Miller James R, Groom Martha, Hess George R, Steelman Toddi, Stokes David L, Thompson Jan, Bowman Troy, Fricke Laura, King Brandon, Marquardt Ryan
Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management and Department of Landscape Architecture, 339 Science II, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-3221, USA.
Conserv Biol. 2009 Feb;23(1):53-63. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.01110.x. Epub 2008 Nov 2.
Local land-use policy is increasingly being recognized as fundamental to biodiversity conservation in the United States. Many planners and conservation scientists have called for broader use of planning and regulatory tools to support the conservation of biodiversity at local scales. Yet little is known about the pervasiveness of these practices. We conducted an on-line survey of county, municipal, and tribal planning directors (n =116) in 3 geographic regions of the United States: metropolitan Seattle, Washington; metropolitan Des Moines, Iowa; and the Research Triangle, North Carolina. Our objectives were to gauge the extent to which local planning departments address biodiversity conservation and to identify factors that facilitate or hinder conservation actions in local planning. We found that biodiversity conservation was seldom a major consideration in these departments. Staff time was mainly devoted to development mandates and little time was spent on biodiversity conservation. Regulations requiring conservation actions that might benefit biodiversity were uncommon, with the exception of rules governing water quality in all 3 regions and the protection of threatened and endangered species in the Seattle region. Planning tools that could enhance habitat conservation were used infrequently. Collaboration across jurisdictions was widespread, but rarely focused on conservation. Departments with a conservation specialist on staff tended to be associated with higher levels of conservation actions. Jurisdictions in the Seattle region also reported higher levels of conservation action, largely driven by state and federal mandates. Increased funding was most frequently cited as a factor that would facilitate greater consideration of biodiversity in local planning. There are numerous opportunities for conservation biologists to play a role in improving conservation planning at local scales.
在美国,地方土地利用政策日益被视为生物多样性保护的基础。许多规划者和保护科学家呼吁更广泛地使用规划和监管工具,以支持地方层面的生物多样性保护。然而,对于这些做法的普遍程度却知之甚少。我们对美国三个地理区域的县、市和部落规划主任(n = 116)进行了在线调查:华盛顿州西雅图市大都市区;爱荷华州得梅因市大都市区;北卡罗来纳州研究三角区。我们的目标是评估地方规划部门在多大程度上关注生物多样性保护,并确定促进或阻碍地方规划中保护行动的因素。我们发现,生物多样性保护在这些部门中很少成为主要考虑因素。工作人员的时间主要用于发展任务,很少花在生物多样性保护上。要求采取可能有利于生物多样性的保护行动的法规并不常见,不过在所有三个区域中关于水质的规定以及西雅图地区对受威胁和濒危物种的保护规定除外。能够加强栖息地保护的规划工具很少被使用。跨辖区的合作很普遍,但很少侧重于保护。有保护专家的部门往往与更高水平的保护行动相关联。西雅图地区的辖区也报告了更高水平的保护行动,这在很大程度上是由州和联邦的任务驱动的。增加资金是最常被提及的有助于在地方规划中更多考虑生物多样性的因素。保护生物学家有很多机会在改善地方层面的保护规划中发挥作用。