Understanding the contribution of land trusts to wildlife conservation

1. Understanding the contribution of land trusts to wildlife conservation Ashley Dayer, Ph.D. Amanda Rodewald, Ph.D. Rich Stedman, Ph.D. Emily Cosbar

2. Magnitude of land trust impacts • Over 1700 land trusts (24 national) • Protected 47 million acres Wildlife Conservation?

3. Knowledge Gap • Landowners’ motivating factors for conservation easements, but not motivations & impacts of land trusts(Merenlender et al. 2004) • 93% of land trusts believe “natural areas and wildlife habitats” are important (LTA, 2010) • Extent of focus on habitat protection must be evaluated, along with the type of land (Merenlender et al., 2004)

4. Research objective • Assess land trusts’ interest and activity in conserving wildlife and their habitats, as reflected in: • 1) their mission statements and • 2) self-reported information in an organizational survey

5. Why Mission Statements? • Mission foundational to non-profits (Pearce & David, 1987) • Mission reflects interests & philosophy (Swales & Rogers, 1995; Patrick & Matthews, 2007) • Land Trust Alliance emphasizes importance to land trusts (e.g., Hocker, 2008) • Mission -> conservation priorities (Amundsen, 2012) • Mission review required for accreditation

6. Questions • Do land trusts’ mission statements reflect a focus on wildlife and/or habitat? • Do land trusts report that their land provides wildlife habitat benefits (and to what extent relative to other benefits)? • What habitat types are protected by land trusts? • Do land trusts with “wildlife missions” report that a greater proportion of their land provides wildlife habitat than land trusts without “wildlife missions”?

7. Methods - Missions • Land Trust Census dataset • January – September 2010 • Email and mail to 1760 land trusts (n = 970; RR =55%) • If no response, included mission from 2005 or 2000 Census • Word count analysis by NVivo • Thematic analysis of mission statements • 2 coders • “Wildlife”, “animal”, and types • “Habitat” and types

8. Methods - Survey • US land trusts working at sub-national level • 5 email requests in March – April 2014 • Incentive: Rally registration drawing • 614 respondents (response rate: 42%)

9. Survey Items • “Approximately what percentage of the total acreage protected by your land trust maintains or protects these benefits?” • Response options: 0%, 1-25%, 26-50%, 51-75%, or 76-100% • Benefits: historic or cultural resources, working farms or ranch lands, working forests, important natural areas, water resources, wildlife habitat in general, bird habitat, and recreation • “Approximately what percentage of the total acreage protected by your land trusts is characterized by the following types of land?” • Response options: 0%, 1-25%, 26-50%, 51-75%, or 76-100% • Land types: urban, agricultural, riparian, wetland, forest, aridland, grassland, arctic, coastal, and island

10. Mission Statements • 1358 mission statements (of 1639) “To protect and conserve woodlands, wetlands, stream corridors, floodplains, forest interior, wildlife corridors and connections, and other lands, which support declining or significant habitats for native flora and fauna, especially locally threatened, uncommon species such as neotropicalbirds.”

11. Frequencies

12. More than 50% of Land Benefits Percentage of Land Trusts

13. More than 50% of Habitat Benefits Percentage of Land Trusts

14. Comparison of mission & self-report • Neither • “wildlife missions” • (Pearson chi-square = 3.06; p=.548) • nor “habitat missions” • (Pearson chi-square = 6.00; p=.200) • predicted amount of land benefiting wildlife habitat

15. Return to Questions • Do land trusts’ mission statements reflect a focus on wildlife and/or habitat? Limited • Do land trusts report that their land provides wildlife habitat benefits (and to what extent relative to other benefits)? Largely Yes • What habitat types are protected by land trusts? Forests • Do land trusts with “wildlife missions” report that a greater proportion of their land provides wildlife habitat than land trusts without “wildlife missions”? No connection

16. discussion • Conflicting results -> what is the source of discrepancy? • Missions don’t guide land trust activities?(broader? outdated?) • Land trusts presume wildlife benefits even if not purposeful • Mission statements don’t predict habitat outcomes • Future research: biologically assess land trust outcomes for wildlife and habitat • Applied: consider whether appropriate to recommend priorities based on missions

17. Ashley Dayer AAD86@CORNELL.EDU Questions?