Show simple item record

dc.contributorVirginia Tech GIS & Remote Sensing 2014 Research Symposiumen_US
dc.contributor.authorScott, L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorGillespie, J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorVillamagna, A.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-11-04T19:39:20Z
dc.date.available2014-11-04T19:39:20Z
dc.date.issued2014en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/50678
dc.description.abstractResearch Objective: To quantify and compare ecosystem services (ES) capacity for Publicly Protected Areas (PPAs) and private conservation easements. Method: The study area was state and federal PPAs and private conservation easements in NC and VA. We developed and used existing ES capacity models to quantify ES capacity using GIS. Focal ES were surface water regulation, groundwater protection, water quality regulation, erosion control, recreational fishing, carbon storage, and biodiversity support. National Conservation Easement Database was used to map private conservation easements with environmental systems, recreation and education, open forest, and open farm purposes with a gap status of 1, 2, or unknown. USGS National Inventory of Protected Areas (PAD-US) was used to map State and Federal PPAs with a gap status 1 or 2. All ES capacities were standardized on a scale of 0-1 for comparison. Results: Biodiversity support was significantly greater in federal PPAs, especially throughout VA. Surface water regulation was the only ES where federal and state PPA capacity was significantly greater than private conservation easements. Ecosystem service capacity for private conservation easements was equal or greater to federal and state PPAs for all services except surface water regulation. Private land conservation protects ES and may have positive regional impacts where PPAs are not present. Although smaller, private easements can protect ES in more diffuse areas throughout the region. Existing ES capacity can be used to identify conservation areas with potential to enhance ES protection. Riparian filtration, erosion control, carbon storage, and surface water regulation capacity are the most practical services to incentivize ES protection on private lands.en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.rightsIn Copyright (InC)en_US
dc.rightsThis Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights. Some uses of this Item may be deemed fair and permitted by law even without permission from the rights holder(s). For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights holder(s).en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectConservation easementsen_US
dc.subjectNational protected area systemsen_US
dc.subjectEcosystem servicesen_US
dc.subjectLand use mappingen_US
dc.titleEcosystem Service Benefits from Public and Private Conservation Landsen_US
dc.typePosteren_US
dc.rights.holderScott, L.en_US
dc.rights.holderGillespie, J.en_US
dc.rights.holderVillamagna, A.en_US
dc.type.dcmitypeTexten_US
dc.type.dcmitypeImageen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record