ABSTRACT. Information is critical for environmental governance. The rise of digital mapping has the potential to advance privateland conservation by assisting with conservation planning, monitoring, evaluation, and accountability. However, privacy concerns from private landowners and the capacity of conservation entities can influence efforts to track spatial data. We examine public access to geospatial data on conserved private lands and the reasons data are available or unavailable. We conduct a qualitative comparative case study based on analysis of maps, documents, and interviews. We compare four conservation programs involving different conservation tools: conservation easements (the growing but incomplete National Conservation Easement Database), regulatory mitigation (gaps in tracking U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's endangered species habitat mitigation), contract payments (lack of spatial data on U.S. Department of Agriculture's Conservation Reserve Program due to Farm Bill restrictions), and property-tax incentives (online mapping of Wisconsin's managed forest tax program). These cases illuminate the capacity and privacy reasons for current incomplete or inaccessible spatial data and the politics of mapping private land. If geospatial data are to contribute fully to planning, evaluation, and accountability, we recommend improving information system capacity, enhancing learning networks, and reducing legal and administrative barriers to information access, while balancing the right to information and the right to privacy.

The ecological literature offers many conflicting recommendations for how managers should respond to ecosystem change and novelty. We propose a framework in which forest managers may achieve desired forest characteristics by combining strategies for (1) restoring historical conditions, (2) maintaining current conditions, and (3) transitioning toward novel conditions. Drawing on policy studies and the ecological and social sciences, we synthesize research on factors that shape forest management responses to ecosystem novelty and change. Although the ecological literature often suggests the likelihood of transitions to novelty, we found that a management focus on restoration and persistence strategies was supported by landowners, private and public lands policy, and forest manager capacity and culture. In this era of unprecedented change, managers and policy makers must address ecosystem novelty to achieve desired forest futures without eroding support for forest conservation and management.

No abstract

No abstract

Consulting forester business practices are challenged by significant decreases in the sizes of private forest properties and the changes in landowner values that accompany forestland parcelization. Though researchers have discussed the potential ways entrepreneurial foresters could adapt to these new ownership patterns and landscape dynamics, actual responses by foresters working in parcelizing landscapes are largely undocumented. We conducted twenty in-depth interviews with foresters working in New York State to determine (1) how foresters have experienced parcelization of properties they work with, (2) what challenges are associated with forestry projects on decreasing property sizes, and (3) what kinds of changes foresters are making to adapt to decreasing property sizes. We found that foresters across the state observe decreasing sizes of forest properties and see values of forest owners shifting beyond timber production, although most do not consider these changes to be the most urgent challenges to sustainable forestry and profitable forest consulting. Professional foresters are reacting to parcelization in diverse ways; while some are trying entrepreneurial approaches to reach new clients or offer different services, others are primarily interested in maintaining their traditional practices and roles. These findings indicate that strictly relying on independent entrepreneurial responses by private foresters may not be sufficient to close the gap between the historical role of consulting foresters and the trajectory of modern forest parcels. Additional measures like specialized training and policy changes may also be required to address the management challenges associated with forestland parcelization.