Reserve selection with minimum contiguous area restrictions: An application to open space protection planning in suburban Chicago

Conservation efforts often require site or parcel selection strategies that lead to spatially cohesive reserves. Although habitat contiguity is thought to be conducive to the persistence of many sensitive species, availability of funding and suitable land may restrict the extent to which this spatial attribute can be pursued in land management or conservation. Using optimization modeling, we explore the economic and spatial tradeoffs of retaining or restoring grassland habitat in contiguous patches of various sizes near the Chicago metropolitan area. The underlying mathematical construct is the first exact, generalized formulation that directly models spatial contiguity in optimal reserve selection. The construct allows conservation planners to analyze and weigh different minimum contiguous habitat size requirements that are to be used in specific land acquisition or retention projects.

[1]  Richard M Cowling,et al.  Conservation planning in a changing world. , 2007, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[2]  James R. Miller.  Restoration, reconciliation, and reconnecting with nature nearby , 2006 .

[3]  S. K. Davis,et al.  AREA SENSITIVITY IN GRASSLAND PASSERINES: EFFECTS OF PATCH SIZE, PATCH SHAPE, AND VEGETATION STRUCTURE ON BIRD ABUNDANCE AND OCCURRENCE IN SOUTHERN SASKATCHEWAN , 2004 .

[4]  Sharon Kingsland,et al.  Creating a Science of Nature Reserve Design: Perspectives from History , 2002 .

[5]  Hayri Önal,et al.  A graph theory approach for designing conservation reserve networks with minimal fragmentation , 2008, Networks.

[6]  Hayri Önal,et al.  Designing a conservation reserve network with minimal fragmentation: A linear integer programming approach , 2005 .

[7]  R. Haight,et al.  Habitat Acquisition Strategies for Grassland Birds in an Urbanizing Landscape , 2007, Environmental management.

[8]  C. Revelle,et al.  Counterpart Models in Facility Location Science and Reserve Selection Science , 2002 .

[9]  Hayri Önal,et al.  Incorporating spatial criteria in optimum reserve network selection , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[10]  J. Orestes Cerdeira,et al.  Connectivity in priority area selection for conservation , 2005 .

[11]  Charles S. ReVelle,et al.  Spatial attributes and reserve design models: A review , 2005 .

[12]  V. Pareto.  Manuel D'Economie Politique , 1988 .

[13]  Hayri Önal,et al.  Optimal Selection of a Connected Reserve Network , 2006, Oper. Res..

[14]  John Sessions,et al.  Designing Compact and Contiguous Reserve Networks with a Hybrid Heuristic Algorithm , 2002, Forest Science.

[15]  Hayri Önal,et al.  Selection of a minimum–boundary reserve network using integer programming , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[16]  R L Pressey,et al.  Beyond opportunism: Key principles for systematic reserve selection. , 1993, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[17]  S. A. Temple,et al.  Nest predation and brood parasitism of tallgrass prairie birds , 1990 .

[18]  Vladimir Marianov,et al.  Selecting compact habitat reserves for species with differential habitat size needs , 2008, Comput. Oper. Res..

[19]  Marc E. McDill,et al.  Finding the Efficient Frontier of a Bi-Criteria, Spatially Explicit, Harvest Scheduling Problem , 2006, Forest Science.

[20]  Justin C. Williams.  A Zero-One Programming Model for Contiguous Land Acquisition , 2002 .

[21]  Kevin J. Gaston,et al.  Optimisation in reserve selection procedures—why not? , 2002 .

[22]  Douglas H. Johnson,et al.  AREA REQUIREMENTS OF GRASSLAND BIRDS: A REGIONAL PERSPECTIVE , 2001 .

[23]  Marc E. McDill,et al.  Can mature patch constraints mitigate the fragmenting effects of harvest opening size restrictions , 2003 .

[24]  Atte Moilanen,et al.  Reserve Selection Using Nonlinear Species Distribution Models , 2005, The American Naturalist.

[25]  C. Revelle,et al.  A 0–1 Programming Approach to Delineating Protected Reserves , 1996 .

[26]  Aldina M. A. Franco,et al.  Prioritizing multiple-use landscapes for conservation: methods for large multi-species planning problems , 2005, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[27]  Richard L. Church,et al.  Clustering and Compactness in Reserve Site Selection: An Extension of the Biodiversity Management Area Selection Model , 2003, Forest Science.

[28]  Dennis E. Jelinski,et al.  THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF PATCH AREA AND PERIMETER–AREA RATIO TO GRASSLAND BREEDING BIRDS , 1999 .

[29]  S. Sarkar,et al.  Systematic conservation planning , 2000, Nature.

[30]  S. Robinson,et al.  Effects of Prairie Fragmentation on the Nest Success of Breeding Birds in the Midcontinental United States , 2003 .

[31]  Justin C. Williams,et al.  Reserve assemblage of critical areas: A zero-one programming approach , 1998 .

[32]  Stephen Polasky,et al.  You can't always get what you want: conservation planning with feedback effects. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[33]  J. Kline,et al.  Land use changes involving forestry in the United States: 1952 to 1997, with projections to 2050. , 2003 .

[34]  P. D. Kilburn.  The Forest-Prairie Ecotone in Northeastern Illinois' , 1959 .

[35]  Anna M. Hersperger,et al.  Road Traffic and Nearby Grassland Bird Patterns in a Suburbanizing Landscape , 2002, Environmental management.

[36]  Marc E. McDill,et al.  Promoting Large, Compact Mature Forest Patches in Harvest Scheduling Models , 2008 .

[37]  Marc E. McDill,et al.  A mixed-integer formulation of the minimum patch size problem , 2003 .