94.0 175 0.96 0.46 Linkage Corridor 560 109.7 173 1.12 0.54 Linkages 44101 91.2 175 0.93 0.45
Mojave 12773240 97.9 204 1.00 0.48
Desert Tortoise Not Habitat 4336331 80.0 200 0.82 0.39 Habitat 8436915 107.0 204 1.09 0.52
Desert Kit Fox Not Habitat 3552573 69.2 204 0.71 0.34 Habitat 9220673 108.9 187 1.11 0.53 Mojave Desert Amphibians Total Species Birds
Reptiles Mammals Plan Area Mojave River CorridorTotal Desert Linkages Mojave Desert 0.7
0.6 Total 0.5
0.4
0.3
Reptile 0.2 Amphibian
0.1
0
Mammal Bird Normalized Index of Biodiversity Average of each metric pixel value in the Apple Valley/highest mapped pixel value in the Mojave Ecoregion Not Desert Tortoise Habitat Desert Tortoise Habitat
0.7 Not Desert Kit Fox Habitat Desert Kit Fox Habitat
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 Total Amphibian Bird Mammal Reptile
Normalized Index of Biodiversity Average of each metric pixel value in the Apple Valley/highest mapped pixel value in the Mojave Ecoregion Planning Conclusions
• The Normalized Index of Biodiversity allows comparisons between areas and between metrics (Boykin et al. 2013). • Total species richness was higher: • Mojave River Corridor • Desert Linkage areas • desert tortoise habitats • desert kit fox habitats • This pattern was observed with amphibians, birds, and reptiles, but not with mammals. Planning Conclusions • Supports Plan’s complete Linkage Design (Desert Linkages + Mojave River Corridor) • Equal to greater biodiversity richness than the Mojave Desert ecoregion • Supports the value of the Linkage Design for the Plan for: • covered species • common species • Analysis supports an additional impact assessment. Some general observations • Ecosystem Services paradigm useful organizing framework for characterizing and assessing biodiversity conservation; • Deductive modeling provides great utility for mapping and quantifying metrics of biodiversity conservation at multiple scales and within a reasonable timeframe; • Full Circle • First level effort to cluster species distribution models into functional groups (metrics) is complete at local and regional scales; • Moved to the national scale via EPA EnviroAtlas & USGS/GAP platforms. All national deductive habitat species models complete (1590 spp); • Now can work anywhere within the conterminous US; Some general observations • Provides baseline or reference conditions for alternative future scenarios (e.g. climate change, urbanization, trend analysis); • Establishes common sense indicators of Ecosystem Services for national, regional, and local end-user and decision-maker needs; • Flexible enough to add & test new metrics as they are identified; • Also potentially useful for global initiatives (IPBES, TEEB, GEO BON, DIVERSITAS, etc.); • Continued work in Apple Valley and Mojave Desert.
Contact Information Kenneth G. Boykin Center for Applied Spatial Ecology, New Mexico State University, New Mexico Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Las Cruces, NM [email protected] William G. Kepner (Retired) USEPA, Office of Research and Development Las Vegas, NV [email protected] Lori Lamson Assistant Town Manager Community and Development Services 14955 Dale Evans Parkway, www.epa.gov/enviroatlas Apple Valley, CA 92307 [email protected] http://case.nmsu.edu/case/es/ Heidi Brannon www.solutionstrategies.com [email protected]
Total Vertebrate Species Richness within the Apple Valley MSHCP
• The total terrestrial vertebrate species modeled for the project area is 329 • 196 birds • 75 mammals • 51 reptiles • 7 amphibians. Amphibian Species Richness within the Apple Valley MSHCP
• Highest amphibian species richness is along the perennial reaches of the Mojave River Corridor. Bird Species Richness within the Apple Valley MSHCP
• The highest bird species richness is along the Mojave River Corridor and near the summits of the Granite Mountains and Deadman Hills (west of Lucerne Valley). Mammal Species Richness within the Apple Valley MSHCP
• Highest mammal species richness is directly north and south of the Town of Apple Valley Reptile Species Richness within the Apple Valley MSHCP
• Highest reptile species richness is in the lowland areas directly north, east, and south of the Town of Apple Valley
Biodiversity is both a response variable affected by global change drivers and a factor modifying ecosystem processes and services and human well-being. Develop deductive habitat model for each species that historically reside, breed, or use habitat in the conterminous U.S. for a substantial portion of their life history (n = 1,590).
Range Delineation • Hydrologic Unit (12-digit)
Habitat Variables • Land Cover, Landsat-based • Elevation (min/max) • Slope/Aspect • Hydrology (Proximity) – Streams, lakes, springs • Patch Size
https://www.fws.gov/nevada/desert_tortoise/dtro/dtro_recovery_plan.html Desert tortoise habitat model within the Apple Valley MSHCP
• Desert tortoise habitat covers almost the entire lowland area of the project area except urban, agricultural areas and road conveyances • Comparison of species richness between desert tortoise habitat and non-habitat yielded higher richness with desert tortoise habitat. • Within the Mojave Ecoregion • desert tortoise habitat = 107 species/pixel • non-habitat = and 80 species/pixel Desert kit fox habitat model within the Apple Valley MSHCP
• Desert kit fox has similar coverage as desert tortoise, but different habitats throughout the project area. • Desert kit fox, total species richness average • desert kit fox habitat= 108.9 species/pixel • non-habitat= 69.2 species/pixel