Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
A. Hansen, J. Rotella, M. Kraska, D. Brown (1999)
DYNAMIC HABITAT AND POPULATION ANALYSIS: AN APPROACH TO RESOLVE THE BIODIVERSITY MANAGER'S DILEMMAEcological Applications, 9
T. Merrill, D. Mattson, R. Wright, H. Quigley (1999)
Defining landscapes suitable for restoration of grizzly bears Ursus arctos in IdahoBiological Conservation, 87
(1999)
A conservation plan for the Klamath - Siskiyou ecoregion
R. Noss (1983)
A Regional Landscape Approach to Maintain DiversityBioScience, 33
R. Pressey, K. Taffs (2001)
Scheduling conservation action in production landscapes: priority areas in western New South Wales defined by irreplaceability and vulnerability to vegetation lossBiological Conservation, 100
Delineation and development of digital boundary data for fifth-and sixth-level hydrologic units: pilot program for northeast area of Wyoming. USGS, Cheyenne
M. Boyce, L. McDonald (1999)
Relating populations to habitats using resource selection functions.Trends in ecology & evolution, 14 7
(1999)
A model ecosystem for carnivores in Greater Yellowstone
(2000)
Discovering life in America: tools and techniques of biodiversity inventory. Pages 19-53 in
(2000)
Designing a geography of hope: a practitioner's handbook for ecoregional conservation planning
W. Reiners (2014)
Mountains and Plains: The Ecology of Wyoming Landscapes
H. Leslie, M. Ruckelshaus, I. Ball, S. Andelman, H. Possingham (2003)
Using siting algorithms in the design of marine reserve networksEcological Applications, 13
C. Daly, R. Neilson, D. Phillips (1994)
A Statistical-Topographic Model for Mapping Climatological Precipitation over Mountainous TerrainJournal of Applied Meteorology, 33
Valerie Kapos (2000)
UNEP-WCMC Web Site: Mountains and Mountain Forests, 20
R. Pressey, C. Humphries, C. Margules, R. Vane-Wright, P. Williams (1993)
Beyond opportunism: Key principles for systematic reserve selection.Trends in ecology & evolution, 8 4
(1996)
Gap analysis: a landscape approach to biodiversity planning. American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing
B. Manly, L. McDonald, Dana Thomas (1993)
Resource Selection by Animals
N. Myers, R. Mittermeier, C. Mittermeier, G. Fonseca, J. Kent (2000)
Biodiversity hotspots for conservation prioritiesNature, 403
D. Mladenoff, Theodore Sickley, R. Haight, Adrian Wydeven (1995)
A Regional Landscape Analysis and Prediction of Favorable Gray Wolf Habitat in the Northern Great Lakes RegionConservation Biology, 9
R. Pressey, T. Hager, K. Ryan, J. Schwarz, S. Wall, S. Ferrier, P. Creaser (2000)
Using abiotic data for conservation assessments over extensive regions : quantitative methods applied across New South Wales, AustraliaBiological Conservation, 96
R. Noss, H. Quigley, M. Hornocker, T. Merrill, P. Paquet (1996)
Conservation Biology and Carnivore Conservation in the Rocky MountainsConservation Biology, 10
(1999)
SITES V 1 . 0 : an analytical toolbox for designing ecoregional conservation portfolios
Carmen Domingo (1929)
BiologyNature, 123
J. Scott, F. Davis, B. Csuti, R. Noss, C. Groves, H. Anderson, S. Caicco, T. Edwards, J. Ulliman, R. Wright (1993)
GAP ANALYSIS: A GEOGRAPHIC APPROACH TO PROTECTION OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
Miller Miller, Reading Reading, Strittholt Strittholt, Carroll Carroll, Noss Noss, Soulé Soulé, Sanchez Sanchez, Terborgh Terborgh, Brightsmith Brightsmith, Cheeseman Cheeseman, Foreman Foreman (1998)
Using focal species in the design of nature reserve networks.Wild Earth, 8
J. Rappole, R. Noss, Michael O’Connell, D. Murphy (1997)
The Science of Conservation Planning: Habitat Conservation Under The Endangered Species Act
R. Lambeck (1997)
Focal Species: A Multi‐Species Umbrella for Nature ConservationConservation Biology, 11
R. Pressey (1994)
Ad Hoc Reservations: Forward or Backward Steps in Developing Representative Reserve Systems?Conservation Biology, 8
(1998)
A user's guide to the PATCH model. EPA/600/ R-98/135
Irreplaceability and Vulnerability of Greater Yellowstone Sites 907 ecosystem for carnivores in Greater Yellowstone
W. Hall, F. Craighead (1983)
The Track of the Grizzly, 7
(1992)
State soil geographic data base (STATSGO) data user's guide. Miscellaneous publication 1492. U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service
S. Ferrier, R. Pressey, T. Barrett (2000)
A new predictor of the irreplaceability of areas for achieving a conservation goal, its application to real-world planning, and a research agenda for further refinementBiological Conservation, 93
Patten Patten (1998)
Riparian ecosystems of semi‐arid North America: diversity and human impacts.Wetlands, 18
J. Kirkpatrick, M. Brown (1994)
A Comparison of Direct and Environmental Domain Approaches to Planning Reservation of Forest Higher Plant Communities and Species in TasmaniaConservation Biology, 8
R. Briers (2002)
Incorporating connectivity into reserve selection proceduresBiological Conservation, 103
C. Margules, R. Pressey (2000)
Systematic conservation planningNature, 405
R. Pressey, I. Johnson, Peter Wilson (1994)
Shades of irreplaceability: towards a measure of the contribution of sites to a reservation goalBiodiversity & Conservation, 3
R. Noss (1987)
From plant communities to landscapes in conservation inventories: A look at the nature conservancy (USA)Biological Conservation, 41
R. Noss (2001)
Beyond Kyoto: Forest Management in a Time of Rapid Climate ChangeConservation Biology, 15
(2001)
Technical description of mapping historical, current, and future housing densities in the US using census block groups. Colorado State University, Fort Collins
C. Carroll, R. Noss, P. Paquet (2001)
CARNIVORES AS FOCAL SPECIES FOR CONSERVATION PLANNING IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGIONEcological Applications, 11
Mark McDonnell, Hugh Possingham, Ian Ball, Elizabeth Cousins (2002)
Mathematical Methods for Spatially Cohesive Reserve DesignEnvironmental Modeling & Assessment, 7
H. Possingham, I. Ball, S. Andelman (2000)
Mathematical Methods for Identifying Representative Reserve Networks
R. Pressey, R. Cowling (2001)
Reserve Selection Algorithms and the Real WorldConservation Biology, 15
J. Scott, F. Davis, R. McGhie, R. Wright, C. Groves, J. Estes (2001)
NATURE RESERVES: DO THEY CAPTURE THE FULL RANGE OF AMERICA'S BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY?Ecological Applications, 11
E. Dinerstein, David Olson, D. Graham, Avis Webster, Steven Primm, Marnie Bookbinder, G. Ledec (1995)
A Conservation Assessment of the Terrestrial Ecoregions of Latin America and the CaribbeanEnvironmental Conservation, 23
(2001)
A biological conservation assessment for the greater Yellowstone ecosystem
K. Poiani, B. Richter, Mark Anderson, H. Richter (2000)
Biodiversity Conservation at Multiple Scales: Functional Sites, Landscapes, and Networks, 50
Abstract: We conducted a systematic conservation assessment of the 10.8‐million‐ha Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), integrating three basic approaches to conservation planning: protecting special elements, representing environmental variation, and securing habitat for focal species (grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos), wolf (Canis lupus), and wolverine (Gulo gulo)). Existing protected areas encompass 27% of the GYE but fail to capture many biological hotspots of the region or to represent all natural communities. Using a simulated annealing site‐selection algorithm, combined with biological and environmental data based on a geographic information system and static ( habitat suitability) and dynamic ( population viability) modeling of focal species, we identified unprotected sites within the GYE that are biologically irreplaceable and vulnerable to degradation. Irreplaceability scores were assigned to 43 megasites (aggregations of planning units) on the basis of nine criteria corresponding to quantitative conservation goals. Expert opinion supplemented quantitative data in determining vulnerability scores. If all megasites were protected, the reserved area of the GYE would expand by 43% (to 70%) and increase protection of known occurrences of highly imperiled species by 71% (to 100%) and of all special elements by 62% (to 92%). These new reserves would also significantly increase representation of environmental variation and capture critical areas for focal species. The greatest gains would be achieved by protecting megasites scoring highest in irreplaceability and vulnerability. Protection of 15 high‐priority megasites would expand reserved area by 22% and increase the overall achievement of goals by 30%. Protection of highly imperiled species and representation of geoclimatic classes would increase by 46% and 49%, respectively. Although conservation action must be somewhat opportunistic, our method aids decision‐making by identifying areas that will contribute the most to explicit conservation goals.
Conservation Biology – Wiley
Published: Aug 1, 2002
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.