Practicing good stewardship every day.
Mid-Michigan Land Conservancy Strategic Conservation Plan
The purpose of a strategic conservation plan is to help a land conservancy efficiently use their resources by prioritizing their acquisition efforts. While a strategic conservation plan need not dogmatically dictate conservancy efforts, close adherence to a good plan will ensure that the conservancy is maximizing their resources by protecting the right places.
Strategic conservation planning typically consists of a “where” component and a “how” component that go hand in hand. The “where” component is a spatial component. This is a delineation of those places deemed important for a conservancy to reach its conservation goals. It is achieved through a process of spatial analysis and the output is typically some form of a map product.
The “how” component is as important as the “where” component. The “how” component is a strategy to protect those areas delineated as important during the spatial analysis. It consists of determining the appropriate conservation actions for any given situation, defi ning and working with partner organizations, and identifying and cultivating funding sources. This document describes the spatial component of a Strategic Conservation Plan (SCP) for the Mid-Michigan Land Conservancy (MMLC). The purpose of this effort is to delineate those areas within its operating boundary where MMLC should direct its resources to best fulfill its mission.
Area of Interest
The MMLC service area consists of Eaton, Ingham, Jackson, Hillsdale, Ionia, Clinton, and Shiawassee Counties, in the south central portion of the Michigan Lower Peninsula. This analysis is limited to the MMLC service area
Process
The spatial delineation process started with MMLC board members defining conservation attributes or conservation features to be prioritized for protection. A total of eight conservation features were selected as priorities. Those features consist of; core natural vegetation areas, large forest blocks, wetlands, isolated wetlands, rare species, intact riparian vegetation, lakes with intact shores, and buffers of existing protected areas.
Each conservation feature was then mapped in a Geographic Information System (GIS). Each feature was individually mapped in a binary raster format. Each raster cell (pixel) was either a value of one, meaning the feature was present, or a value of zero, meaning the feature was not present. The raster datasets of the individual conservation features were combined using the GIS to determine those areas where there was overlap of the desired features. While any one of the features is important and worthy of protection, those areas with a convergence of two or more features becomes more important, assuming that all features are weighted the same.
Combining the individual conservation features produced a raster dataset where pixel values ranged from zero, meaning no features present, up to a theoretical value of eight, meaning all conservation features present. In reality, a value of six was the highest count achieved.
A hotspot analysis was then performed on the combined raster dataset to determine those areas with significant clustering of conservation values. To do the hotspot analysis a vector dataset consisting of 40 acre squares was overlaid on the combined conservation features raster. The pixel values from the combined conservation features raster that fell within each 40 acre square were summed and that sum weighted by the highest possible score for each 40 acre square. The result of this operation gave each 40 acre square a weighted value indicative of the number and extent of conservation features present within the square.
The 40 acres squares were then used in a hotspot analysis to determine which squares had statistically significant values. In the hotspot analysis, the value of each 40 acre square is examined in relation to the values of neighboring squares to determine the likelihood that a square’s value is part of a statistically significant cluster and not due to random chance.
The hotspot analysis was performed using the ESRI ArcGIS hotspot tool and based on the weighted sum value in each 40 acre square. The hotspot tool calculates a Getis-Ord statistic and those squares with a Getis-Ord value equal to or greater than 1.96 are determined to be statistically valid hotspots. The statistically significant hotspots are shown in Figure 3.
The MMLC Board of Directors used the significant hotspots to delineate the general boundaries of two focal areas. The focal area boundaries were then digitized into a GIS vector dataset using a backdrop of 2012 NAIP aerial photographs. Generally roads and easily identifiable landscape features were used as guides for the focal area boundaries (Figure 4).
These two focal areas are places within the MMLC operational boundaries that contain concentrations of MMLC conservation values. Protection efforts within these areas, either by MMLC or by partner organizations, will help MMLC achieve its goals in an effective manner. The focal areas are designed to serve as a basis for proactive conservation actions such as identifying potential fee simple purchases, targeted easements, or general landowner outreach.
These focal areas are the places where MMLC should focus near term proactive conservation efforts. An emphasis on the focal areas does not preclude taking advantage of conservation opportunities that arise elsewhere. In particular, if an opportunity such as a gift arises that will afford protection to an area with conservation values deemed important during this effort, that opportunity should be pursued. As a guide, any of the areas selected as significant hotspots during this effort are worthy of attention by MMLC or another entity, regardless of whether they fall within a focal area or not.
The Conservation Features
Each conservation feature, and the processing steps to spatially delineate that feature, are further explained below. All GIS processing was performed utilizing ESRI ArcGIS, Version 10.0. The source of land cover data used in the analysis is the 2006 NOAA Coastal Change Analysis Program (CCAP). The existing protected areas boundaries are from The Nature Conservancy/Ducks Unlimited Conservation and Recreation Lands database. Rare species information is from the Michigan Natural Features Inventory (MNFI) Biological Rarity Index. Wetland information is from the Ducks Unlimited update of the National Wetlands Inventory dated 3/25/09. The lakes and the streams datasets were obtained from the Michigan Center for Geographic Information (www.michigan.gov\cgi). Spatial data sources are presented as an appendix on Page 21.
Core Natural Vegetation Areas
Core natural vegetation areas are those areas where there is a large patch of contiguous natural land cover types. These core areas of heterogeneous land cover types represent the best opportunity to buffer organisms from anthropogenic influences and to allow natural processes to occur. Examples of naturally occurring processes include ecological succession and disturbances such as fi re or flooding.
Large Forest Blocks
Large forest blocks are more likely to provide forest interior dependent species buffering from anthropogenic edges and influences. In particular, forest nesting bird species require nest sites away from forest edges to minimize brood parasitism from edge species. Invasive species are also less likely to penetrate forest interiors, providing some protection to native species from invasive species.
Wetlands
Wetlands are important natural resources for a number of reasons. They provide habitat for wetland dependent species, flood control, etc….. Michigan is estimated to have lost 75% (11 million acres) of wetlands since European settlement of Michigan (MDNR).
Isolated Wetlands
Isolated wetlands are a subset of the larger wetland dataset. Isolated wetlands are legally defined as those that are less than five acres in size and are not connected to a water body. Isolated wetlands, especially vernal pools that do not contain fi sh species, often serve as critical breeding areas for amphibians. Isolated wetlands were selected as conservation targets because they are exempted from wetland regulations and receive no legal protection.
Rare Species
Rare species consist of those that are legally protected and those are considered special concern by the Michigan Natural Features inventory. In this analysis we utilized the MNFI Biological Rarity Index. The biological rarity index scores areas based on the known occurrence of rare species or high quality natural communities. Scoring is based on the species or natural community global imperilment level, state imperilment level, the viability rank assigned to each occurrence, and the age of the record.
The biological rarity index is presented as a vector dataset consisting of 40 acre squares. Those squares scoring 25 or higher in the viability index were selected from the larger dataset. A score of 25 was based on recommendations from MNFI. The selected squares were converted from a vector dataset to a raster dataset with a value of one for each raster cell within a selected square.
Intact Riparian Vegetation
Riparian vegetation provides a number of ecosystem services and water quality enhancements. One of the most important services is the trapping of nutrients and soil particles that would otherwise enter water bodies. Trapping of nutrients reduces water body eutrophication and the accompanying growth of excessive algae. Reduction of soil entering water bodies will decrease sedimentation and improves water clarity. In addition to reduction of nutrients and soil entering water bodies riparian provides shading that helps regulate water temperatures for aquatic organisms sensitive to temperature fluctuations.
Lakes with Intact Shorelines
Inland lakes are highly valued as development properties and they under constant development pressure. Development of lakeshores often includes replacing of native vegetation with lawns and impervious surfaces and in some areas addition of septic systems. These actions are often detrimental to water quality and native species, both plants and animals.
Protected Area Buffers
Connecting or building on existing protected areas is considered a sound conservation strategy. Protecting any non-developed lands in proximity of existing protected areas can help buffer those areas from human encroachment.