Habitat Conservation Plan Implementation: Keeping Promises for Adaptive Management Within a "No Surprises" Policy

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorSmith, Bernice Lorettaen
dc.contributor.committeechairRandolph, Johnen
dc.contributor.committeememberTrauger, David L.en
dc.contributor.committeememberBailey, Carol A.en
dc.contributor.committeememberBryant, Margaret M.en
dc.contributor.committeememberRichardson, Jesse J.en
dc.contributor.departmentEnvironmental Design and Planningen
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-14T20:19:38Zen
dc.date.adate2005-12-09en
dc.date.available2014-03-14T20:19:38Zen
dc.date.issued2005-10-21en
dc.date.rdate2005-12-09en
dc.date.sdate2005-12-02en
dc.description.abstractAdaptive management is an approach to problem solving that acknowledges uncertainty. Adaptive management involves a systematic and rigorous process of learning from the outcomes of management actions, accommodating change and improving management. Plans, policies or management strategies influenced by new information and learning, are modified. This study examines the implementation of adaptive management for endangered and threatened species covered in Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP). Introduced in 1982 as an amendment to the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Habitat Conservation Plans are negotiated agreements that mitigate the incidental "take" (killing, harming) of endangered and threatened species during a development or resource extraction project. However, scholars found the scientific basis of approved HCPs to be inadequate and the efficacy of prescribed mitigation measures untested implying the need for adaptive management during implementation. This case study evaluation investigates HCP landowner compliance and progress within the parameters of the federal 1994 "No Surprises" policy. That policy limits landowner liability and responsibility for additional conservation action due to failed mitigation measures during HCP implementation. "No Surprises" assumes we can predict all the consequences of implementing a HCP. The policy seems to work against the objectives of adaptive management to improve scientific knowledge and modify action. The cases include the Central Cascades HCP implemented in the Central Cascades of Washington and the Orange Central Coastal County HCP implemented within a nature reserve in Orange County, California. The study assesses the strengths and weaknesses of adaptive management implementation for protecting endangered species and their habitat, and 2) recommends mid-course corrections for improving adaptive management before HCP maturity.en
dc.description.degreePh. D.en
dc.identifier.otheretd-12022005-151704en
dc.identifier.sourceurlhttp://scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-12022005-151704/en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10919/29878en
dc.publisherVirginia Techen
dc.relation.haspartREVISEDfinalBLSMITHDISSERTATION12505.pdfen
dc.rightsIn Copyrighten
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/en
dc.subjectHabitat Conservation Plan Implementationen
dc.subjectProgram Evaluationen
dc.subjectEndangered and Threatened Speciesen
dc.subjectCase Study Evaluationen
dc.subjectAdaptive Managementen
dc.titleHabitat Conservation Plan Implementation: Keeping Promises for Adaptive Management Within a "No Surprises" Policyen
dc.typeDissertationen
thesis.degree.disciplineEnvironmental Design and Planningen
thesis.degree.grantorVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State Universityen
thesis.degree.leveldoctoralen
thesis.degree.namePh. D.en

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
REVISEDfinalBLSMITHDISSERTATION12505.pdf
Size:
4.7 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

Doctoral Dissertations