Grantee Research Project Results
1999 Progress Report: Delineating Optimal Wetland Habitat Corridors for Inclusion in Migratory Flyways
EPA Grant Number: R825996Title: Delineating Optimal Wetland Habitat Corridors for Inclusion in Migratory Flyways
Investigators: ReVelle, Charles , Boland, John , Malcolm, Scott
Current Investigators: ReVelle, Charles , Bain, Daniel , Boland, John , Williams, Justin , Malcolm, Scott
Institution: The Johns Hopkins University
EPA Project Officer: Chung, Serena
Project Period: October 1, 1997 through September 30, 1999
Project Period Covered by this Report: October 1, 1998 through September 30, 1999
Project Amount: $227,858
RFA: Decision-Making and Valuation for Environmental Policy (1997) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Environmental Justice
Objective:
The goal of this project is to develop an integrated, theoretically sound methodology for identifying "superior" configurations of locations to be included in flyways for migratory birds. In development are two major classes of decision models that will address the goal of site selection/suggestion in different ways. These models will be applied to the Atlantic Flyway, although they will be generalizable to other flyways.Progress Summary:
Decision models were run using hypothetical data that described the physical location and habitat suitability of the existing and candidate stopover site locations, as well as data on the maximum desirable flight distance between stopover sites by species. While hypothetical data are clearly not applicable to planning efforts, the use of such data will aid in the exploration of many practical and theoretical issues involved in the models.Preliminary tests on small, hypothetical problems provided insight into the properties of the methodology when applied to larger, real-life problems. Principally, the models identify specific sites that might be selected as protected stopovers. As expected, the number (or cost) of stopover sites required declines as the maximum allowable distance between successive sites is increased. In addition, the models show the range of maximum allowable distances over which a given number of sites is optimal.
Other models were developed to consider multiple species or populations simultaneously; results indicate that efficiencies (cost savings) can be realized by the joint modeling of species.
Future Activities:
In the first year of this 2-year study, multiple-objective decision models have been prepared and data collected on the location of managed areas and military bases. The decision models have been tested on hypothetical data, and results indicate that useful tradeoffs between flyway costs and suitability for species can be identified. In the second year of the project, alternative possible enhancements will be suggested for the Atlantic Flyway by using: (1) data already collected as well as new data; and (2) the existing models as well as new models where appropriate. Selection of trial species and collection of species data also will take place during the second year.Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 3 publications for this projectSupplemental Keywords:
restoration, habitat, decisionmaking, conservation, modeling, analytical, northeast, southeast, Atlantic coast, Mid-Atlantic, mathematical programming, birds, migration., RFA, Economic, Social, & Behavioral Science Research Program, Scientific Discipline, decision-making, Ecology and Ecosystems, Economics & Decision Making, coastal wetlands, ecosystem valuation, migratory birds, valuation, decision analysis, environmental policy, landscape ecology, mathematical program models, optimal wetland habitat corridors, aquatic ecosystems, GIS, migratory flyways, land useProgress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.