Former title: COA Wildlife Conservation List

Taiwan's unique geographical location and varied topography resulted in diverse fauna on this beautiful island. However, excessive land development and resource utilization have incessantly squeezed the space for the survival of wildlife. Wildlife conservation is not just a simple act of protection, it warrants reasonable and sustainable use of natural resources.

The Wildlife Conservation Act, enacted by Ministry of Agriculture (MOA, former as Council of Agriculture, COA), is an important legal basis for wildlife management and habitat protection. Its purpose is to maintain species diversity and ecological balance. The government and related conservation organizations have designated 17 wildlife refuges. Not only are they the subject of academic researches, they are also the indicators of environmental quality. The checklist of Taiwan (TaiCOL) lists 398 endangered, rare, and other protected species of wildlife in Taiwan. The database also provides information on these species, such as their scientific names (including authors and years), common names, and synonyms. Through Taiwan Biodiversity Information Facility (TaiBIF), the information can be shared and exchanged with other GBIF participants. Users can use keywords to link to other websites with relevant information. All these efforts will result in the circulation of information in the fields of research, education and conservation, which in turn will arouse global attention to the protection of wildlife.

Capacity building grants made in partnership with the Land Trust Alliance to land trusts in New York State annually beginning 2003.

The National Conservation Easement Database (NCED) is the first national database of conservation easement information, compiling records from land trusts and public agencies throughout the United States. This public-private partnership brings together national conservation groups, local and regional land trusts, and local, state and federal agencies around a common objective. This effort helps agencies, land trusts, and other organizations plan more strategically, identify opportunities for collaboration, advance public accountability, and raise the profile of what’s happening on-the-ground in the name of conservation.For an introductory tour of the NCED and its benefits check out the story map.

Managers require quantitative yet tractable tools that can identify areas for restoration yielding effective benefits for targeted wildlife species and the ecosystems they inhabit. A spatially explicit conservation planning tool that guides effective sagebrush restoration for sage-grouse can be made more effective by integrating baseline maps describing existing (pre-restoration) habitat suitability, and the distribution and abundance of breeding sage-grouse. Accordingly, we provide two rasters. The first is a floating point raster file informed by lek data, and derived from: 1) utilization distributions weighted by lek attendance, and 2) a non-linear probability of space-use relative to distance to lek. The second is a floating point raster file of baseline sage-grouse habitat modeled as a resource selection function and then relativized to bracket values between 1.0 (highest modeled suitability) and 0.0 (lowest modeled suitability). Note that this map differs slightly from previous unpublished maps of Bi-State habitat suitability owing to differences in data inputs and modeling methods. These data support the following publication: Ricca, M.A., Coates, P.S., Gustafson, K.B., Brussee, B.E., Chambers, J.C., Espinosa, S.P., Gardner, S.C., Lisius, S., Ziegler, P., Delehanty, D.J., and Casazza, M.L., 2018, A conservation planning tool for greater sage-grouse using indices of species distribution, resilience, and resistance, Ecological Applications, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/eap.1690

This hosted feature layer has been published in RI State Plane Feet NAD 83. Approximate edges of Conservation Lands protected by the State of Rhode Island through Fee Title Ownership, Conservation Easement, or Deed Restriction. Includes: Wildlife Management Areas, Drinking Water Supply Watersheds, State Parks, Beaches, Bike Paths, Fishing Access Areas, Local Parks and Recreation Facilities that have been developed with State Grant Funds.

A world without tigers is hard to imagine, but red flags are being hoisted across the tiger’s range. In Indochina, widespread poaching of tigers and wildlife continues to create empty forests, and the development of the proposed transnational economic corridors in the region will further fragment Indochina’s remaining forests and create dispersal barriers. In Sumatra and Malaysia, vast oil palm and acacia plantations are predicted to result in complete conversion of some of the richest lowland rain forests on Earth, habitats that were populated by tigers only a few years ago. The increasing demand for tiger parts for folk medicines in China and Southeast Asia and for costume adornment among Tibet’s growing middle-class has intensified threats to tigers across the range.But large mammals, including tigers, have coexisted for centuries with dense human populations. The release of the 1997 Tiger Conservation Unit Analysis identified where tigers can live in the future. During the decade since, experiences from implementing field conservation projects have confirmed that the future of wildlife conservation in Asia depends on judicious land use planning—zoning—of human use areas, core wildlife habitat, buffer zones, and corridors in large conservation landscapes to restore the harmony that once existed in the wild land-village interface of rural Asia.Learn more about the analysis and resultsThe User's Guide that highlights the remaining tiger lands—the large landscapes of habitat, often anchored by protected areas that are global priorities for conservation.The Technical Assessment: Setting Priorities for the Conservation and Recovery of Wild Tigers: 2005-2015The fate of wild tigers. BioScience, Dinerstein, E., Loucks, C.J., Wikramanayake, E., Ginsberg, J., Sanderson, E., Seidensticker, J., Forrest, J.L., Bryja, G., Heydlauff, A., Klenzendorf, S., Mills, J, O'Brien, T., Shrestha, M, Simons, R., Songer, M. 2007.

This hosted feature layer has been published in RI State Plane Feet NAD 83. Non-State Conservation lands are real property permanently protected from future development by fee simple ownership, conservation or other restrictive easements, or deed restrictions held or enforceable by recognized land protection organizations other than the State of Rhode Island. These include, but are not limited to, the Audubon Society of Rhode Island, The Nature Conservancy, RI municipal governments, The United States Fish & Wildlife Service, private land trusts and other conservation groups. In addition to permanent legally conserved land, a number of properties documented in this dataset are included in a category called "Conservation Intent." This designation applies to areas such as local parks, recreation areas, or lands associated with cluster sub-division developments that are not strictly protected by a fee simple or easement interest held by a recognized conservation organization. Instead they are considered protected by the good-will of the owners (both municipal and private) to prevent or restrict future development beyond the existing use.

Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) are public-private partnerships composed of states, tribes, federal agencies, non-governmental organizations, universities, international jurisdictions, and others working together to address landscape and seascape scale conservation issues. LCCs inform resource management decisions to address broad-scale stressors-including habitat fragmentation, genetic isolation, spread of invasive species, and water scarcity-all of which are magnified by a rapidly changing climate.

This shapefile contains Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) (some of which are also Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP)) boundaries in California. This layer may contain boundaries that are no longer active. Please confirm the status of boundaries before using them in maps and analyses. Some boundaries may be estimated. NCCPs take a broad based approach to protect habitats and species. The program began in 1991. An NCCP identifies and provides for the regional protection of plants, animals, and their habitats, while allowing compatible and appropriate economic activity. Working with landowners, environmental organizations, and other interested parties, a local agency oversees the numerous activities that compose the development of an NCCP. CDFW and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provide the necessary support, direction, and guidance to NCCP participants. For more information on NCCPs please see https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/conservation/planning/nccp .

A Special Area of Conservation (SAC) is the land designated under Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora. Data supplied has the status of "Candidate". The data does not include "proposed" Sites. Boundaries are mapped against Ordnance Survey MasterMap. Attribution statement: © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right [year]. Attribution statement: © Natural England copyright. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right [year].

A conservation easement, according to the Land Trust Alliance, is “a legal agreement between a landowner and a land trust or government agency that permanently limits uses of the land in order to protect its conservation values.” The National Conservation Easement Database (NCED) is the first national database of conservation easements in the United States. Voluntary and secure, the NCED respects landowner privacy and will not collect landowner names or sensitive information. This public-private partnership brings together national conservation groups, local and regional land trusts, and state and federal agencies around a common objective. The NCED provides a comprehensive picture of the estimated 40 million acres of privately owned conservation easement lands, recognizing their contribution to America’s natural heritage, a vibrant economy, and healthy communities.Before the NCED was created no single, nationwide system existed for sharing and managing information about conservation easements. By building the first national database and web site to access this information, the NCED helps agencies, land trusts, and other organizations plan more strategically, identify opportunities for collaboration, advance public accountability, and raise the profile of what's happening on-the-ground in the name of conservation.With the initial support of the U.S. Endowment for Forestry and Communities, NCED is the result of a collaboration between five environmental non-profits: The Trust for Public Land, Ducks Unlimited, Defenders of Wildlife, Conservation Biology Institute, and NatureServe.

The California Conservation Easement Database (CCED) contains lands protected under conservation easements. It is a parallel data set to the California Protected Areas Database (CPAD), which covers protected areas owned in fee. The first version of the CCED database was released in April 2014, the latest update is from June 2024.

CCED is maintained and published by GreenInfo Network (www.greeninfo.org). GreenInfo Network publishes CCED twice annually.

The National Conservation Easement Database (NCED) is the first national database of conservation easement information, compiling records from land trusts and public agencies throughout the United States. This public-private partnership brings together national conservation groups, local and regional land trusts, and state and federal agencies around a common objective. The NCED is the first nationwide database and website for sharing and managing information about conservation easements. This effort helps agencies, land trusts, and other organizations plan more strategically, identify opportunities for collaboration, advance public accountability, and raise the profile of what’s happening on-the-ground in the name of conservation.

Please visit the User Guide to learn about using the Conservation Opportunities Modeler.CA Nature supports the California Natural Resources Agency’s goals for equitable access for all, the conservation of the state’s biodiversity, and expanding the use of nature-based solutions to address climate change. The Conservation Opportunities Modeler uses a technique called a Weighted Raster Overlay (WRO) to evaluate multiple factors simultaneously. You can select layers from almost 50 layers in library, assign a weight to each selected layer, and then a scores to the available variables. These are then combined to show the range of combined values across the landscape, whether high or low based on your assigned weights. Data libraries are available to explore opportunities for access for all, biodiversity, climate mitigation and adaptation, as well as opportunities that integrate across multiple challenges. After your model is complete, run it online and explore the results through interactive summaries and comparison against data from CA Nature or other sources. Use the Conservation Opportunities Modeler to explore opportunities through building your own scenarios.

In the first few decades of European settlement, records of Australian vegetation ranged from descriptions by explorers and new settlers, artists? drawings, through to specimens sent to international herbaria and museums. In the late 19th century more systematic observations were published and form the basis of today?s quantitative approaches. In the 1980s a project was conducted in which data across the continent of Australia from 711 terrestrial and littoral vegetation surveys were collected and digitised to enable an objective assessment of the conservation status of Australian plant communities, the ?Conservation Atlas? project (Specht et al. 1995, Specht and Specht, 2013). The source files (reprints and reports) were retained as completely as possible, while the extracted data were retained as print outs and/or stored digitally using the technology current at the time.

The data delivered through the Atlas of Living Australia (and as a full data package through the Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity: http://doi.org/10.5063/F1QC01QK ; Specht et al., 2018a) is the result of an effort to retrieve the data from the Conservation Atlas project. Accessible paper and digital sources were obtained and re-entered where required, georeferences and sources were updated. This work resulted in a collection of sites x species observation records mapped to Darwin Core format. The data from 1390 communities incorporating records of 9450 taxa were retrieved from a total of 705 sources between 1879 to 1989. This was a considerable loss from the initial project, but substantial nevertheless. The project aimed to provide a sustainable open-access resource to the research community and others to enable better long-term comprehension of vegetation change, and to provide insight into the long-term challenges of effective data curation.

The details of the retrieval project can be obtained in Specht et al. (2018).

References Specht A. and Specht R.L. (2013) Australia: Biodiversity of Ecosystems. In, The Encyclopedia of Biodiversity Vol. 1 (ed. B. Levin, et al.) pp 291-306. Waltham, MA: Academic Press. Specht, R.L., Specht, A. Whelan, M.B. and Hegarty, E.E. (1995) Conservation Atlas of Plant Communities in Australia. Centre for Coastal Management in association with Southern Cross University Press. Specht A., Bolton M.P., Kingsford B., Specht R.L., Belbin L. (2018a) Data from the Conservation Atlas of Australian Plant communities 1879-1989 (1995). Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity. doi:10.5063/F1QC01QK. Specht A., Bolton M.P., Kingsford B., Specht R.L., Belbin L. (2018b) A story of data won, data lost and data re-found: the realities of ecological data preservation. Biodiversity Data Journal 6:e28073. doi: 10.3897/BDJ.6.e28073

The Conservation Practice Effectiveness Database compiles information on the effectiveness of a suite of conservation practices. This database presents a compilation of data on the effectiveness of innovative practices developed to treat contaminants in surface runoff and tile drainage water from agricultural landscapes. Traditional conservation practices such as no-tillage and conservation crop rotation are included in the database, as well as novel practices such as drainage water management, blind inlets, and denitrification bioreactors. This will be particularly useful to conservation planners seeking new approaches to water quality problems associated with dissolved constituents, such as nitrate or soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP), and for researchers seeking to understand the circumstances in which such practices are most effective. Another novel feature of the database is the presentation of information on how individual conservation practices impact multiple water quality concerns. This information will be critical to enabling conservationists and policy makers to avoid (or at least be aware of) undesirable tradeoffs, whereby great efforts are made to improve water quality related to one resource concern (e.g., sediment) but exacerbate problems related to other concerns (e.g., nitrate or SRP). Finally, we note that the Conservation Practice Effectiveness Database can serve as a source of the soft data needed to calibrate simulation models assessing the potential water quality tradeoffs of conservation practices, including those that are still being developed. This database is updated and refined annually. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: 2019 Conservation Practice Effectiveness (CoPE) Database. File Name: Conservation_Practice_Effectiveness_2019.xlsxResource Description: This version of the database was published in 2019.

A conservation or mitigation bank is privately or publicly owned land managed for its natural resource values. In exchange for permanently protecting, managing, and monitoring the land, the bank sponsor is allowed to sell or transfer habitat credits to permitees who need to satisfy legal requirements and compensate for the environmental impacts of developmental projects.Conservation (Endangered Species) BankingA conservation bank generally protects threatened and endangered species and habitat. Credits are established for the specific sensitive species that occur on the site. Conservation banks help to consolidate small, fragmented sensitive species compensation projects into large contiguous preserves which have much higher wildlife habitat values. Other agencies that typically participate in the regulation and approval of conservation banks are the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration-National Marine Fisheries Service.Mitigation (Wetlands) BankingA mitigation bank protects, restores, creates, and enhances wetland habitats. Credits are established to compensate for unavoidable wetland losses. Use of mitigation bank credits must occur in advance of development, when the compensation cannot be achieved at the development site or would not be as environmentally beneficial. Mitigation banking helps to consolidate small, fragmented wetland mitigation projects into large contiguous preserves which will have much higher wildlife habitat values. Mitigation banks are generally approved by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

For the Ninth Pacific Islands Conference on Nature Conservation and Protected Areas December 2013, Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) commissioned an assessment of the status of biodiversity and conservation in Oceania. This report assesses the overall state of conservation in the Federated States of Micronesia using 16 indicators.

this report wasn't published but was sent to FSM for checking (2013) - to be used for the Regional SOE initiative 2019