An interdisciplinary assessment of private conservation areas in the Western United States

Abstract

Conservation easements are the fastest growing private conservation strategy in the United States. However, mechanisms to assess private land conservation as well as their support by the general public are not well understood. This study uses the ecosystem services framework for assessing existing private lands in Idaho and identifies areas for future conservation easements. Using conservation targets of the land trust as a guide for selecting ecosystem services, we (a) mapped the spatial delivery of conservation targets across public and private lands, (b) explored public awareness in terms of social importance and vulnerability, and (c) mapped future priority areas by characterizing conservation bundles. We found that public lands provided the highest levels of conservation targets, and we found no difference in conservation target provision between private areas and conservation easements. The spatial characterization of conservation target bundles identified potential future priority areas for conservation easements, which can guide planning of land trust conservation efforts.

Mapping socio‐ecological systems in Idaho: Spatial patterns and analytical considerations

“…The state is an excellent candidate for SEZ mapping because of its strong bio‐geo‐physical gradients, and diverse land uses and management designations. Over 61% of Idaho's land area is federally owned or administered, resulting in varying levels of protection from private development and potential ecosystem degradation (Quintas‐Soriano et al, 2021). Idaho, however, is economically reliant on natural resource acquirement and utilization (>5% 2019 Idaho gross domestic product [GDP]; United States Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2021), and is one of the most productive agricultural states, contributing nearly one‐third of the potatoes grown in the United States (Idaho State Department of Agriculture, 2021).…”

Analysis of Agricultural and Environmental Objectives

“…1185/2009 on pesticide statistics. [6] But there is the question of the mechanisms by which pollution can be controlled by improving the use of agricultural resources and the consumption of pesticides in agriculture.…”

“…However, farmers can approach climate change in a variety of ways, including agriculture, carbon sequestration, change, irrigation and water management. Recent studies on the provision of ecosystem services at the landscape level have largely focused on service packages for administrative regions or grouped areas (Queiroz et al, 2015;Mouchet et al, 2017;Quintas-Soriano et al, 2021) or unique locations (Andersson et al, 2015;Nikodinoska et al, 2018). [1] To our knowledge, there is a lack of studies that explicitly link changes in biodiversity and ecosystem services to the increasing specialization of production, despite the fact that the latter is an important link between agricultural policy and environmental outcomes (Leventon et al al., 2017).…”

Public conservation connection and support between ocean and terrestrial systems in the United States

“…Likely due to a combination of relative accessibility and ease of observation, among other factors, most U.S. federal policies for conservation are rooted in land-based protections, while ocean-based efforts–mostly fishery reforms and passive approaches of marine protected areas (MPAs)–are comparatively recent [ 4 , 5 ]. Matching the terrestrial conservation trend, funding for conservation projects is typically terrestrial dominated [ 6 ] and private-land easements, an exponentially growing sector to conserve land in the U.S. [ 7 , 8 ], are less likely in marine systems, a more common-use space. The collective conservation efforts for the terrestrial ecosystem may lend to more favorable perception of the conditions, thus reduced conservation needs.…”