30 research outputs found

    Identifying the Opportunity Cost of Critical Habitat Designation under the U.S. Endangered Species Act

    Get PDF
    We determine the effect of the US Endangered Species Act’s Critical Habitat designation on land use change from 1992 to 2011. We find that the rate of change in developed land (constructed material) and agricultural land is not significantly affected by Critical Habitat designation. Therefore, Sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act do not appear to be more heavily applied in lands designated as Critical Habitat areas versus lands within listed species’ ranges, but without critical habitat designation. Further, there does not appear to be any extraordinary conservation activity in critical habitat areas; for example, environmental non-profits and land trusts do not appear to be concentrating activity in these areas. Before we conclude that the opportunity cost of Critical Habitat designation is negligible we need to examine the land management impacts of designation

    Projected land-use change impacts on ecosystem services in the United States

    Get PDF
    Providing food, timber, energy, housing, and other goods and services, while maintaining ecosystem functions and biodiversity that underpin their sustainable supply, is one of the great challenges of our time. Understanding the drivers of land-use change and how policies can alter land-use change will be critical to meeting this challenge. Here we project land-use change in the contiguous United States to 2051 under two plausible baseline trajectories of economic conditions to illustrate how differences in underlying market forces can have large impacts on land-use with cascading effects on ecosystem services and wildlife habitat. We project a large increase in croplands (28.2 million ha) under a scenario with high crop demand mirroring conditions starting in 2007, compared with a loss of cropland (11.2 million ha) mirroring conditions in the 1990s. Projected land-use changes result in increases in carbon storage, timber production, food production from increased yields, and \u3e10% decreases in habitat for 25% of modeled species. We also analyze policy alternatives designed to encourage forest cover and natural landscapes and reduce urban expansion. Although these policy scenarios modify baseline land-use patterns, they do not reverse powerful underlying trends. Policy interventions need to be aggressive to significantly alter underlying land-use change trends and shift the trajectory of ecosystem service provision

    The Intriguing Effects of Substituents in the N-Phenethyl Moiety of Norhydromorphone: A Bifunctional Opioid from a Set of “Tail Wags Dog” Experiments

    Get PDF
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.(−)-N-Phenethyl analogs of optically pure N-norhydromorphone were synthesized and pharmacologically evaluated in several in vitro assays (opioid receptor binding, stimulation of [35S]GTPγS binding, forskolin-induced cAMP accumulation assay, and MOR-mediated β-arrestin recruitment assays). “Body” and “tail” interactions with opioid receptors (a subset of Portoghese’s message-address theory) were used for molecular modeling and simulations, where the “address” can be considered the “body” of the hydromorphone molecule and the “message” delivered by the substituent (tail) on the aromatic ring of the N-phenethyl moiety. One compound, N-p-chloro-phenethynorhydromorphone ((7aR,12bS)-3-(4-chlorophenethyl)-9-hydroxy-2,3,4,4a,5,6-hexahydro-1H-4,12-methanobenzofuro[3,2-e]isoquinolin-7(7aH)-one, 2i), was found to have nanomolar binding affinity at MOR and DOR. It was a potent partial agonist at MOR and a full potent agonist at DOR with a δ/μ potency ratio of 1.2 in the ([35S]GTPγS) assay. Bifunctional opioids that interact with MOR and DOR, the latter as agonists or antagonists, have been reported to have fewer side-effects than MOR agonists. The p-chlorophenethyl compound 2i was evaluated for its effect on respiration in both mice and squirrel monkeys. Compound 2i did not depress respiration (using normal air) in mice or squirrel monkeys. However, under conditions of hypercapnia (using air mixed with 5% CO2), respiration was depressed in squirrel monkeys.NIDA grant P30 DA13429NIDA grant DA039997NIDA grant DA018151NIDA grant DA035857NIDA grant DA047574NIH Intramural Research Programs of the National Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute of Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismNIH Intramural Research Programs of the National Institute on Drug AbuseNIH Intramural Research Program through the Center for Information TechnologyNIH Intramural Research Programs of the National Institute on Drug Abus

    Identifying the impacts of critical habitat designation on land cover change

    No full text
    The US Endangered Species Act (ESA) regulates what landowners, land managers, and industry can do on lands occupied by listed species. The ESA does this in part by requiring the designation of habitat within each listed species’ range considered critical to their recovery. Critics have argued that critical habitat (CH) designation creates significant economic costs while contributing little to species recovery. Here we examine the effects of CH designation on land cover change. We find that the rate of change from 1992 to 2011 in developed (urban and residential) and agricultural land in CH areas was not significantly different compared to similar lands without CH designation, but still subject to ESA regulations. Although CH designation on average does not affect overall rates of land cover change, CH designation did slightly modify the impact of land cover change drivers. Generally, variation in land prices played a larger role in land cover decisions within CH areas than in similar areas without CH designation. These trends suggest that developers may require a greater than typical expected return to development in CH areas to compensate for the higher risk of regulatory scrutiny. Ultimately, our results bring into question the very rationale for the CH regulation. If it is for the most part not affecting land cover choices, is CH helping species recover

    Working through the Crises: A Plan for Action

    No full text

    Single species conservation as an umbrella for management of landscape threats.

    No full text
    Single species conservation unites disparate partners for the conservation of one species. However, there are widespread concerns that single species conservation biases conservation efforts towards charismatic species at the expense of others. Here we investigate the extent to which sage grouse (Centrocercus sp.) conservation, the largest public-private conservation effort for a single species in the US, provides protections for other species from localized and landscape-scale threats. We compared the coverage provided by sage grouse Priority Areas for Conservation (PACs) to 81 sagebrush-associated vertebrate species distributions with potential coverage under multi-species conservation prioritization generated using the decision support tool Zonation. PACs. We found that the current PAC prioritization approach was not statistically different from a diversity-based prioritization approach and covers 23.3% of the landscape, and 24.8%, on average, of the habitat of the 81 species. The proportion of each species distribution at risk was lower inside PACs as compared to the region as a whole, even without management (land use change 30% lower, cheatgrass invasion 19% lower). Whether or not bias away from threat represents the most efficient use of conservation effort is a matter of considerable debate, though may be pragmatic in this landscape where capacity to address these threats is limited. The approach outlined here can be used to evaluate biological equitability of protections provided by flagship species in other settings
    corecore