Assessing the influence of rapid urban growth and regional policies on biological resources

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 93, Issue 3-4, 2009, Pages 172-183

  Beardsley, Karen ^a   Thorne, James H ^a   Roth, Nathaniel E ^a   Gao, Shengyi ^a   McCoy, Michael C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Conservation; GIS; Modeling; Urbanization

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION; GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS; MODELS; NATURAL RESOURCES; PUBLIC POLICY;

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES; BUSINESS-AS-USUAL; CONSERVATION PRIORITIES; ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS; SPATIALLY EXPLICIT; URBAN GROWTH MODELING; URBANIZATION; WORKING LANDSCAPES;

URBAN GROWTH;

BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; DATA SET; ECOLOGICAL IMPACT; GIS; LOCAL GOVERNMENT; NATURAL RESOURCE; POLICY ANALYSIS; URBAN GROWTH; URBANIZATION;

EID: 70350565984     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2009.07.003     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Arax M., and Wartzman R. The King of California: J.G. Boswell and the Making of a Secret American Empire (2003), Public Affairs, New York
2. AB 32-California Assembly Bill 32, ch. 488, 2006.
3. Baker J.P., Hulse D.W., Gregory S.V., White D., Van Sickle J., Berger P.A., et al. Alternative futures for the Willamette River Basin, Oregon. Ecol. Appl. 14 2 (2004) 313-324
4. The California Energy Commission, 2001. Shining PLACE3S: Sacramento and National Examples of Smart Growth. Sacramento, CA.
5. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), § 21000 et seq, 1972.
6. CDBTH California Department of Business Transportation and Housing, 2007. California Regional Blueprint Planning Program. From http://calblueprint.dot.ca.gov/ (retrieved February, 2007).
7. California Department of Finance, 2004. Population projections by race/ethnicity for California and its counties 2000-2050. From http://www.dof.ca.gov/HTML/DEMOGRAP/ReportsPapers/Projections/P1/P1.asp (retrieved February, 2007).
8. California Department of Fish and Game, 2006. California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). From California Department of Fish and Game: http://www.dfg.ca.gov/biogeodata/cnddb/ (retrieved January, 2007).
9. California Employment Development Department (EDD), 2007. EDD home page. From http://www.edd.ca.gov/ (retrieved October, 2006).
10. California Gap Analysis (CA GAP), 1998. CA gap analysis vegetation layer (statewide). From University of California, Santa Barbara: http://www.biogeog.ucsb.edu/projects/gap/gap_data.html (retrieved November, 2007).
11. California Partnership for the San Joaquin Valley, 2007. Seed grants. From http://www.sjvpartnership.org/seed_grant_list.php (retrieved November, 2007).
12. California Resources Agency, 2005. Public, conservation and trust lands. From California Resources Agency, Sacramento, CA: http://www.atlas.ca.gov/download.html (retrieved June, 2007).
13. Carsjens G.J., and Ligtenberg A. A GIS-based support tool for sustainable spatial planning in metropolitan areas. Landsc. Urban Plan. 80 1-2 (2007) 72-83
14. Central Intelligence Agency, 2002. The world factbook: field listing-population growth rate. From https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html (retrieved March, 2007).
15. Chiesura A. The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landsc. Urban Plan. 68 (2004) 129-138
16. Cogan C.B. Biodiveristy conflict analysis at multiple spatial scales. In: Scott J.M., Heglund P.J., Morrison M.L., Haufler J., Raphael M.G., Wall W.A., and Samson F.B. (Eds). Predicting Species Occurrences: Issues of Accuracy and Scale (2002), Island Press, Washingon, D.C. 229-239
17. Colding J. Ecological land-use complementation for building resilience in urban ecosystems. Landsc. Urban Plan. 81 (2007) 46-55
18. Congressional Research Service, 2005. California's San Joaquin valley: a region in transition. From http://www.csub.edu/library/gov/San_Joaquin_Valley_CRS_Report.pd (retrieved April, 2007).f
19. Dannenberg A.L., Jackson R.J., Frumkin H., Schieber R.A., Pratt M., Kochtitzky C., et al. The impact of community design and land-use choices on public health: a scientific research agenda. Am. J. Public Health 93 (2003) 1500-1508
20. Dietzel C., and Clarke K.C. The effect of disaggregating land use categories in cellular automata during model calibration and forecasting. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 30 (2006) 78-101
21. Downs A. Smart growth: why we discuss it more than we do it. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 71 4 (2005) 367-380
22. Endangered Species Recovery Program, 1999. Historical lakes of the San Joaquin valley. From ESRP, Fresno, CA: http://esrp.csustan.edu/gis/ (retrieved December, 2007).
23. Endangered Species Recovery Program, 2004. Land use and land cover of the San Joaquin valley. From ESRP, Fresno, CA: http://esrp.csustan.edu/gis/ (retrieved December, 2007).
24. Environmental Systems Research Institute, 2007. ArcEditor-Desktop GIS with advanced geographic data editing and management. From http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arceditor/index.html (retrieved 15.01.07).
25. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP), 2004. Important farmland. from California Department of Conservation, Sacramento, CA: http://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Index.aspx (retrieved February, 2007).
26. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 1996. Q3 Flood data. From FEMA, Washington, D.C. http://www.fema.gov/hazard/map/q3.shtm (retrieved January, 2007).
27. Federal Water Pollution Control Act, § 1251 et seq., 1972.
28. Fulton, W.B., 2008. SB 375 is now law-but what will it do? From http://www.cp-dr.com/node/2140 (retrieved 01.11.08).
29. Fulton W.B., and Shigley P. Guide to California Planning. 3rd ed. (2005), Solano Press Books, Point Arena, CA
30. Gao, S., Johnston, R.A., 2004. California general plan map. From http://www.atlas.ca.gov/download.html (retrieved January, 2007).
31. The Great Valley Center, 2008. San Joaquin Valley Blueprint. From http://www.greatvalley.org/blueprint/ (retrieved November, 2007).
32. Hansen A.J., Knight R.L., Marzluff J.M., Powell S., Brown K., and Gude P.H. Effects of exurban development on biodiversity: patterns, mechanisms, and research needs. Ecol. Appl. 15 6 (2005) 1893-1905
33. Holland, R., 1995. Vernal Pool Complexes (Map).
34. Huber, P.R., 2008. The effects of spatial and temporal scale on conservation planning and ecological networks in the Central Valley, California. Dissertation, University of California, Davis.
35. Information Center for the Environment, 2006. UPlan user manual. From http://ice.ucdavis.edu/doc/uplan/resources (retrieved 31.12.06).
36. Information Center for the Environment, 2008. UPlan-urban growth modeling. From http://ice.ucdavis.edu/doc/uplan (retrieved November, 2008).
37. Johnston, R.A., Lehmer, E., Gao, S., Roth, N., McCoy, M., 2008. UPlan land use allocation model 2.6 user's manual. From http://ice.ucdavis.edu/doc/uplan/resources (retrieved March, 2007).
38. Johnston R.A., Shabazian D., and Gao S. UPlan: a versatile urban growth model for transportation planning. Transp. Res. Rec. 1831 (2003) 202-209
39. Johnston, R. A., McCoy, M. C., Kirn, M., Fell, M. (2004). Streamlining the National Environmental Policy Act Process Through Cooperative Local-State-Federal Transportation and Land Use Planning. J. Trans. Res. Board (No. 1880), 135-143.
40. Langpap C., and Wu J. Predicting the effect of land-use policies on wildlife habitat abundance. Can. J. Agric. Econ. 56 (2008) 195-217
41. Lebel L. Multi-level scenarios for exploring alternative futures for upper tributary watersheds in mainland Southeast Asia. Mountain Res. Develop. 26 3 (2006) 263-273
42. Longley P.A. Geographical information systems: will developments in urban remote sensing and GIS lead to 'better' urban geography?. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 26 2 (2002) 231-239
43. Luck M., and Wu J. A gradient analysis of urban landscape pattern: a case study from the Phoenix metropolitan region, Arizona, USA. Landsc. Ecol. 17 (2002) 327-339
44. Mahiny A.S., and Gholamalifard M. Dynamic spatial modeling of urban groth through cellular automata in a GIS environment. Int. J. Environ. Res. 1 3 (2007) 272-279
45. McCreary S., Twiss R., Warren B., White C., Huse S., Gardels K., et al. Land-use change and impacts on the San-Francisco estuary-a regional assessment with national policy implications. Coast. Manage. 20 3 (1992) 219-253
46. Meade, R.J., McCoy, M.C., 2006. Identifying high value open space and conservation opportunities in the San Joaquin Valley. The San Joaquin Valley: California's 21st century opportunity (strategic action proposal): Appendix H from http://www.bth.ca.gov/capartnership/pdf/0906landuseagriculturehousingworkgroup.pdf (retrieved July, 2007).
47. Merenlender A.M., Brooks C., Shabazian D., Gao S., and Johnston R.A. Modeling future development for Sonoma County, California: the consequences of agricultural land protection policies for habitat conservation. J. Conserv. Plan. 1 (2005) 64-68
48. Nassauer J.I., and Corry R.C. Using normative scenarios in landscape ecology. Landsc. Urban Plan. 19 (2004) 343-356
49. National Environmental Policy Act, § 4321-4370a, 1969.
50. Polk M.H., Young K.R., and Crews-Meyer K.A. Biodiversity conservation implications of landscape change in an urbanizing desert of Southwestern Peru. Urban Ecosyst. 8 (2005) 313-334
51. Pyke C.R. Assessing climate change impacts on vernal pool ecosystems and endemic branchiopods. Ecosystems 8 1 (2005) 95-105
52. Quigley J.M. Urban diversity and economic growth. J. Econ. Perspect. 12 2 (1998) 127-138
53. Rice K.J., and Emery N.C. Managing microevolution: restoration in the face of global change. Front. Ecol. Environ. 1 9 (2003) 469-478
54. Rural Migration News, 2006. San Joaquin Valley: new appalachia? Rural Migr. News, 13(1).
55. Santelmann M.V., White D., Freemark K., Nassauer J.I., Eilers J.M., Vache K.B., et al. Assessing alternative futures for agriculture in Iowa, USA. Landsc. Ecol. 19 4 (2004) 357-374
56. Schumaker N.H., Ernst T., White D., Baker J., and Haggerty P. Projecting wildlife responses to alternative future landscapes in Oregon's Willamette Basin. Ecol. Appl. 14 2 (2004) 381-400
57. Scott J.M., Davis F., Csuti B., Noss R., Butterfield B., Groves C., et al. GAP analysis-a geographic approach to protection of biological diversity. Wildlife Monogr. 123 (1993) 1-41
58. Stapley, G., 2009. Growth summit chooses density: 31 people per acre in new subdivisions. Modesto Bee, from http://www.modbee.com/local/story/578493.html
59. SB 375-California Senate Bill 375, ch. 728, 2008a.
60. SB 732-California Senate Bill 732, ch. 729, 2008b.
61. Syphard A.D., Clarke K.C., and Franklin J. Using a cellular automaton model to forecast the effects of urban growth on habitat pattern in southern California. Ecol. Complex. 2 2 (2005) 185-203
62. Teale GIS Solutions Group, 1998. Hydrarca. From Teale GIS Solutions Group, Sacramento, California: http://greatplaces.ca.gov/data.html (retrieved January, 2007).
63. Teitz M.B., Dietzel C., and Fulton W. Urban Development Futures in the San Joaquin Valley (2005), Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco
64. The Nature Conservancy, 2001. TNC Portfolio Conservation Areas for California (Map).
65. Theobald D.M., Hobbs N.T., Bearly T., Zack J.A., Shenk T., and Riebsame W.E. Incorporating biological information in local land-use decision making: designing a system for conservation planning. Landsc. Ecol. 15 (2000) 35-45
66. Theobald D.M., Spies T., Kline J., Maxwell B., Hobbs N.T., and Dale V.H. Ecological support for rural land-use planning. Ecol. Appl. 15 6 (2005) 1906-1914
67. Thorne J.H., Gao S., Hollander A.D., Kennedy J.A., McCoy M.C., Johnston R.A., et al. Modeling potential species richness and urban buildout to identify mitigation sites along a California highway. Transp. Res. D: Transp. Environ. 11 4 (2006) 277-291
68. Tyler C.M., Kuhn B., and Davis F.W. Demography and recruitment limitations of three oak species in California. Q. Rev. Biol. 81 (2006) 127-152
69. Tzoulas K., Korpela K., Venn S., Yli-Pelkonen V., Kazmierszak A., Niemela J., et al. Promoting ecosystem and human health in urban areas using Green Infrastructure: a literature review. Landsc. Urban Plan. 81 (2007) 167-178
70. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 2002. Grasslands Ecological Areas (Central Valley Habitat Joint Venture) (Map).
71. U.S. Census Bureau, 2000. Report of the US Census Bureau. Washington, D.C.
72. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Projecting Land Use Change: A Summary of Models for Assessing the Effects of Community Growth and Change on Land-use Patterns: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2000), Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC
73. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1998. Vernal pool complexes in the greater Central Valley (Map).
74. United Nations Population Fund (UNPF), 2007. State of world population 2007: unleashing the potential of urban growth. From http://www.unfpa.org/swp/ (retrieved February, 2007).
75. United States Geological Survey, 2004a. National hydrography dataset 100k flowlines. From United States Geological Survey, Washington D.C.: http://nhd.usgs.gov/index.html (retrieved January, 2007).
76. United States Geological Survey., 2004b. National hydrography dataset 100k waterbodies. From United States Geological Survey, Washington D.C.: http://nhd.usgs.gov/index.html (retrieved January, 2007).
77. van der Valk A. The Dutch planning experience. Landsc. Urban Plan. 58 (2002) 201-210
78. Vendlinski T. California's vernal pools: accomplishments and conservation strategies. Fremontia 28 1 (2000) 19-27
79. Weng Y.-C. Spatiotemporal changes of landscape pattern in response to urbanization. Landsc. Urban Plan. 81 (2007) 341-353
80. Wilhere G.F., Linders M.J., and Cosentino B.L. Defining alternative futures and projecting their effects on the spatial distribution of wildlife habitats. Landsc. Urban Plan. 79 3-4 (2007) 385-400
81. Zavaleta E.S., Hulvey K.B., and Fulfrost B. Regional patterns of recruitment success and failure in two endemic California Oaks. Divers. Distrib. 13 (2007) 735-745