<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Williams, P.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hannah, L.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andelman, S.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Midgley, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Araujo, M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hughes, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Manne, L.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Martinez-Meyer, E.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pearson, R.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Planning for climate change: Identifying minimum-dispersal corridors for the Cape proteaceae</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Conservation Biology</style></secondary-title><short-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Conserv Biol Conserv Biol</style></short-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">area-selection algorithms</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">bioclimatic modeling</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biodiversity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">biodiversity conservation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">connectivity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Conservation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">distance</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">distribution models</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">distributions</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">floristic region</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">habitat suitability</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">plant migration</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Protected areas</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">reserve selection algorithms</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">south-africa</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">species persistence</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;Go to ISI&gt;://000231118600013</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">19</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1063-1074</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Climate change poses a challenge to the conventional approach to biodiversity conservation, which relies on fixed protected areas, because the changing climate is expected to shift the distribution of suitable areas for many species. Some species will persist only if they can colonize new areas, although in some cases their dispersal abilities may be very limited. To address this problem we devised a quantitative method for identifying multiple corridors of connectivity through shifting habitat suitabilities that seeks to minimize dispersal demands first and then the area of land required. We applied the method to Proteaceae mapped on a 1-minute grid for the western part of the Cape Floristic Region of South Africa, to supplement the existing protected areas using Worldmap software. Our goal was to represent each species in at least 35 grid cells (approximately 100 km(2)) at all times between 2000 and 2050 despite climate change. Although it was possible to achieve the goal at reasonable cost, caution will be needed in applying our method to reserves or other conservation investments until there is further information to support or refine the climate-change models and the species&#039; habitat-suitability and dispersal models.</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>13</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Davis, F. W.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stoms, D. M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Costello, C. J.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Machado, E. A.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Metz, J.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Gerrard, R.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andelman, S.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Regan, H.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Church, R.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A framework for setting land conservation priorities using multi-criteria scoring and an optimal fund allocation strategy</style></title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">marginal value conservation planning cost-effectiveness GIS Sierra Nevada California Legacy Project</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2003</style></year></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis</style></publisher><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The California Legacy Project (CLP) mission is &quot;to enable the State and its partners in conservation to develop and implement a strategic and inclusive approach to conserving and restoring California&#039;s lands and natural resources.&quot; In Spring 2001 The Resources Agency of California contracted with the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis at UC Santa Barbara to convene a working group to help bring systematic conservation planning theory and methods to bear on the design and implementation of CLP. The framework described in this report is one of the products from that working group. The framework is intended to serve the dual purpose of helping decision makers to evaluate current opportunities (e.g., current proposal applications for State conservation funds) and to help planners develop longer term conservation strategies that highlight general areas, species and communities for more focused analysis and collaborative planning. We do not present a plan or &quot;blueprint&quot; for future conservation activities. Instead, we offer an analytical, data-driven planning process that could be applied to ongoing conservation assessments and evaluations by State conservation planning staff and collaborating organizations over the State or regions of the State. We organize the planning framework based on a hierarchy of conservation goals and objectives, each of which is further elaborated in terms of specific objectives, criteria, and sources of evidence. At the highest level we distinguish three categories of conservation goals: Resource Production Capacity, Natural Capital, and Public Open Space. Under Natural Capital we distinguish terrestrial biodiversity from wetland and aquatic biodiversity. This report focuses on terrestrial biodiversity. The framework applies GIS technology to map conservation value and investment priorities based on available spatial data, derived indices and simple algebraic functions. A planning region is divided into sites and each site is scored in terms of its marginal conservation value, that is, the incremental value added to the current system of conservation lands by making the next conservation investment in that site. Site prioritization depends on the resources the site contains, the threat to those resources, and the conservation cost of mitigating that threat. The strategic objective is to allocate conservation funds among a set of candidate sites such that there is the greatest possible resource value remaining at the end of the planning period. We present a measure of ecological condition based on land use, land cover, roads, housing density and forest structure. The condition index is mapped for 2000 A.D. and 2040 A.D. (based on projected patterns of housing development) and the difference between the two is applied as a measure of threat to biodiversity. We then present formal measures for five different values that places can have for conserving terrestrial biodiversity: 1) hotspots of rare threatened and endangered species, 2) areas supporting vulnerable habitat types, 3) unique landscapes, 4) wildlands for area dependent species, and 5) areas to expand the size of existing reserves. We apply the framework to prioritize new conservation investments on private lands in the Sierra Bioregion. Our purpose is to demonstrate the end-to-end use of the framework and attention should be focused on the process, not the actual products. We first use existing, readily available data to map resource values and threats to produce maps of marginal conservation value without consideration of site cost. Spatial patterns in site value differ considerably among the five conservation criteria. We then use a crude estimate of land prices and allocate a hypothetical budget of $44 million to 50 sites scattered across the region. The framework can also be applied to other conservation concerns such as aquatic biodiversity, production lands, public open space, cultural resources and recreational opportunities. In a separate report we demonstrate its application for cropland conservation in the Bay Delta Bioregion. Our initial experiences in applying the framework to terrestrial biodiversity and cropland are very encouraging, but testing and refinement of the indices and value functions models are still needed and are currently underway.</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Report to the Resources Agency of California</style></work-type></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>13</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Davis, F. W.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Regan, H. M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andelman, S.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Beyeler, M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dangermond, P.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Greenwood, G.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hickson, D.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Hoshovsky, M.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Choosing Assessment Units for State and Regional Conservation Planning</style></title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2001</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">June 10, 2001.</style></date></pub-dates></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis</style></publisher><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><notes><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Report to the Resources Agency of California CCRISP Project.</style></notes></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Davis, F. W.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stoms, D. M.</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andelman, S.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Systematic reserve selection in the USA: An example from the Columbia Plateau ecoregion</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Parks</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">BMAS biodiversity management areas reserve selection The Nature Conservancy TNC Columbia Plateau Geography of Hope coarse-filter fine-filter expert opinion</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1999</style></year></dates><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1</style></number><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">9</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">31-41</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">We describe a systematic conservation planning approach for identifying a set of areas that meet specified goals for biotic representation while balancing the dual objectives of efficiency (minimum area) and site suitability. The approach was applied by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) to a regional planning exercise in the Columbia Plateau ecoregion of the northwestern United States. The exercise required integrating data on species, plant communities, land ownership and other socioeconomic factors, and combined expert opinion with computer-aided site selection modeling. The set of selected areas satisfied TNC&#039;s requirements and now serves as a blueprint for ongoing conservation efforts in the region. Strengths of the approach include its explicitness, flexibility, and consideration of both biological goals and socioeconomic concerns. However, the current site selection model requires fairly sophisticated computing hardware and software, which limits its portability and use by non-specialists. We are currently working to improve model portability and to add new functionality for site prioritization and species viability.</style></abstract></record></records></xml>