@article {474,
	title = {A State-based national network for effective wildlife conservation},
	journal = {Bioscience},
	volume = {62},
	year = {2012},
	month = {11/2012},
	type = {policy forum},
	chapter = {970},
	keywords = {SWAP state wildlife action plans},
	author = {Meretsky, Vicky J. and Maguire, Lynn and Davis, Frank W. and Stoms, David and Scott, J. Michael and Figg, Dennis and Goble, Dale D. and Griffith, Brad and Henke, Scott E. and Vaughn, Jacqueline and Yaffee, Steve}
}
@booklet {405,
	title = {Initial implementation of the State Wildlife Action Plans: Conservation impacts, challenges and enabling mechanisms},
	year = {2008},
	month = {May 16, 2008},
	publisher = {University of California Santa Barbara},
	type = {Final Report to the National Council for Science and the Environment{\textquoteright}s Wildlife Habitat Policy Research Program},
	abstract = {In Fall 2007 we conducted a graduate seminar distributed across eight universities to analyze state wildlife action plans, or Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies" (CWCS) and their initial implementation. For most states, the CWCS represents the first statewide synthesis of information on wildlife species, habitats, threats, conservation priorities and opportunities. Differences in approach, information quality, habitat classification and threat analysis make it impossible to amalgamate state plans to gain consistent regional or national views of conservation needs and priorities. Such views could be attained in the next planning cycle with a modest increase in standardization of information and multi-state planning processes such as those that have already commenced in some regions. Inadequate funding and a shortage of personnel severely limit the ability of state wildlife agencies to achieve the conservation goal of the State Wildlife Grants (SWG) program. Still, many states have creatively leveraged limited resources, using the planning process, published strategies, and SWG funds to strengthen partnerships and align conservation priorities with other agencies and NGOs, build political support for non-game and habitat-based conservation, and attract new public and private conservation funding. The Nature Conservancy, Audubon Society and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in particular have been key partners in planning and implementation in many states. The Doris Duke Conservation Fund has energized the implementation process and provided much-needed additional funding. Habitat loss to development is identified as a leading threat to wildlife in nearly all plans, but most states have had limited success engaging local governments or private land owners in wildlife action planning or implementation. Some states are undertaking innovative efforts to engage county and local governments or associations of county planners that may serve as models for other states. Some states, especially those states with little public land, have expanded incentive programs to engage private landowners. Diverse constituencies look to the state wildlife agencies for leadership in addressing urgent conservation needs. Unless SWG or related funding is increased significantly, state wildlife agencies will maximize their impact in non-game biodiversity conservation by exploiting overlap in game and non-game conservation and by catalyzing and coordinating conservation investments made by other organizations. To more effectively play this role, state programs would benefit from concerted training and capacity-building in areas such as data integration, analysis and synthesis, conservation effectiveness monitoring, spatial planning support systems, grant writing, education and outreach. Products from this project, including 3-6 page summaries of implementation in the 50 states and District of Columbia, are available via a project website at http://www.biogeog.ucsb.edu/SWAP/SWAP-home2.html.},
	keywords = {state wildlife action plans conservation planning public participation adaptive management monitoring prioritiy conservation areas species of greatest conservation need threats habitat conservation},
	author = {Davis, Frank and Griffith, Brad and Henke, Scott and Maguire, Lynn and Meretsky, Vicky and Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale and Vaughn, Jacqueline and Yaffee, Steve and Stoms, David}
}
@inbook {339,
	title = {Agricultural and urban landscapes},
	booktitle = {The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: Conserving Biodiversity in Human-Dominated Landscapes},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2006},
	note = {ESA Conference at UCSB},
	pages = {256-274},
	publisher = {Island Press},
	organization = {Island Press},
	address = {Washington},
	keywords = {farmland working landscapes Wildlife habitat relationships CalFlora},
	author = {Brosi, B. J. and Daily, G. C. and Davis, F. W.},
	editor = {Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale D. and Davis, Frank W.}
}
@inbook {601,
	title = {Agricultural and urban landscapes},
	booktitle = {The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: Conserving Biodiversity in Human-Dominated Landscapes},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2006},
	note = {ESA Conference at UCSB},
	month = {2006},
	pages = {256-274},
	publisher = {Island Press},
	organization = {Island Press},
	address = {Washington},
	keywords = {CalFlora, farmland, Wildlife habitat relationships, working landscapes},
	author = {Brosi, B. J. and Daily, G. C. and Davis, F. W.},
	editor = {Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale D. and Davis, Frank W.}
}
@inbook {425,
	title = {Conserving biodiversity in human-dominated landscapes},
	booktitle = {The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: Conserving Biodiversity in Human-Dominated Landscapes},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2006},
	note = {ESA Conference at UCSB},
	pages = {288-290},
	publisher = {Island Press},
	organization = {Island Press},
	address = {Washington},
	author = {Goble, Dale D. and Scott, J. Michael and Davis, F. W.},
	editor = {Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale D. and Davis, Frank W.}
}
@inbook {683,
	title = {Conserving biodiversity in human-dominated landscapes},
	booktitle = {The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: Conserving Biodiversity in Human-Dominated Landscapes},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2006},
	note = {ESA Conference at UCSB},
	month = {2006},
	pages = {288-290},
	publisher = {Island Press},
	organization = {Island Press},
	address = {Washington},
	author = {Goble, Dale D. and Scott, J. Michael and Davis, F. W.},
	editor = {Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale D. and Davis, Frank W.}
}
@booklet {751,
	title = {The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: Conserving Biodiversity in Human-Dominated Landscapes},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2006},
	month = {2006},
	pages = {360},
	publisher = {Island Press},
	address = {Washington},
	keywords = {conservation planning, critical habitat, endangered species, habitat recovery plans, incentives, working landscapes},
	author = {Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale D. and Davis, Frank W.}
}
@book {505,
	title = {The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: Conserving Biodiversity in Human-Dominated Landscapes},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2006},
	publisher = {Island Press},
	organization = {Island Press},
	address = {Washington},
	keywords = {Endangered species habitat recovery plans critical habitat incentives working landscapes conservation planning},
	author = {Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale D. and Davis, Frank W.}
}
@book {426,
	title = {The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: Renewing the Conservation Promise},
	volume = {1},
	year = {2006},
	publisher = {Island Press},
	organization = {Island Press},
	address = {Washington},
	keywords = {Endangered species habitat recovery plans critical habitat incentives working landscapes conservation planning},
	author = {Goble, Dale D. and Scott, J. Michael and Davis, Frank W.}
}
@booklet {684,
	title = {The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: Renewing the Conservation Promise},
	volume = {1},
	year = {2006},
	month = {2006},
	pages = {372},
	publisher = {Island Press},
	address = {Washington},
	keywords = {conservation planning, critical habitat, endangered species, habitat recovery plans, incentives, working landscapes},
	url = {http://www.bren.ucsb.edu/news/FirstVoumeofEndangeredSpeciesActatThirty.htm},
	author = {Goble, Dale D. and Scott, J. Michael and Davis, Frank W.}
}
@inbook {804,
	title = {Endangered species time line},
	booktitle = {The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: Conserving Biodiversity in Human-Dominated Landscapes},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2006},
	note = {ESA Conference at UCSB},
	month = {2006},
	pages = {24-35},
	publisher = {Island Press},
	organization = {Island Press},
	address = {Washington},
	author = {Svancara, Leona K. and Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale D. and Davis, F. W. and Brewer, Donna},
	editor = {Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale D. and Davis, Frank W.}
}
@inbook {559,
	title = {Endangered species time line},
	booktitle = {The Endangered Species Act at Thirty: Conserving Biodiversity in Human-Dominated Landscapes},
	volume = {2},
	year = {2006},
	note = {ESA Conference at UCSB},
	pages = {24-35},
	publisher = {Island Press},
	organization = {Island Press},
	address = {Washington},
	author = {Svancara, Leona K. and Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale D. and Davis, F. W. and Brewer, Donna},
	editor = {Scott, J. Michael and Goble, Dale D. and Davis, Frank W.}
}
@article {750,
	title = {Nature reserves: Do they capture the full range of America{\textquoteright}s biological diversity?},
	journal = {Ecological Applications},
	volume = {11},
	year = {2001},
	note = {JOURNAL ARTICLE},
	month = {2001},
	pages = {999-1007.},
	abstract = {Less than 6\% of the coterminous United States is in nature reserves. Assessment of the occurrence of nature reserves across ranges of elevation and soil productivity classes indicates that nature reserves are most frequently found at higher elevations and on less productive soils. The distribution of plants and animals suggests that the greatest number of species is found at lower elevations. A preliminary assessment of the occurrence of mapped land cover types indicates that approximates60\% of mapped cover types have < 10\% of their area in nature reserves. Land ownership patterns show that areas of lower elevation and more productive soils are most often privately owned and already extensively converted to urban and agricultural uses. Thus any effort to establish a system of nature reserves that captures the full geographical and ecological range of cover types and species must fully engage the private sector.},
	keywords = {(General Biology--Conservation, Resource Management), Animalia-Unspecified, biological diversity, Cover Type, Elevation, Land Ownership Patterns, Nature Reserves, Plantae-Unspecified, Soil Productivity},
	author = {Scott, J. Michael and Davis, Frank W. and McGhie, R. Gavin and Wright, R. Gerald and Groves, Craig and Estes, John}
}
