U.S. imperiled species are most vulnerable to habitat loss on private lands

作者: Michael J. Evans , Jacob W. Malcom , Adam J. Eichenwald , Adam J. Eichenwald

DOI: 10.1101/556241

关键词:

摘要: To stem the ongoing loss of biodiversity, there is an urgent need to distinguish effective and ineffective approaches protecting species their habitats. Conservation laws may be strong on paper but in practice, or vary effectiveness across different contexts, such as land ownership management settings. Using Google Earth Engine 30 years Landsat satellite images, we quantify annual habitat change for 24 U.S. Endangered Species List IUCN Red categories ownership, federal, state, private. We show that imperiled lost very little federal lands (3.6%), while losses non-protected private (8.1%) were twice great. Patterns suggest listing under Act was one mechanism limiting loss, law most lands. These results emphasize importance species, also highlight improve protection long-term conservation.

参考文章(27)
Christopher H.M Carter, A Dual Track for Individual Takings: Reexamining Sections 7 and 10 of the Endangered Species Act Boston college environmental affairs law review. ,vol. 19, pp. 135- ,(1991)
A. M. Trainor, J. R. Walters, D. L. Urban, A. Moody, Evaluating the effectiveness of a Safe Harbor Program for connecting wildlife populations Animal Conservation. ,vol. 16, pp. 610- 620 ,(2013) , 10.1111/ACV.12035
Elizabeth F Mason, Contribution, Contribution Protection, and Nonsettlor Liability Under CERCLA: Following Laskin’s Lead Boston college environmental affairs law review. ,vol. 19, pp. 73- ,(1991)
Private Lands: The Neglected Geography Conservation Biology. ,vol. 13, pp. 223- 224 ,(1999) , 10.1046/J.1523-1739.1999.013002223.X
AMARA BROOK, MICHAELA ZINT, RAYMOND DE YOUNG, Landowners' Responses to an Endangered Species Act Listing and Implications for Encouraging Conservation Conservation Biology. ,vol. 17, pp. 1638- 1649 ,(2003) , 10.1111/J.1523-1739.2003.00258.X
Torbjörn Säterberg, Stefan Sellman, Bo Ebenman, High frequency of functional extinctions in ecological networks Nature. ,vol. 499, pp. 468- 470 ,(2013) , 10.1038/NATURE12277
Clinton N. Jenkins, Kyle S. Van Houtan, Stuart L. Pimm, Joseph O. Sexton, US protected lands mismatch biodiversity priorities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. ,vol. 112, pp. 5081- 5086 ,(2015) , 10.1073/PNAS.1418034112
CARLOS CARROLL, JOHN A. VUCETICH, MICHAEL P. NELSON, DANIEL J. ROHLF, MICHAEL K. PHILLIPS, Geography and Recovery under the U.S. Endangered Species Act Conservation Biology. ,vol. 24, pp. 395- 403 ,(2010) , 10.1111/J.1523-1739.2009.01435.X
Claire Boryan, Zhengwei Yang, Rick Mueller, Mike Craig, Monitoring US agriculture: the US Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, Cropland Data Layer Program Geocarto International. ,vol. 26, pp. 341- 358 ,(2011) , 10.1080/10106049.2011.562309