patrickbdevaney/mia9 · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 6.44k
Uplands (mean difference for all urbanization scenarios ¼
15.03) compared with High Pine and Scrub (mean¼0.13)
and Freshwater Aquatics (mean¼0.07). Furthermore, the
difference in percent area lost between high and
intermediate SLR for Coastal Uplands is slightly greater
under the Alternative development scenario (21.12) than
under the Trend development scenario (20.83).
Discussion
Our results project increasing losses in extent and area
of priority conservation ecosystems moving toward
2070. These findings are attributable to projections of
increasing urbanization and SLR over the coming
decades. Generally, we found that the greatest losses
are projected to be from SLR than urbanization, although
largely from impacts to Coastal Uplands. The increase in
percent area lost from Coastal Uplands between high
and intermediate SLR is projected to be slightly greater
under Alternative urbanization than Trend. This difference is potentially because Alternative aims to reduce
sprawl; therefore, more habitat remains compared with
Trend, and this remaining habitat can be impacted by
high SLR.
Florida has experienced many negative impacts from
urban development, including destruction and loss of
important habitats and ecosystem services such as flood
risk reduction (Arnold and Gibbons 1996). Florida had a
mandate to limit urban sprawl and minimize negative
impacts on the natural environment (Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985; Frank 1985) but even so, policies were
not always adopted at the local level (Brody and
Highfield 2005). To protect the environment and restore
environmental damage caused by urbanization, Florida
enables several options for landowners and developers,
such as establishing conservation easements where
landowners are paid not to develop land in exchange
for reduced taxation or creation of mitigation banks
(where the land is used to offset continued development
elsewhere). Brody and Highfield (2005) suggest that
imposing legal or financial consequences for not
adhering to urban planning requirements could lead to
greater compliance. In the meantime, scientists, citizens,
natural resource managers, and urban planners are
increasingly required to innovate alternative solutions
to help with the conservation of critical habitats and
ecosystems of concern.
For High Pine and Scrub, the projection is for
urbanization to cause greater losses than SLR. We found
a trend of greater percentage of area projected to be lost
for the gopher tortoise and the Sandhill bird index
(brown-headed nuthatch, northern bobwhite, Bachman’s
sparrow), indicating that these species may be particularly vulnerable to future urbanization. Urbanization has
resulted in a greater than 60% reduction in scrub habitat
in Florida (Richardson 1989). These areas provide habitat
for hundreds of species, many of which are endangered
(U.S. Endangered Species Act; ESA 1973, as amended).
Gopher tortoise populations, for example, have declined
by 80% in the past century due to urbanization and
other human development activities that have destroyed
their habitat (Diemer 1986). Although managers have
developed methods that can support gopher tortoise
populations even with dramatically reduced important
habitat, for example, by reinstituting summer and winter
prescribed burns (Landers and Speake 1980; Russell et al.
1999), these restoration actions are difficult to implement as urbanization and infrastructure encroach on
remaining important habitat. Pickens et al. (2017)
showed that fire suppression due to urban encroachment was most likely to impact habitat restoration for
Backman’s sparrow. Low-density urban growth (the
Trend scenario) has a disproportionate negative impact,
per capita, on these species.
Projections suggest that losses for Freshwater Aquatics from urbanization and SLR will be minimal. One
explanation is that freshwater has less potential for
impact from SLR because of greater distances from the
coast and less potential impact from urbanization owing
to the challenges of developing on water bodies such as
natural lakes, rivers, and streams. The persistence of
freshwater wetland ecosystems depends on their ability
to keep pace with SLR through soil accretion (Scavia et
al. 2002). However, one aspect that our SLR scenarios do
not consider is saltwater intrusion into the aquifer. If
saltwater intrusion were to carry far into freshwater
ecosystems, many of the species that inhabit those
ecosystems may not be able to persist (e.g., Nielsen et al.
2003). Depending on hydrologic conditions, saltwater
Impacts of Urbanization and Sea Level Rise S.S. Romanach et al. ˜
Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management \| www.fwspubs.org June 2020 \| Volume 11 \| Issue 1 \| 180
Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jfwm/article-pdf/11/1/174/3103287/i1944-687x-11-1-174.pdf by guest on 29 February 2024
intrusion from SLR may range from a few meters to more
than a kilometer (Werner and Simmons 2009). Much of
Florida has a porous, limestone base, and most of the
state is lower than 3.7 m in elevation, with most saltintolerant communities occurring at less than a 2-m
elevation (Saha et al. 2011). In addition, any location in
Florida is a maximum of 100 km from the coast, with
most locations much more proximal to the state’s
extensive coastline; therefore, saltwater intrusion requires serious consideration both for the natural world
and for human needs.
With losses up to 46.8% for Coastal Uplands, this lowlying Priority Resource is the most vulnerable to SLR,
which is significant because of its importance for
Florida’s tourism industry. These coastal ecosystems
would benefit from sustainable management to continue to attract tourists that contribute to Florida’s
economy. The Florida Keys alone (Figure 1) represent a
multibillion-dollar tourist industry including diving,

Uplands (mean difference for all urbanization scenarios ¼

15.03) compared with High Pine and Scrub (mean¼0.13)

and Freshwater Aquatics (mean¼0.07). Furthermore, the

difference in percent area lost between high and

intermediate SLR for Coastal Uplands is slightly greater

under the Alternative development scenario (21.12) than

under the Trend development scenario (20.83).

Discussion

Our results project increasing losses in extent and area

of priority conservation ecosystems moving toward

2070. These findings are attributable to projections of

increasing urbanization and SLR over the coming

decades. Generally, we found that the greatest losses

are projected to be from SLR than urbanization, although

largely from impacts to Coastal Uplands. The increase in

percent area lost from Coastal Uplands between high

and intermediate SLR is projected to be slightly greater

under Alternative urbanization than Trend. This difference is potentially because Alternative aims to reduce

sprawl; therefore, more habitat remains compared with

Trend, and this remaining habitat can be impacted by

high SLR.

Florida has experienced many negative impacts from

urban development, including destruction and loss of

important habitats and ecosystem services such as flood

risk reduction (Arnold and Gibbons 1996). Florida had a

mandate to limit urban sprawl and minimize negative

impacts on the natural environment (Local Government

Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of 1985; Frank 1985) but even so, policies were

not always adopted at the local level (Brody and

Highfield 2005). To protect the environment and restore

environmental damage caused by urbanization, Florida

enables several options for landowners and developers,

such as establishing conservation easements where

landowners are paid not to develop land in exchange

for reduced taxation or creation of mitigation banks

(where the land is used to offset continued development

elsewhere). Brody and Highfield (2005) suggest that

imposing legal or financial consequences for not

adhering to urban planning requirements could lead to

greater compliance. In the meantime, scientists, citizens,

natural resource managers, and urban planners are

increasingly required to innovate alternative solutions

to help with the conservation of critical habitats and

ecosystems of concern.

For High Pine and Scrub, the projection is for

urbanization to cause greater losses than SLR. We found

a trend of greater percentage of area projected to be lost

for the gopher tortoise and the Sandhill bird index

(brown-headed nuthatch, northern bobwhite, Bachman’s

sparrow), indicating that these species may be particularly vulnerable to future urbanization. Urbanization has

resulted in a greater than 60% reduction in scrub habitat

in Florida (Richardson 1989). These areas provide habitat

for hundreds of species, many of which are endangered

(U.S. Endangered Species Act; ESA 1973, as amended).

Gopher tortoise populations, for example, have declined

by 80% in the past century due to urbanization and

other human development activities that have destroyed

their habitat (Diemer 1986). Although managers have

developed methods that can support gopher tortoise

populations even with dramatically reduced important

habitat, for example, by reinstituting summer and winter

prescribed burns (Landers and Speake 1980; Russell et al.

1999), these restoration actions are difficult to implement as urbanization and infrastructure encroach on

remaining important habitat. Pickens et al. (2017)

showed that fire suppression due to urban encroachment was most likely to impact habitat restoration for

Backman’s sparrow. Low-density urban growth (the

Trend scenario) has a disproportionate negative impact,

per capita, on these species.

Projections suggest that losses for Freshwater Aquatics from urbanization and SLR will be minimal. One

explanation is that freshwater has less potential for

impact from SLR because of greater distances from the

coast and less potential impact from urbanization owing

to the challenges of developing on water bodies such as

natural lakes, rivers, and streams. The persistence of

freshwater wetland ecosystems depends on their ability

to keep pace with SLR through soil accretion (Scavia et

al. 2002). However, one aspect that our SLR scenarios do

not consider is saltwater intrusion into the aquifer. If

saltwater intrusion were to carry far into freshwater

ecosystems, many of the species that inhabit those

ecosystems may not be able to persist (e.g., Nielsen et al.

2003). Depending on hydrologic conditions, saltwater

Impacts of Urbanization and Sea Level Rise S.S. Romanach et al. ˜

Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management | www.fwspubs.org June 2020 | Volume 11 | Issue 1 | 180

Downloaded from http://meridian.allenpress.com/jfwm/article-pdf/11/1/174/3103287/i1944-687x-11-1-174.pdf by guest on 29 February 2024

intrusion from SLR may range from a few meters to more

than a kilometer (Werner and Simmons 2009). Much of

Florida has a porous, limestone base, and most of the

state is lower than 3.7 m in elevation, with most saltintolerant communities occurring at less than a 2-m

elevation (Saha et al. 2011). In addition, any location in

Florida is a maximum of 100 km from the coast, with

most locations much more proximal to the state’s

extensive coastline; therefore, saltwater intrusion requires serious consideration both for the natural world

and for human needs.

With losses up to 46.8% for Coastal Uplands, this lowlying Priority Resource is the most vulnerable to SLR,

which is significant because of its importance for

Florida’s tourism industry. These coastal ecosystems

would benefit from sustainable management to continue to attract tourists that contribute to Florida’s

economy. The Florida Keys alone (Figure 1) represent a

multibillion-dollar tourist industry including diving,