↓ Skip to main content

Integrating Climate Change into Habitat Conservation Plans Under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Management, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Integrating Climate Change into Habitat Conservation Plans Under the U.S. Endangered Species Act
Published in
Environmental Management, April 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00267-012-9853-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paola Bernazzani, Bethany A. Bradley, Jeffrey J. Opperman

Abstract

Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) are an important mechanism for the acquisition of land and the management of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. HCPs have become a vital means of protecting endangered and threatened species and their habitats throughout the United States, particularly on private land. The scientific consensus that climate is changing and that these changes will impact the viability of species has not been incorporated into the conservation strategies of recent HCPs, rendering plans vulnerable biologically. In this paper we review the regulatory context for incorporating climate change into HCPs and analyze the extent to which climate change is linked to management actions in a subset of large HCPs. We conclude that most current plans do not incorporate climate change into conservation actions, and so we provide recommendations for integrating climate change into the process of HCP development and implementation. These recommendations are distilled from the published literature as well as the practice of conservation planning and are structured to the specific needs of HCP development and implementation. We offer nine recommendations for integrating climate change into the HCP process: (1) identify species at-risk from climate change, (2) explore new strategies for reserve design, (3) increase emphasis on corridors, linkages, and connectivity, (4) develop anticipatory adaptation measures, (5) manage for diversity, (6) consider assisted migration, (7) include climate change in scenarios of water management, (8) develop future-oriented management actions, and (9) increase linkages between the conservation strategy and adaptive management/monitoring programs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 133 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 27%
Researcher 28 20%
Student > Master 25 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Student > Postgraduate 6 4%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 19 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 46 33%
Environmental Science 46 33%
Social Sciences 10 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 1%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 20 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 May 2012.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Management
#1,653
of 1,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,510
of 175,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Management
#14
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 175,641 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.