Legally designated wilderness areas are acknowledged to be an important element in strategies to conserve biological diversity in United States. However, because of the restrictions on consumptive uses in wilderness, their establishment is normally contentious. Criteria for establishment have typically been associated with opportunity and aesthetic and experiential values. Biological data have not normally played a major role in guiding wilderness establishment. We present four wilderness allocation options for those public lands considered suitable for wilderness designation in Idaho. These options cover the span of choices presently available to wilderness planners in the state and range from not establishing any new wilderness areas to the inclusion of all suitable lands in wilderness. All options are evaluated using spatial biological data from the National Biological Survey's Gap Analysis Project. A conservation strategy that would protect a minimum of 10% of the area occupied by each of 113 native vegetation types and at a minimum 10% of the distribution of each of 368 vertebrate species was evaluated for each option. Only the inclusion of all suitable lands in wilderness, creating a system of 5.1 million ha came close to achieving these goals, protecting 65% of the vegetation types and 56% of the vertebrate species. We feel this approach, which allows planners to evaluate the ecological merits of proposed widerness units along with other values, can provide a means to resolve the impasse over additional wilderness designation in Idaho.
[1]
M. Hummel.
Endangered spaces : the future for Canada's wilderness
,
1989
.
[2]
R. G. Wright,et al.
An Ecological Evaluation of Proposed New Conservation Areas in Idaho: Evaluating Proposed Idaho National Parks
,
1994
.
[3]
M. J. Brown,et al.
A Comparison of Direct and Environmental Domain Approaches to Planning Reservation of Forest Higher Plant Communities and Species in Tasmania
,
1994
.
[4]
D. Roth.
The Wilderness Movement and the National Forests
,
1988
.
[5]
R. G. Wright,et al.
GAP ANALYSIS: A GEOGRAPHIC APPROACH TO PROTECTION OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
,
1993
.
[6]
J. Franklin.
Preserving Biodiversity: Species, Ecosystems, or Landscapes?
,
1993,
Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.
[7]
John E. Estes,et al.
Species RichnessA geographic approach to protecting future biological diversity
,
1987
.
[8]
J. M. Scott,et al.
Status and prospects for success of the endangered species act: a look at recovery plans.
,
1993,
Science.
[9]
Jean E. McKendry,et al.
The role of geography in extending biodiversity gap analaysis
,
1993
.
[10]
C. Margules,et al.
Introduction to some Australian developments in conservation evaluation
,
1989
.