Transcript Understanding the Strategic Habitat Conservation Framework

The Strategic Habitat Conservation Framework
What, Why, and Its Implications
to the LMV Joint Venture
A Briefing for the LMV Joint Venture
Management Board – June 13, 2007
Thinking about the “What”…
A framework for pursuing the
functional elements of conservation
• Planning
• Implementation
• Monitoring
• Evaluation
• Research
…in a more “strategic” way.
Thinking about the “What”…
In what manner “strategic”?
• Focused on measurable biological
outcomes
• Supported by a more comprehensive
science/management relationship
• Reflecting landscape-level conditions
and objectives.
• Reflecting the interdependency of the
conservation community in effecting
conservation at ecoregional scales.
The SHC Framework of Functional Elements
Biological Planning
Conservation Design
Conservation Delivery
Decision-Based Monitoring
Assumption-Driven Research
Thinking about the “Why”…
SHC is a response to changes affecting not simply the
Service but the conservation community at large:
• A growing focus on the sustainability of systems,
communities, and species as the overarching aim of
conservation. As reflected in…
• Conservation theory
• Higher education
• Increasingly comprehensive plans and planning
processes
• Spatially explicit methods and approaches of
habitat characterization and assessment
Thinking about the “Why”…
SHC is a response to changes affecting not simply the
Service but the conservation community at large:
• A growing focus on the sustainability of systems,
communities, and species as the overarching aim of
conservation.
•
An information technology revolution that is both
supporting and driving an increasing ability to think
and act at large spatial scales.
• An increasing emphasis on accountability, biological as
well as administrative.
Implications of SHC to the Service
•
Recognize biological planning and conservation design
(at ecoregional scales) as core functions and work
within our “ecosystem” of conservation partners to
develop a shared capacity.
•
Create with our DOI sister agency (USGS) a
science/management relationship that moves beyond
the “research needs/response” paradigm to encompass
each of the SHC functional elements.
•
Expand our investment in ecoregional-scale
partnerships as the operational model for pursuing
biological outcomes at broad spatial scales.
Implications of SHC to the LMV Joint Venture
The “LMV model” has already had a material bearing on how
SHC was developed and how it is being communicated:
•
The SHC functional elements are essentially as
defined in the LMV.
The SHC Framework of Functional Elements
Biological Planning
Conservation Design
Conservation Delivery
Decision-Based Monitoring
Assumption-Driven Research
Implications of SHC to the LMV Joint Venture
The “LMV model” has already had a material bearing on how
SHC was developed and how it is being communicated:
•
The SHC functional elements are essentially as
defined in the LMV.
•
Our application of the elements has been used to
explain and illustrate SHC.
•
•
•
•
•
•
FWS Directorate
USGS Executive Leadership Team
Asst Secretary for Water and Science
Deputy Secretary of Interior
Chief of Staff, Secretary of Interior
Regional Directorate of four FWS Regions
Implications of SHC to the LMV Joint Venture
The “LMV model” has already had a material bearing on how
SHC was developed and how it is being communicated:
•
The SHC functional elements are essentially as
defined in the LMV.
•
Our application of the elements has been used to
explain and illustrate SHC.
• The science/management relationship we are
cultivating in the LMV is viewed as comprehensive.
•
Partner interactions in the LMV increasingly illustrate
the concept of organizational interdependency in
working toward biological outcomes at large spatial
scales.
Implications of SHC to the LMV Joint Venture
The “LMV model” has already had a material bearing on how
SHC was developed and how it is being communicated.
Through continuing refinement of the “LMV model”, LMVJV
partners have the opportunity to influence by example:
• The response of the Service to broad changes working
within the conservation community at large.
• The response within AFWA to “Conservation Design”
and cross-state approaches in implementing State
CWCS’s.
Arkansas
Kentucky
Ducks Unlimited
Louisiana
The
Conservation
Fund
Our Challenge
The Nature
Conservancy
Wildlife Mgt
Institute
Mississippi
Continue to refine the Joint Venture
concept as a model for collaborative
conservation at ecoregional scales.
Oklahoma
US Geological
Survey
Tennessee
Forest
Service
USFWS
Texas
Missouri