The Scale Problem for Land Use Decisions

• Author: Rebecca L. Kihslinger/James M. Mcelfish Jr.
• Pages: 1-22

chapter one

The Scale Problem for Land Use Decisions

Habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation are the major causes of imperil-

ment for most threatened and endangered species, as well as the most signif‌icant

threats to ecological systems and the natural services they provide.1As the U.S.

population grows, developments associated with urbanization and exurbaniza-

tion will continue to be signif‌icant threats to these systems.

Indeed, two million new housing units may be built annually to meet the

demand of the next 100 million U.S. residents that are expected over the next

35 years.2This new development is likely to hit imperiled species and habitats

especially hard, as areas, such as California and Florida, with high numbers of

endangered species are likely to experience disproportionate population

growth.3California’s population is expected,by some estimates, to increase by

as much as 46% by 2025.4Development associated with that population increase

could add 185 species to that state’s list of imperiled species—an increase of

nearly 10%.5

Communities, public agencies, and developers that make habitat conserva-

tion an important secondary objective of their plans, policies, and projects will

be increasingly important conservation agents. Through their planning and reg-

ulatory activities, local governments have the ability to inf‌luence the pattern

and extent of development on private lands and the amount and pattern of land

conserved for wildlife. Local decisionmakers set the overall vision for types

of development and future land uses in a community through master planning,

green infrastructure planning, and comprehensive planning. Local resource

regulations and zoning ordinances can limit development in sensitive ecosys-

tems such as wetlands, riparian corridors, and critical habitat. Further, locally

implemented state and federal programs not principally focused on habitat con-

servation, such as source water protection and wetland mitigation programs,

can have ancillary benef‌its for the conservation of ecosystems.

Nature-friendly developers can also make substantial contributions to land

conservation in the context of development. Green development plans can pre-

serve open space and protect critical habitat, while improving overall

1

environmental quality by reducing motor vehicle use,promoting redevelopment

of older industrial and commercial sites, and reducing impervious surfaces.6Pri-

vate development can also provide habitat corridors, adequate riparian buffers,

and protected areas of core habitat. Incorporating green design or smart growth

principles into the development process creates communities that both respect

the environment and foster economic development,providing unique and effec-

tive opportunities for conservation. The U.S. Green Building Council has recently

developed standards for environmentally superior development practices for its

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Neighborhood Develop-

ment (LEED–ND) pilot program.7LEED–ND-certif‌ied developments can be

encouraged by strong local environmental protection ordinances.

Because local communities, agencies, and developers can have a major

effect on development across the landscape, they should play a vital role in

effective conservation. However, local governments generally have jurisdic-

tion over relatively small areas and their decisions are def‌ined by political

jurisdictional boundaries. Developers and other landowners generally focus on

lands that they own. Habitat conservation, on the other hand, requires thinking

and planning at much larger regional scales. Thus, the scales at which local

governments plan, or that developers plan and develop, or within which state

agencies operate programs such as those dealing with water supply or recre-

ation, often do not correspond to the scales at which biologists and ecologists

advise that we plan and manage for long-term ecosystem viability and resilience.

The Issue of Scale

Although state and federal governments and some regional authorities play a role

in regulating and managing land, local governments have most of the responsi-

bility for making land use decisions. State enabling laws, growth management

laws, and home-rule powers provide local governments with the legal authority

for planning, zoning, site review,and subdivision decisions.8Although local gov-

ernments can consider factors related to biodiversity conservation in land use

decisions, local government concerns are generally related to advancing the “pub-

lic health, safety,and welfare”—the classic def‌inition of local land use regulatory

authority. Where local plans do consider environment and biodiversity conser-

vation, ecological issues outside of the planning boundary are usually not

addressed.

Effective planning for ecosystem conservation, in contrast, requires think-

ing and planning at both site-specif‌ic and regional scales. Ecological processes

from species’ life history events, e.g., nesting, foraging, and reproduction, to

2nature friendly land use practices at multiple scales