Landscape design schwartz
•
1 like•279 views
The document summarizes a presentation on using landscape design to benefit water quality, wildlife, and agriculture. It discusses Landscape Conservation Cooperatives, an initiative involving 22 regions across North America. Specifically, it focuses on the Mississippi River Basin/Gulf Hypoxia Initiative, which aims to provide tools to target conservation investments that improve wildlife habitat while addressing agriculture, water quality, and hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico. Example strategies discussed include riparian buffers, wetland restoration, cover crops, and restored connectivity. Metrics include species populations and water quality indicators.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Similar to Landscape design schwartz
Similar to Landscape design schwartz (20)
More from Soil and Water Conservation Society
More from Soil and Water Conservation Society (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Landscape design schwartz
- 1. LANDSCAPE DESIGN FOR WATER, WILDLIFE, AND AGRICULTURE Michael Schwartz – The Conservation Fund Jorgen Rose – Indiana University SWCS Conference – July 2016 Louisville, KY
- 2. Symposium Overview 1) Intro to Landscape Conservation Cooperatives 2) Background on Mississippi River Basin / Gulf Hypoxia Initiative 3) Breakdown of MRB/GHI tools and tool development • Conservation Practice Sheets • Conservation Blueprint (The Conservation Fund 4) Overview of ongoing “pilot projects” & next steps
- 3. What are Landscape Conservation Cooperatives? • “Network of Networks” • 22 Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) spread across North America • Overarching LCC Network “Landscapes capable of sustaining natural and cultural resources for current and future generations.” “Building connections to tackle large-scale and long- term conservation challenges”
- 6. Eastern Tallgrass Prairie & Big Rivers LCC • Steering Committee • Four Technical Advisory Groups (TAGS): o Agroecology o River Restoration o Prairie Restoration o Urban Conservation (Ecological Places in Cities) • Larger, cross‐TAG Initiatives: o Monarch Conservation o Mississippi River Basin / Gulf Hypoxia Initiative
- 9. MISSISSIPPI / GULF HYPOXIA INITIATIVE Goal (draft): Provide tools for targeting conservation investments (what, how much, & where) that benefit fish and wildlife in a resilient, multifunctional landscape while also addressing agriculture, local water quality, and Gulf hypoxia.
- 13. Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) 1. Plains & Prairie Potholes LCC ‐ Rick Nelson, Max Post van der Burg 2. Upper Midwest & Great Lakes LCC ‐ John Rogner, Brad Potter 3. Eastern Tallgrass Prairie & Big Rivers LCC ‐ Glen Salmon, Gwen White 4. Great Plains LCC – Nicole Athearn, James Broska 5. Gulf Coast Prairie LCC – Bill Bartush, Cynthia Edwards 6. Gulf Coastal Plains & Ozarks LCC – Greg Wathen, Todd Jones‐Farrand 7. Appalachian LCC – Jean Brennan, Mary Davis GRP Connection – Bob Clevenstine, John Tirpak 7 LCCs & 3 CSCs Multi‐Agency Collaboration across the Mississippi Basin Climate Science Centers (CSCs) North Central CSC ‐ Jeff Morrisette South Central CSC ‐ Kim Winton, Michael Langston North East CSC ‐ Mary Ratnaswamy, Michelle Staudinger
- 15. • Started with a workshop in Memphis in August 2014 oDevelop overarching framework oDefine way forward for the Initiative
- 16. Who are the multi‐sector stakeholders that are involved? Universities: Kansas State University Mississippi State University Ohio State University Louisiana University Marine Consortium University of Illinois University of Minnesota University Wisconsin‐Madison NGOs: Agricultural Watershed Institute Mississippi River Network Ducks Unlimited Enviroscapes Ecological Consulting Fishers & Farmers Fish Habitat Partnership Gulf Hypoxia Task Force Illinois Council on Best Management Practices KGregg Consulting Lower Mississippi River Committee Midwest Conservation Biomass Alliance Mississippi Interstate Cooperative Resource Association National Wildlife Federation Natural Land Institute Oak Ridge National Laboratory Ohio River Basin Fish Habitat Partnership Practical Farmers of Iowa Rainwater Basin Joint Venture The Conservation Fund The Nature Conservancy Wildlife Management Institute State agencies: Indiana DNR Iowa Dept of Agriculture Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Missouri Dept of Conservation Nebraska Game & Parks Commission Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Federal agencies: Army Corps of Engineers Dept of Energy Dept of Transportation EPA (OWOW, Hypoxia Task Force) Fish & Wildlife Service (ES, Partners, EA, NCTC) USDA Forest Service US Geological Survey (NAWQA, HTF) National Park Service NOAA (HTF) USGS North Central Climate Science Center USGS South Central Climate Science Center USDA Farm Service Agency USDA National Institute of Food & Agriculture USDA NRCS (AR, IN, TN, MRBI) 50 people in Memphis. Over 250 in the contact list and counting…
- 18. Objective – Increase Wildlife Benefits Forested Riparian Mid-sized Streams Prairie (Grazing) Mainstem Floodplains American woodcock American redstart Belted kingfisher Blue-gray gnatcatcher Red-eyed vireo Black redhorse Pugnose minnow River redhorse Shovelnose sturgeon Smallmouth bass Copper-bellied watersnake Mussels Cyanobacteria Macroinvertebrate IBI Fish IBI Acadian flycatcher (forest breeding songbirds) Cerulean warbler Kentucky warbler Prothonotary Warbler Red-headed Woodpecker Swainson’s warbler Swallow-tailed kite Tree or Barn Swallows Wood Duck (wintering waterfowl) Wood thrush Alligator gar Mudpuppy Mussels Palaemonetes shrimp Blue-winged teal Bobolink Dickcissel Gadwall Grasshopper sparrow Henslow’s sparrow Horned lark Killdeer Loggerhead shrike Meadowlarks Upland sandpiper Prairie vole Plains pocket gopher Monarch butterfly Topeka shiner Floristic Quality Index Modified Headwaters (Row Crop Fields) American golden plover Blue-winged teal Leopard frog Crawfish frog Blackside darter Brown trout Creek chub Johnny darter Sculpin Topeka shiner Monarch butterfly Pollinators (native bees) Wild rice Macroinvertebrate IBI Fish IBI Shared Measurement Which Focal Species indicate progress and benefit directly from multi-sector conservation practices?
- 19. Strategies to Achieve Multiple Objectives Riparian Forest Mid-sized Streams Prairies Grazing Lands Floodplain Ag Lower Miss Valley (Cotton & Rice) Low cost / effective Riparian buffers Soil health Medium cost Bank stabilization Livestock fencing High cost Restore connectivity Hydrologic restoration Remeandering Sediment removal Infiltration Dam removal Easements Acquisition Wetlands Low cost / effective Vegetation diversity Convert marginal land Medium cost Wetland reforestation Regulate diversions Invasive control High cost Re-open channels Dredge wetlands Acquisition (forest) Water diversion Connectivity Market drivers Low cost / effective Conversion incentive Grazing BMPs Medium cost Prescribed fire Wetland buffer Drought mgt Prairie STRIPS High cost Compensate services Riparian habitat Restore savanna/oaks Native seed mix Headwaters Corn & Soybean Row Crops Multi-Sector Practices Ordered by Effectiveness & Relative Cost Low cost / effective Soil health Crop land for inverts Drainage lay out Oxbow restoration No till Crop rotation Medium cost Buffers Alt crops (biomass) Cover crops Prairie STRIPS Stream fencing High cost Habitat restoration Drainage water mgt Treatment wetlands Nutrient standards Floodplain Ag (Upper Basin / Midwest) Low cost / effective Veg restoration Medium cost Vegetation control Levee breaks Remove tiles Stop log structure Carp grates Reforestation High cost Connectivity Backwaters Control structures
- 21. MISSISSIPPI / GULF HYPOXIA INITIATIVE Goal (draft): Provide tools for targeting conservation investments (WHAT, how much, & where) that benefit fish and wildlife in a resilient, multifunctional landscape while also addressing agriculture, local water quality, and Gulf hypoxia.
- 22. Join a Work Team! Matching Practices to Species & Programs for Implementation • What & Where – Which species respond to each practice with multi‐sector benefits? – Do we have population objectives and monitoring? – Will redesign of the practices maximize multiple benefits? • Who & Why – Which programs implement, research and/or design these practices? – What are the socioeconomic implications? • How – How do we deliver this information to programs?
- 23. Strategies to Achieve Multiple Objectives Riparian Forest Mid‐sized Streams Prairies Grazing Lands Floodplain Ag Lower Miss Valley (Cotton & Rice) Low cost / effective Buffers in headwaters Soil health Medium cost Bank stabilization Livestock fencing High cost Restore connectivity Hydrologic restoration Remeandering Sediment removal Infiltration Dam removal Easements Acquisition Wetlands Low cost / effective Vegetation diversity Convert marginal land Medium cost Wetland reforestation Regulate diversions Invasive control High cost Re‐open channels Dredge wetlands Acquisition (forest) Water diversion Connectivity Market drivers Low cost / effective Conversion incentive Grazing BMPs Medium cost Prescribed fire Grassed wetland buffer Drought mgt Prairie STRIPS High cost Compensate services Riparian habitat Restore savanna/oaks Native seed mix Headwaters & Corn & Soybean Row Crops What do we mean by high‐impact and multiple‐ benefit? Low cost / effective Soil health Crop land for inverts Drainage lay out Oxbow restoration No till Crop rotation Medium cost Buffers Alt crops (biomass) Cover crops Prairie STRIPS Stream fencing High cost Habitat restoration Drainage water mgt Treatment wetlands Nutrient standards Floodplain Ag Midwest (Corn & Beans) Low cost / effective Veg restoration Medium cost Vegetation control Levee breaks Remove tiles Stop log structure Carp grates Reforestation High cost Connectivity Backwaters Control structures
- 24. Drainage Water Management … mitigates drought, keeps nutrients in place & provides shorebird habitat
- 34. Indianapolis R&D Forum • March 1‐3, 2016 in Indianapolis, IN • 60+ professionals and experts from across the MRB/GHI • Focused on reviewing and soliciting feedback on tools and future tool development o Solicited information both on practices that we’re missing and what our next steps in developing these sheets should look like
- 36. Next Steps • Integrate feedback from Indianapolis R&D Forum • Reconvene MRB/GHI Work Teams (Fall 2016) o Expand & differentiate practices o Fill in information gaps for practices (e.g., monitoring/evaluation)
- 39. PILOT: Lower Wabash Conservation Design Abby Donnelly, Indiana University Jorgen Rose, Indiana University Stakeholders listed to left Habitats: Floodplains – forest, wetlands, cane Headwaters – crop fields & grazing Goals (draft): 1) Wildlife conservation 2) Nutrient stewardship & soil health 3) Promote connection to nature 4) Adapt to future changes For more information, contact Jorgen Rose <jorgen_rose@fws.gov>
- 41. Lower Wabash LCD Strategic Plan • Characterize the region, including opportunities (complete) • Develop strategic framework, including goals and objectives (complete) • Develop actions steps and strategies to achieve goals and objectives (in progress) • Develop spatial priorities within larger geography (in progress) • Determine metrics for measuring progress and success, including indicator species, priority habitats, and population objectives (in progress)
- 45. Organization ‐ Audience & Role of LCCs (summer 2016) • Expand the stakeholders involved with refinement and implementation – production groups, extension, farm advisors. • Recognize and incorporate the importance of adequate infrastructure and personnel at a local level • Present to program leads – NRCS State Tech Comm; state SWAPs; EPA Section 319 Watershed Management; Soil & Water Conservation Society symposium; etc. Strategic Approach • Integrate models to better parse out the multi‐sector conservation benefits and related performance metrics. • Continue research into benefits of emerging practices – emphasizing soil health, biomass/biofuels, drainage water management, two‐stage ditches, wetlands. • Synthesize human dimensions research on adoption of conservation practices to guide marketing and delivery of conservation design. Refine Tools – Practices & Blueprint • Continue development of the spatial targeting tool • Demonstrate the utility of the tools at various scales in pilots Next Steps for Refinement & Implementation