Learn WHY, WHERE and HOW we work as well as the science behind it -- including a climate change summary

We Face Problems for Nature and People

Leading scientists, and now much of the general public, realize that the extinction of plants and animals in North America is happening at a much faster pace then ever before. Many believe we are well into the era of the Sixth Great Extinction.

One of the critical problems is that the areas previously set aside to protect wildlife in North America were not always chosen with ecological values in mind. This "ad hoc" approach to conservation has left Canada, the United States, and Mexico with systems of protected areas that are too small, too isolated from each other, and represent too few types of ecosystems to sustain native wildlife over time.

Add to this the threats of climate change to existing wildlife populations and work becomes even more urgent.

We Provide a Conservation Strategy that is Continental, Regional and Local in Scale

The Wildlands Network's work to reconnect the continent begins with "wildways"--vast pathways that tie healthy habitats together.

Within each continental wildway, we propose regional systems of core protected areas connected to one another by "corridors for wildlife," mosaics of public and private lands that provide safe passageways for wildlife to travel freely from place to place.

Private land owners within proposed conservation planning areas are not bound in any way by our recommendations, but are encouraged to participate in voluntary actions to protect landscape linkages and native species.

We Support the Vision with Solid Science

Leading scientists agree that large-scale conservation efforts must include the full range of native plants and animals in order to fully protect biodiversity for the long term. Unique or special features of the landscape that support rare and unusual species, such as wetlands and riverbanks, should also be protected. Important species that are particularly sensitive to changes in their environment, such as lynx and marten, those that have a particularly strong influence over other plants and animals in the ecosystem, like bears and wolves, also deserve special consideration. We use scientific methodologies to take all of the factors into account, resulting in a Wildlands Network Design or "WND," used for effective conservation planning.

We Get the Job Done with our Network of Partners

Once completed, these large-scale, science-based, conservation plans are then used by conservation groups, state and federal agencies, local governments, land trusts, private landowners, and others to make more informed decisions on the ground regarding their efforts to protect wildlife and wildlands.

We also seek to support our network of a growing number of international, traditional and non –tradional conservation partners focused on connectivity through comprehensive internal and external networking programs and research. In fact, our evolving role is to create efficient and collaborative “Networks of People Protecting Networks of Land” on a continental scale.

WHY

A Very Big Problem

The conservation movement began in the late 1800s when visionaries such as John Muir rallied support for protection of particularly special natural places like Yosemite Valley. This “scenic icon” preservation approach sparked conservation efforts worldwide, and remains a core strategy for conservation throughout North America. However, over time, as pressures mounted from human expansion into wild places, and as environmental and conservation science matured, it became clear that we could no longer simply protect those iconic places and charismatic species if we are serious about conserving our natural heritage.

Today, less than 6% of the United States is permanently protected from development. Roads, housing developments, fences, agriculture, and resource extraction increasingly compromise ecological processes and animal movements. These barriers fragment the landscape and isolate wildlife populations. Ecological studies have repeatedly shown that 6% is far below the required threshold for the persistence of biological diversity and evolutionary processes. Further, most existing protected areas are too small and will soon be too isolated to sustain ecologically critical interactions unless there are viable connections between them. This will only be exacerbated as the effects of climate change mount and dramatic shifts occur in the landscape. If our wild places and reserves continue to be isolated from one another while the effects of climate change intensify, we risk a mass extinction on our watch.

A Very Big Solution

By the middle of the 20^th century, the concept of “ecosystems” really took shape and soon conservation organizations were focusing on protecting as much of the entire house as possible, rather than just the heirlooms the house contained, so to speak. This was a significant advancement, but another important development occurred: In 1991, the Wildlands Network (then, Wildands Project) formed around the conclusion that the only way to protect diversity in the face of habitat fragmentation and climate change is by maintaining and restoring connectivity between large protected areas. Animals, especially wide-ranging species, need connections between parks and preserves. They need landscape “connectivity” to roam, locate food, find a mate, and breed. Using the house metaphor, there has to be a way to get from house to house.

Led by the father of the field of conservation biology, Michael Soulé, we, the Wildlands Network (then Project) inspired the conservation movement to think boldly and beyond “postage stamp” conservation. The vision is Room to Roam – provided by systems of connected protected areas from Canada to Mexico, from the Pacific to the Atlantic –to ensure the survival of America's natural heritage. We recognize that even though natural systems have been highly fragmented by human activities; we cannot, as a conservation movement, react by isolated, fragmented planning. Thus, the Wildlands Project became a leader in orienting the conservaton movement towards this necessarily ambitious vision of continental-scale, collaborative, wildlands protection.

WHERE

CONTINENTAL CONNECTIONS – Humans use highways; wildlife needs Wildways. The Wildlands Network has identified four regions where we focus on reconnecting the continent’s wild places. The Pacific Wildway running from Baja to Alaska

The Boreal Wildway running west-east from Alaska to the Canadian Maritimes across the forest roof of North America

The Eastern Wildway extends northward from the Everglades along the Appalachians to the Arctic

The Western Wildway spans the continent from Mexico, through the Rockies, to Alaska. This Western Wildway, called the Spine of the Continent, is our showcase initiative, underway now for nearly a decade.

HOW

Networks of people protecting networks of land –

Collaboration is key to achieving our vision of four continental wildlife corridors, each spanning thousands of miles. Unanimous consensus within the conservation tells us that saving Nature in North America will only be possible by coordinating and unifying the strategies and projects of many existing and new partner organizations.

To this end, the Wildlands Project provides scientific and mapping assistance, long-range planning and strategic analysis, communications support and financial resources to our partners. When necessary, we also become involved at a detailed level to see a project through. We bring together organizations that would otherwise have little or no contact. These Mexican, Canadian, and American partners, in return, are our power on the ground. Together we achieve systematic conservation outcomes that put the jigsaw pieces of protected wildlands back together, so our children and their children will be able to experience the whole natural picture for years to come.

THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF OUR WORK

A comprehensive conservation strategy is built on a framework of numerous inter-related components.

Private lands, however large or small, can be managed for collaborative conservation and personal values. Various programs can result in tax credits, increased revenue and property vibrancy for the owner or can be donated outright to land trusts and other conservation oriented organizations. Private lands can be restored to fully ecological health, and native species can be reintroduced, as, for example, at the Wind River Ranch.

Public lands are our collective natural treasury, and in the case of western North America, comprise the majority of the total acreage. States each have land, wildlife and fish management agencies and State Wildlife Action Plans, and these agencies are important partners. Federal lands are managed by several agencies and coordination between regional districts within agencies, or across agencies, has room for improvement. Achieving a consistent conservation management system that is cross-jurisdiction and trans-boundary is critical to the success of our vision.

Highway “safe passage” campaigns are gaining in popularity throughout North America as being important not only to achieve connectivity between reserves but also for human safety on roadways. The recently developed field of “road ecology” brings road engineers, Department of Transportation planners, and private and agency wildlife management professionals together to design roads that provide safe crossing opportunities for wildlife and reduce human and wildlife collision mortalities.

Predators play a vital role in maintaining natural and robust ecosystems by regulating populations of other animals lower on the food chain; well balanced top-down animal populations vegetation patterns in check. No matter how protected and connected a system of wildlands is, the natural balance and resilience of this system will never be sustained if predators are absent. A comprehensive conservation strategy must include the reintroduction and maintenance of viable populations of native predators like wolves and jaguars. Humans and predators can live side-by-side in healthy ecosystems and in the presence of progressive animal management programs.

Policies that effectively protect and sustain landscapes and biological populations must be put in place by land and wildlife management in order to supportthe principle components listed above. The recent explosion of climate change acceptance in North American government has generated an encouraging shower of (draft) policy solutions, most of which entail strategies for helping landscapes and biodiversity adapt to rapidly changing environmental conditions. But climate change is not the only problem we face, and tough laws protecting the remaining un-roaded wild areas of the continent must be emplaced.

Communication efforts must support policychange and creation. Successfully conveying the need for preserving biodiversity and the accompanying need for extensive connected protected networks of land is therefore core to Widlands Network’s mission. Humanity is dependent on its natural environment for clean air and water, carbon capture, food, solace and recreation. Losing biological diversity at the rate currently occurring is a canary in the coalmine for our own health and well being. Wildlands Network’s continental conservation vision is an ambitious and comprehensive solution to the loss of biodiversity and natural balance, and must be communicated to the public and policy makers.

Science is another and perhaps the most vital components of our work; however, it requires a designated area all its own. It is the cornerstone upon which were established, now exist and will continue to lead.

THE SCIENCE

There is broad consensus among conservationist that, to stem the extinction of plants and animals in North America, we need to establish conservation systems that 1) represent all native ecosystem types and stages; 2) maintain viable populations of all native species in natural patterns of abundance and distribution; 3) maintain ecological and evolutionary processes; and 4) are responsive to natural and human – caused change. In most cases, these fundamental goals are not now being met by our current conservation systems. But these systems nevertheless represent a jumping off point, and we can use modern conservation science and technology to meet these goals. In framing the work, scientists often consider the following core questions:

• What new conservation areas should be established, and where?
• How should we connect new and existing conservation areas?
• What should we conserve first with limited resources?
• How can conservation systems be designed to be resilient in the face of climate change?

Over the past decade, conservation scientists have concluded that we can answer many of these questions by pursuing a conservation planning process that 1) captures a full-spectrum of habitat types; 2) identifies particularly rare species occurrences and other place of high biological value; and 3) determines the habitat requirements for a key group of “focal” species. This “three-track approach” is the heart of a Wildlands Network Design.

Wildlands Network Designs and Large-Scale Conservation Planning

Wildlands Network organizes its mapping and science work around each of the four Wildways. We develop partnerships with conservation organizations and agencies within regions in each Wildway to conduct a scientific analysis and mapping process to identify priority conservation targets. The resulting conservation area design is called a Wildlands Network Design (WND), and is then used as a planning tool for conservation actors – a blueprint for establishing core conservation habitats and achieving connectivity within a specific region. In some cases Wildlands Network collaborates with partners to develop alternative, large-scale, conservation plans that incorporate the key elements of a WND.

Each Wildlands Network Design or other type of large-scale conservation plan is then connected to the next, like links in a chain, thereby “reconstructing” the wildway. The suite of WNDs therefore represents a consistent and robust approach that crosses political and jurisdictional boundaries and, collectively, provides a high-resolution, continental, conservation and connectivity master plan for each Wildway. Though WNDs are disseminated to target audiences, their purpose is not public communications. Wildlands Network also supports partners with ongoing scientific counsel, and has been investing in analyzing the relationship of large landscape connectivity with climate change, with a particular focus on conservation area designs that insure ecosystem resilience.

Each WND is built around three primary units: cores, linkages, and stewardship. Cores are generally large intact habitats, such as Wilderness Areas or National Parks, which then must be connected to each other by linkages, which can be described as the spokes radiating from a hub. The “matrix” of lands adjacent to cores and linkages must then be managed in a manner that is complementary with the cores. Just as an electrical current cannot flow if there is a short circuit anywhere in the system, this system of cores, linkages, and stewardship areas provide a contiguous network of lands throughout a planning region so there is “connectivity” instead of blocks of habitat separated by shorts. In reality, the core, linkages (or connecting lands), stewardship land model can become quite complex, as shown in the graphic below from the Vermont Biodiversity Project’s report in 2002, but the basic building blocks remain consistent.

METHODOLOGY:

Each WND is generated through a systematic process that adheres to five key principles:

1. Establish planning boundaries based on ecological features
2. Compile existing data on biological resources and identify those that are most representative of biodiversity
3. Set clear biodiversity conservation goals and carry out explicit and objective conservation area design in support of those goals
4. Evaluate the degree to which conservation goals are currently being met in existing areas and identify new areas needed to meet those goals
5. Involve a broad array of stakeholders in design and implementation

Establish planning boundaries based on ecological features

Wildways represent the first step of establishing boundaries based on ecological features: in this case, the major mountain and boreal regions of North America. The network designs within the wildways should then adhere to further ecological subdivisions. Although smaller than a wildway, these subdivisions are still millions of acres, or hectares, in size. Since the mid-1990s there has been increasing agreement among conservation scientists as to the de
nitions, boundaries and utility of these ecological divisions, usually referred to as ecoregions. The Nature Conservancy has defined ecoregions for all of North America. A single ecoregion, or sometimes a combination of them, is a good planning scale for a WND. In many cases, The Nature Conservancy, and other groups, have carried out extensive planning within ecoregions, and Wildlands Network works closely with these groups to craft the WND for a given ecoregion.

Compile existing data on biological resources within the planning area and identify those that are most representative of biodiversity

There is general agreement among conservation scientists that three types, or tracks, of ecological data are needed to adequately represent biodiversity across a broad area.

1. Representative natural habitats or “environmental variation.” Sometimes called the “coarse filter,” this track of data encompasses the full spectrum of habitat types (e.g., vegetation, abiotic habitats, aquatic habitats), from the common to the uncommon. In mountainous areas, this is well represented by ecological land units (ELUs), unique combinations of geology, elevation and aspect.

2. Special elements. This second type of data encompasses occurrences of rare species and natural communities, particularly "hotspots" where such occurrences are concentrated. In contrast to the coarse filter in track 1, this track is sometimes referred to as the “fine filter” that ensures that known examples of high biodiversity value don’t slip through the cracks. Examples may include wetland basins, cove forests, and mountain summits.

3. Focal Species. The third track identifies habitat requirements and population viability of a set of particularly important or representative species in a given planning area. Such focal species warrant special attention in conservation planning because they are not adequately captured by other considerations, such as coarse-scale representation of environmental variation or
ne-scale special element occurrences (e.g., hotspots of diversity or rarity). A variety of characteristics can result in a species being considered a useful focal species for conservation planning, including that they are: (1) functionally important to an extent out of proportion to their numerical abundance (keystone species); (2) wide ranging, thus potentially acting as surrogates for other species that have similar habitat requirements (umbrella species); (3) sensitive to habitat quality (indicator species); and (4) charismatic (agship species), thus encouraging public support for conservation initiatives. If sufficient habitat is maintained to support viable populations of a carefully-selected suite of focal species over time, many other species may also be conserved.

Population viability analyses help predict the ability of a population to remain viable given demographic, genetic, environmental, and other variables (e.g., survival, fecundity, mortality risk, and habitat productivity) over speci
ed periods of time and under various scenarios (e.g., changes in land cover, trapping pressures, and climate). Through such analyses, potential source (where births exceed deaths) and sink (where deaths exceed births) habitats can be predicted. These predictions can then help inform questions relevant to conservation planning such as: where are the high value habitats, how much area is needed to support viable populations, and where are wildlife movement linkages needed?

When combined with emerging connectivity analysis tools, such viability analyses can provide robust insights into where wildlife movement linkages are needed. Population viability analyses can also model future landscape change scenarios (climate change, logging, human development).

There are of course multiple types of data within each of the three main three tracks. A group of scientific experts with knowledge of each track is needed to determine the precise elements, or features, in each track. Once determined, spatially explicit data on each of these features should be systematically collected for the planning area as whole and entering into a geographic information system (GIS). Often there are gaps in data availability for a given feature, which will highlight the need for additional analyses.

As part of the data collection process, spatial information should also be gathered on existing conservation areas and their degree of protection.

Where possible, spatial information on threats or human impacts on the landscape should also be gathered. Analytical tools such as the Human Footprint [link here to WCS docs, plus Leu et al.] are well suited to this task. It also possible to carryout analyses of how human impacts will change over time [link to Future Human Footprint].

Set clear biodiversity conservation goals and carry out explicit and objective conservation area design in support of those goals

Once data have been collected for the three tracks there needs to be a way to determine which places on the landscape are most vital for conservation. This process is often called site selection. New computer tools, called site selection algorithms, have emerged in the last few years that allow researchers to determine which set of sites on the landscape contribute the most to the conservation of a full suite of ecological features. Marxan is a popular site selection algorithm and has been used by Wildlands Network (http://www.uq.edu.au/marxan/)

It is not practical to conserve 100% of all the features, so analysts must go through a goal-setting process to determine how much of a given feature the site selection algorithm will seek to capture. This may be a single goal, say 30% of a focal species source habitat, or it may be a range of goals. In any case, goal setting should be done in an explicit way.

Once goals have been set, most site selection algorithms then divide the planning area into similarly sized “planning units,” often hexagons or squares. Usually there is an upper limit on the number of planning units that the software can accommodate. Data on the ecological features is loaded into the planning units and the algorithm is run.

Usually the algorithm is run 100 times, with millions of iterations in each run. Each run will yield a slightly different result. Those planning units that are selected in multiple runs are likely to be more ecologically valuable, or irreplaceable, than those selected less frequently. The algorithms are designed to clump planning units together where possible, under the assumption that larger areas are better than smaller areas for conservation. The algorithm can also be “seeded” with existing protected areas by always selecting, or locking in, those planning units that encompass the protected areas. If two planning areas are similar in value, the algorithm will choose the one closer to the locked-in areas over ones that are farther away.

Using the site selection algorithm it is possible to isolate clumps or blocks of high irreplaceability planning units. These clumps are the fundamental building blocks of a Wildlands Network Design. Further review by an expert panel, with input from other stakeholders, can help determine how those clumps should zoned or designated, that is, as core wild areas or as stewardship zones.

While the site selection algorithm and the focal species analysis can provide some insights into connectivity, new connectivity planning tools, such as CircuitScape (http://www.circuitscape.org/Circuitscape/Welcome.html) or FunConn (http://www.nrel.colostate.edu/projects/starmap/funconn_index.htm) provide much robust planning tools to identify wildlife linkages. As with site selection tools, the quality of the outputs will depend greatly on the data quality going in. These tools should also be applied in consultation with experts in the field.

Together, then, site selection and connectivity planning tools, in conjunction with extensive review and consultation, can yield a robust and defensible Wildlands network design comprised of core wild areas, where natural processes are allowed to direct the ebb and flow of life; wildlife linkages, zones of shared use by humans and wildlife that allow for the unimpeded migration of species, genes, and natural processes across the land; and compatible-use/stewardship areas, which surround and buffer core wild areas and support vibrant and sustainable rural economies

Evaluate the degree to which conservation goals are currently being met in existing areas and identify new areas needed to meet those goals

Once a full Wildlands Network Design has been developed, it can be compared against the existing conservation area system. It is likely that this will have been done throughout the WND development process in an informal way. It also possible that the current conservation system will have been incorporated into the design in explicit way by, for example, locking in existing strictly protected areas such as parks and wilderness areas into the site selection algorithm.

In any event, this comparison will identify gaps in the current conservation system that need to be filled. It also possible to overlay information about the current and future human impacts to identify which conservation gaps are the most threatened.

Involve a broad array of stakeholders in design and implementation

It is critical to involve regional stakeholders, scientific and otherwise, in the process of designing and implementing a network design. The draft network design should undergo a series of rigorous expert reviews before a final design is released. This process should be guided by a scientific advisory committee made up of committed scientists who are familiar the region or with the Wildlands Network’s scientific methods, who can guide and direct necessary research, fieldwork, and data collection by staff, interns, and volunteers. At the same time, we work closely with our partners to integrate the network design process with local and regional efforts to identify and protect conservation areas.

Climate Change

How to Mitigate Climate Change

Restoring and protecting connectivity is critical to saving biodiversity in North America, particularly as human pressures on the landscape continue to fragment animal populations. In order to protect nature for the long-term and on a large scale, we must think about it as a system that evolves over time. Because the environment is constantly changing, and human factors will likely always impact wild places, we need to practice “adaptive conservation planning” – implementing, evaluating, and revising our strategies as we move forward.

Climate Change Facts

Earth’s changing climate further complicates the layers of future conservation planning. During the last century, global temperatures have risen by an average of 1.3° Fahrenheit. Unless action is taken to dramatically reduce carbon emissions, the Earth is projected to warm by another 2.5 to 10.44 degrees Fahrenheit during this century. By comparison, the most recent Ice Age was 5° Fahrenheit cooler than present day. Even if we were to stop burning fossil fuels today and were able to reforest large areas, scientists warn that the planet will continue to warm for decades to come because of inertia already present in the global climate system. For example, melting glaciers reflecting less sunlight will continue to increase global temperatures.

On a day-to -day basis, many of the changes occurring in nature are imperceptible to the human eye. Over time, however, they will add up to broad and sweeping redistributions of animals and plants as entire ecosystems refashion themselves. This is not unnatural of course, but the speed with which these changes are occurring is unprecedented and accelerated. Our wildlife and wild places are facing a race against time for which they are not adapted, and many will likely disappear – if we don’t act now. We have seen what historic changes in climate have done to the mega fauna our children can only embrace in cartoons or as stuffed toys. Today, we face extinctions larger than those seen at the end of the Ice Age. Thus, we have to plan for dramatic shifts in animal populations and movement as our climate changes. Wildlands Network and our partners are suiting up for the job.

What is Wildlands Network Doing?

At Wildlands Network, we have taken on a whole new challenge of protecting and connecting undefined places and populations in the future. Not only do we have to plan for evolving reserve systems around current areas in need of protection and present-day distribution of animals and plants, we also have to consider areas that will likely be biologically critical in the future. To do this as accurately and quickly as possible, Wildlands Network is working with a larger-than-ever network of stakeholders in hopes of providing a sound plan for averting the pending mass extinctions.

We have been working with scientists at the California Academy of Sciences and colleagues within our partner groups to model predicted future climate and distribution scenarios in a changing world. Through a Science & Mapping Advisory Group formed at the recent Western Conservation Summit, we will be providing a forum for conservationists working on this subject to share and coordinate their projects.

Wildlands Network and the Wildlife Conservation Society co-convened a small group of conservation planning experts[1] at a workshop in Boulder, Colorado titled Best Science for Conserving Wildlife Habitats and Connectivity. The overarching goal of the workshop was to discuss what the latest science tells us about protecting crucial wildlife habitat and connectivity for terrestrial-freshwater systems.

Discussions and presentations at the workshop centered on topics such as 1) what successful conservation of connectivity and wildlife habitat should look like in a changing, contested landscape; 2) what an ideal wildlife habitat and connectivity design should include; and 3) the “emerging issues” in biodiversity conservation.

Of particular interest were the discussions concerning “emerging issues,” which highlighted, among other things, recent changes in both the type of threats facing biological diversity (e.g., climate change) as well as our understanding of what it takes to protect nature (e.g., the need to protect keystone species such as carnivores and to develop resilient ecosystems). There was uniform agreement that old conservation planning criteria such as representation of particular communities or ecosystems are a thing of the past due to climate change (which will stir and recombine species in totally new combinations). Of greatest importance now is to develop strategies, such as landscape connectivity and resilience, which help nature adapt to species range shifts, dispersal, migrations, and other changes associated with global warming and expanding land use by humans.

Workshop participants will be collaborating on two written products: 1) A scientific publication discussing the “Emerging Issues in Biodiversity Conservation” and 2) a report outlining a 'conservation design scorecard' in which the array of tools and approaches available to conservation planners is described, assessed, and categorized as to the conditions for which they are best suited. This group will work together to develop these products and disseminate them to institutions and groups involved in planning for biodiversity conservation, such as the Western Governors’ Association, other conservation NGOs, and conservation planners in academia.

Animals and plants respond to changes in their environment through dispersal. Already, we are seeing many species’ ranges are indeed shifting poleward and upslope, and we expect this migration will almost certainly continue as warming trends persist. Unfortunately, in today’s world, landscapes outside of protected areas often are hostile to the survival of many species due to human encroachment, roads, and agriculture. Large-scale, continental connectivity is a precautionary, critical, and adaptive approach to promote resilience and robust communities when planning conservation in North America in the face of climate change. We must keep future management plans and critical habitat open and adaptive to help nature adjust to a new climate with minimal loss of species and other components of biodiversity.

The science of predicting future conditions of ecosystems and habitats is a fledgling field, and conservationists have had little chance to apply this budding science to the process of conservation area design. However, we can safely assume that less land is needed for long-term planning if models are designed to address both current and future climate conditions simultaneously.

We are beginning to witness unprecedented cooperation of national conservation organizations, federal agencies, climate experts, scientists, anglers, farmers, private land owners and local grass-roots environmental groups to collaboratively protect nature. As this synergy builds in the conservation world, it is crucial that the science-based organizations work with conservation planners at all levels to fill knowledge gaps on species and ecosystem responses to climate change.