1. 2C1Forest and Science-based Conservation: Overview of Phase 1 Accomplishments Justina C. Ray, WCS Canada

2. 2C1Forest reinventing conservation for 21st Century Science-based, transboundary, landscape-scale conservation

3. A 2C1Forest Collaborative Project Mark Anderson Science Team, TNC lead Rob Baldwin 2C1Forest Scientist, Future Trends/Maine lead Karen Beazley Science Team, Dalhousie/NS lead Graham Forbes Science Team, UNB/NB lead Louise Gratton Science Team, NCC/Que. lead Justina Ray Science Team, WCS lead Conrad Reining Science Team, Wildlands lead Steve Trombulak Science Director, 2C1Forest/VT,NH,NY lead Gillian Woolmer HF 2000 lead, lead GIS analyst

4. Phase 1: Laying foundation for landscape- scale conservation strategy: priority locations Phase 2: Planning for connectivity and climate change in focal linkage areas

5. Regional Initiatives 1.Ecoregional Assessment  The Nature Conservancy & Nature Conservancy Canada 2.Wildlands Network  Wildlands Project 3.Human Footprint WCS Canada 4.Future Human Footprint 2040  2C1Forest

6. Conservation Planning Components  Importance: the extent to which locations on the landscape are replaceable with respect to achieving the conservation goals we have specified.  Vulnerabilility: extent and threat of conversion/transformation both now and in the future.

7. Measuring Importance Special ecosystems Representative land units Focal species Rare species

8. Ecoregional Planning Select Conservation Targets Fine Filter:Species Coarse Filter: Ecological Communities, Systems, and Physical Diversity Assess Viability of Target Occurrences Size Condition Landscape Context Set Representation and Redundancy Goals Number and Distribution

9. Geology Landforms Climate Elevation Landcover (ELU’s)

11. Irreplaceability  MARXAN site selection tool  1000 ha planning units  Protected Areas locked-in, Urban areas locked-out  Preference for public lands (incld. crown lands)  Conservation elements Focal species – lynx, marten and Wolf (Carroll, 2003 & 2005) Ecological variation (TNC/NCC)) Rare element occurrences (TNC/NCC)

12. 10-km 2 hexagons

13. Sanderson et al. 2002. Bioscience. www.wcs.org/humanfootprint THREAT/VULNERABILITY

14. Human Influence Layers Human SettlementRoadsRail LandcoverMinesDams Major Utility Corridors

15. Human Influence Index (HII)

16. Normalize by Ecological-Subregions

18. Physical habitat degradation: two processes Human Footprint 2000 1)Incremental expansion in settled landscapes (Modeled in Future Human Footprint with residential roads and population density) 2) Large-scale conversion of “wild” and unsettled landscapes Modeled in FHF with Lakeshore Development Zones

19. Lily Bay After proposed resort development (photo simulation) Lily Bay Before proposed resort development Simulation obtained from Natural Resources Council of Maine http://www.nrcm.org/plumcreek_impacts.asp Land Use Change Process 2: Moosehead Lake proposed development on private forestland

20. Future Human Footprint (2040) North Central Lakes scenario (rapid growth)

21. Change (2000-2040)

22. Conservation Prioritization IRREPLACEABILITY  TNC: Ecoregional Assessment  Wildlands Project: Network Design THREAT (Vulnerability)  Human Footprint  Future Human Footprint

23. Noss et al. 2002. A Multicriteria Assessment of Irreplaceability and Vulnerability of Sites in the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem. Conservation Biology CONSERVATION PLANNING: SPATIAL PRIORITIZATION

24. 3 Units of Analysis

25. Each planning unit has: 1 score for importance 4 scores for HF scenarios High Importance, Low Threat High Importance, High Threat Low importance, High Threat Low importance, Low Threat CUT-OFF Hi/Lo: MEDIAN SCORES URGENCY & OPPORTUNITY

26. Importance vs. Threat (current) at 10 km 2 scale

27. Importance vs. Threat (current) at Watershed scale

28. Importance vs. Threat (current) at Ecological Unit scale

29. Importance vs. Threat (Current HF) at 10 km 2 scale Importance vs. Threat (transition) at 10 km 2 scale

30. KEY PATTERNS  large areas that still retain characteristics of “wild” landscapes and that have not yet experienced permanent transformation to settlement,  large areas of permanent transformation that threaten and increasingly fragment the “wild” landscapes,  an increase in transformation in most locations under most future scenarios, and  areas of high irreplaceability and vulnerability across the region that are not currently protected or targeted for protection.

31. TAKE-HOME MESSAGES  Identifies the most urgent priorities in the form of conservation triage.  Identifies sites that are most likely to increase in vulnerability status, many of which lie within zones of connectivity between important relatively intact areas.  The selection of the planning unit has great bearing on the ultimate results in priority ranking, and must therefore be chosen carefully.  Individual layers that collectively contribute to assessments of irreplaceability and vulnerability should not disappear from view, and will be equally valuable to planners characterizing the landscape in question.

33. PRIORITY LINKAGES