@article {780,
	title = {Economic Instruments for Habitat Conservation},
	year = {2002},
	month = {2002},
	institution = {University of California, Santa Barbara},
	address = {Santa Barbara},
	url = {http://www.biogeog.ucsb.edu/projects/wb/wbrpt2002.pdf},
	author = {Stoms, D. M. and Davis, F. W. and Church, R. L. and Gerrard, R. A.}
}
@booklet {536,
	title = {Economic Instruments for Habitat Conservation},
	year = {2002},
	month = {June 14, 2002},
	publisher = {University of California, Santa Barbara},
	type = {Final Report to the World Bank},
	author = {Stoms, D. M. and Davis, F. W. and Church, R. L. and Gerrard, R. A.}
}
@article {528,
	title = {A systematic process for selecting representative Research Natural Areas},
	journal = {Natural Areas Journal},
	volume = {18},
	number = {4},
	year = {1998},
	pages = {338-349},
	abstract = {<p>Prioritizing sites as potential Research Natural Areas to represent a set of target vegetation types is a complex planning problem in which competing objectives must be satisfied simultaneously, including suitability and efficiency. We describe a general process for identifying and siting potential Research Natural Areas that is based on a systematic description of vegetation and environmental variation in the region, analysis of patterns of vegetation ownership and management, and optimal site selection based both on vegetational and environmental criteria. The approach is demonstrated with an application to siting Research Natural Areas to represent Mixed Evergreen Forest types on Los Padres National Forest in the central coast of California. We envision this process as a preliminary step that would precede more detailed ground survey and administrative review procedures as currently practiced. It could also be adapted to similar programs of regional conservation planning.</p>
},
	keywords = {reserve selection algorithm weighted-benefits maximal covering location problem Los Padres National Forest research natural areas},
	url = {http://fiesta.bren.ucsb.edu/~fd/Pubs/stoms_et_al_RNA98.pdf},
	author = {Stoms, D. M. and Borchert, M. I. and Moritz, M. A. and Davis, F. W. and Church, R. L.}
}
@article {420,
	title = {Selecting conservation reserves using species covering models: Adapting the ARC/INFO GIS},
	journal = {Transactions in GIS},
	volume = {2},
	number = {1},
	year = {1997},
	pages = {45-60},
	abstract = {Conflicts between human development of the landscape and conservation of biodiversity will continue to grow. Given this reality, there have been a number of attempts to model the optimal selection of conservation reserve sites such that maximum biodiversity protection can be attained within a limited budget for land acquisition. Here we adapt the Location-Allocation module of ARC/INFO to solve the problem of representing, or covering, as many species as possible in a fixed number of selected reserve sites. Resident ARC/INFO solution routines are applied to an innovative logical network that converts the problem of optimal reserve selection into a problem of optimal facility placement, which the Location-Allocation module can recognize and solve. Use of this unique logical network structure as input to ARC/INFO{\textquoteright}s internal solvers makes possible, compared to previous methods, a much tighter integration of spatial optimization tools with mapping and database tools, all of which are internal to the GIS and accessed via a menu-driven interface. The main advantage is that users of public domain data (such as the U.S. Gap Analysis data) can conduct their own explorations of possible reserve systems without having to acquire and master optimization packages and reformat model output data for GIS display and post-analysis of solutions. Our sample application uses species data from southwestern California. We also present a second major form of species covering model grounded in the same logical network. This enhanced model accommodates weighting of species by their conservation importance, thus allowing reserve systems to be designed around the portection of the most threatened or vulnerable biota.},
	author = {Gerrard, R. A. and Church, R. L. and Stoms, D. M. and Davis, F. W.}
}
@booklet {398,
	title = {A Spatial Modeling and Decision Support System for Conservation of Biological Diversity},
	year = {1997},
	month = {September 30, 19},
	publisher = {University of California, Santa Barbara},
	type = {Final Report to IBM Environmental Research Program},
	author = {Davis, F. W. and Stoms, D. M. and Hollander, A. D. and Bueno, M. J. and Church, R. L. and Okin, W. J. and Gerrard, R. A.}
}
@conference {609,
	title = {Planning management activities to protect biodiversity with GIS and an integrated optimization model},
	booktitle = {Third International Conference/Workshop on Integrating GIS and Environmental Modeling},
	year = {1996},
	month = {1996},
	publisher = {National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis},
	organization = {National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis},
	address = {Santa Fe, New Mexico},
	abstract = {We present the details of a general spatial model that was developed for the selection of biodiversity management areas in the Sierra Nevada Region. This model is loosely integrated with a GIS system. The basic modeling approach begins by first identifying those plant communities that are vulnerable due to land use activities in current management plans. The level of vulnerability is assessed for each element of interest on a spatial basis using ARC/INFO. The planning problem involves selecting an efficient set of watersheds for biodiversity management through specially developed heuristics and the Optimization Subroutine Library of IBM. Results of this approach are given for the northern region of the Sierra Nevada of California. The BMAS model represents a significant advance in GIS-based conservation planning, both in sophistication of the algorithms used and in the integration of cultural and land use data with biological data.},
	keywords = {BMAS model, Sierra Nevada, GIS model integration},
	url = {http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/conf/SANTA_FE_CD-ROM/sf_papers/church_richard/my_paper.html},
	author = {Church, R. L. and Stoms, D. M. and Davis, F. W. and Okin, B. J.}
}
@article {348,
	title = {Reserve selection as a maximal covering location problem},
	journal = {Biological Conservation},
	volume = {76},
	number = {2},
	year = {1996},
	pages = {105-112},
	abstract = {Many alternative approaches have been proposed for setting conservation priorities from a database of species (or communities) by site. We present a model based on the premise that reserve selection or site prioritization can be structured as a classic covering problem commonly used in many location problems. Specifically, we utilize a form of the maximal covering location model to identify sets of sites which represent the maximum possible representation of specific species. An example application is given for vertebrate data of Southwestern California, which is then compared to an iterative solution process used in previous studies. It is shown that the maximal covering model can quickly meet or exceed iterative models in terms of the coverage objective and automatically satisfies a complementarity objective. Refinements to the basic model are also proposed to address additional objectives such as irreplaceability and flexibility.},
	keywords = {reserve selection conservation planning optimization},
	author = {Church, R. L. and Stoms, D. M. and Davis, F. W.}
}
@inbook {654,
	title = {Selecting biodiversity management areas},
	booktitle = {Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final Report to Congress, vol. II, Assessments and scientific basis for management options},
	year = {1996},
	month = {1996},
	pages = {1503-1528},
	publisher = {University of California, Centers for Water and Wildlands Resources},
	organization = {University of California, Centers for Water and Wildlands Resources},
	address = {Davis, California},
	abstract = {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.},
	keywords = {biodiversity management area, reserve selection, BMAS model, representation, Sierra Nevada, California},
	url = {http://ceres.ca.gov/snep/pubs/web/PDF/VII_C58.PDF},
	author = {Davis, F. W. and Stoms, D. M. and Church, R. L. and Okin, W. J. and Johnson, K. N.}
}
@inbook {395,
	title = {Selecting biodiversity management areas},
	booktitle = {Sierra Nevada Ecosystem Project: Final Report to Congress, vol. II, Assessments and scientific basis for management options},
	year = {1996},
	pages = {1503-1528},
	publisher = {University of California, Centers for Water and Wildlands Resources},
	organization = {University of California, Centers for Water and Wildlands Resources},
	address = {Davis, California},
	abstract = {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.},
	keywords = {biodiversity management area, BMAS model, California, representation, reserve selection, Sierra Nevada},
	author = {Davis, F. W. and Stoms, D. M. and Church, R. L. and Okin, W. J. and Johnson, K. N.}
}
