ArcGIS REST Services Directory
JSON

Layer: DRCN Optimization CEA Selection (ID:0)

View In:   Map Viewer

Name: DRCN Optimization CEA Selection

Display Field: STATE_CODE

Type: Feature Layer

Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon

Description: The LSP model results were used to develop the business planning section of the Strategic Restoration and Conservation Action Plan, describing how the DRCN partners will work together to obtain funding for on-the-ground restoration and conservation investments. Now stakeholders can forecast funding available from key conservation and restoration programs over the next few years that can be set as a budget. This allows the DRCN to model some optimization scenarios that inform how to get the “best bang for the buck” of those conservation and restoration investments. Optimization and cost effectiveness are two methods that can provide better conservation and restoration outcomes on the ground at the same budget level. As noted in the book The Science of Strategic Conservation: Protecting More with Less, project selection methods using cost effective techniques are superior to traditional “rank-based” methods where the top scoring projects are selected regardless of their cost. An example of how optimization and cost-effective analysis works is in a pilot project where we applied the LSP model results for fish and wildlife habitat and water quality to the project selection criteria of the Chesapeake Bay Wild program. The Chesapeake Wild Act, if passed by Congress, will authorize the establishment of a grant program to fund fish and wildlife habitat restoration and conservation projects in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. We assumed that $22.5 million (i.e. $5 million, $7.5 million, and $10 million over a three-year period) would be available from the program and that it could be leveraged by 50% to support the acquisition of conservation easements. Project costs were estimated through an analysis of land values in each county. We ran the cost-effective analysis for the entire peninsula, inclusive of areas outside the Chesapeake Bay watershed, since we assumed that the equivalent and previously authorized Delaware River Basin program would have similar selection criteria. The cost-effective analysis ratio is the benefit of the project, as measured by the LSP model score, divided by the cost of purchasing the easement. If you used the cost-effective analysis project selection instead of the traditional rank-based method, you would be able to protect 26% more acres, complete 3 additional projects, get 19% better projects (as measured by mean LSP score), and get 36% better quality (as measured by the aggregate LSP scores).

Copyright Text: Will Allen, The Conservation Fund

Min. Scale: 0

Max. Scale: 0

Default Visibility: true

Max Record Count: 2000

Supported query Formats: JSON, geoJSON, PBF

Use Standardized Queries: True

Extent:

Drawing Info:

HasZ: false

HasM: false

Has Attachments: false

Has Geometry Properties: true

HTML Popup Type: esriServerHTMLPopupTypeAsHTMLText

Object ID Field: FID

Unique ID Field:

Global ID Field:

Type ID Field: CEA_norm

Fields:
Types:

Is Data Versioned: false

Has Contingent Values: false

Supports Rollback On Failure Parameter: true

Last Edit Date: 9/15/2020 8:05:28 PM

Schema Last Edit Date: 9/15/2020 8:05:28 PM

Data Last Edit Date: 9/15/2020 8:05:28 PM

Supported Operations:   Query   Query Pivot   Query Top Features   Query Analytic   Query Bins   Generate Renderer   Validate SQL   Get Estimates   ConvertFormat