Dyckman Caitlin S, McMahan Chris, Overby Anna Treado, Fouch Nakisha, Ogletree Scott, Self Stella W, White David L, Lauria Mickey, Baldwin Robert F
City and Regional Planning Program, School of Architecture, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, USA.
School of Mathematics and Statistical Sciences, Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, USA.
Conserv Sci Pract. 2024 Jun;6(6). doi: 10.1111/csp2.13130. Epub 2024 May 16.
Native ecosystem and biodiversity loss from land use conversion into human-modified landscapes are evident in the United States and globally. In addition to public land conservation, there is an increase in private land conservation through conservation easements (CEs) across exurban landscapes. Not every CE was established strictly for biodiversity protection and permitted land uses can increase human modification. No research of which we are aware has examined the actual tax assessor's land use designations (LUDs) through time. We constructed granular CE datasets (GCED) of CEs and their parcels' tax assessment LUDs for 1997-2008/2009, based on original data from 12 counties in six US states. Using the GCED, we examined patterns in the LUDs, with implications for land uses that could impact CE biological outcomes. We show that LUDs on exurban private conservation lands were predominately residential and agricultural, with increased residential over time. Critically, the LUDs lack a biological conservation exempt designation/category. There is no consistent trend in association between the primary CE reason and its parcel's LUD, suggesting that they coincide in some circumstances but in others, the CE may be a response to contravene the LUD. The majority of the first CE reasons are focused on open space preservation, except in some counties where agricultural land uses and agricultural CEs are associated. The economically and human-focused LUD is one of many social factors that should be considered in a classification system for private land conservation and CEs more specifically. These results prompt the land conservation, conservation biology, and environmental planning communities to explore assessed land uses' impact on biodiversity conservation objectives.
在美国乃至全球范围内,土地用途转变为人类改造景观导致原生生态系统和生物多样性丧失的现象十分明显。除了公共土地保护外,通过城市远郊景观的保护地役权(CEs)进行的私人土地保护也在增加。并非每个CE都是严格为生物多样性保护而设立的,允许的土地用途可能会增加人类对土地的改造。据我们所知,尚无研究对实际的税务评估员随时间推移的土地用途指定(LUDs)进行过考察。我们基于美国六个州12个县的原始数据,构建了1997 - 2008/2009年CEs及其地块税务评估LUDs的详细数据集(GCED)。利用GCED,我们研究了LUDs的模式,以及可能影响CE生物结果的土地用途。我们发现,城市远郊私人保护土地上的LUDs主要是住宅和农业用途,且住宅用途随时间增加。至关重要的是,LUDs缺乏生物保护豁免指定/类别。主要CE原因与其地块的LUD之间没有一致的关联趋势,这表明它们在某些情况下会重合,但在其他情况下,CE可能是对LUD的一种违背。除了一些农业土地用途和农业CEs相关的县外,大多数最初的CE原因都集中在开放空间保护上。以经济和人类为重点的LUD是私人土地保护分类系统,更具体地说是CEs分类系统中应考虑的众多社会因素之一。这些结果促使土地保护、保护生物学和环境规划界去探索评估的土地用途对生物多样性保护目标的影响。