Community Input for Conservation Values in the Pennsylvania Highlands

1
Community Input for Conservation Values in the
Pennsylvania Highlands
2
The Pennsylvania Approach to Community Input

• The Highlands Act requires community input to
  supplement secondary data
• We use three major methods
• Key Informant Interviews
• Facilitated Group Discussions
• Multiple Mapping Exercises

3
Core Conservation Values

• Water
• Biodiversity
• Cultural, Recreation and Open Spaces
• Farmland
• Forestland

4
Main Findings from Key Informant Interviews

• What makes places special?
• About half consider Recreational value and Water
  resources important
• About a third consider Forestland, Farmland, and
  Cultural/historical value equally important
• Less than one in ten specifically mentioned
  Biodiversity

5
Who Is Protecting These Special Places?

• Land Trusts and Conservancies named twice as
  often
• Municipalities
• Farmland preservation groups
• Watershed groups

6
What Natural Resources Are Most Important?

• Water Resources
• Forest
• Farmland
• Open space, recreation cultural resources
• Biodiversity

7
Who Should Protect These Places?

• Overwhelmingly, state government
• Municipalities
• Federal government
• County government

8
Concerns and Issues

• Rapid land development
• Loss of open space
• Increased traffic
• Reductions in quality of life

9
Facilitated Group Discussions
10
Middletown Facilitated Groups
Important Places
Conservation Values
Water Biodiversity
Many Different Places Conewago Creek
Threats/Concerns
Reaction to KI Findings
Development - 1 Loss of Habitat Water Quality
Rank Biodiversity Higher
11
Ephrata Facilitated Groups
Important Places
Conservation Values
Water Biodiversity
Welsh Mountain Texter Mountain Cocalico Creek
Threats/Concerns
Reaction to KI Findings
Development - 1 Loss of Habitat Water Quality
Rank Biodiversity Higher
12
Pottstown Facilitated Groups
Important Places
Conservation Values
Water Biodiversity Cultural/Recreation
Rivers are Important French Creek Schuylkill River
Threats/Concerns
Reaction to KI Findings
Development - 1 Loss of Open Space Loss of Farms
and Forests
Rank Biodiversity Higher
13
Quakertown Facilitated Groups
Important Places
Conservation Values
Biodiversity Cultural/Recreation
Delaware River Quakertown Swamp
Threats/Concerns
Reaction to KI Findings
Water Quality Development Loss of Farms Loss of
Natural Areas
No Consensus
14
Summary of Facilitated Groups
Important Places
Conservation Values
Conewago Creek Welsh Texter Mountains Cocalico
Creek French Creek Schuylkill River Delaware
River Quakertown Swamp
Water Biodiversity Cultural/Recreation
Threats/Concerns
Reaction to KI Findings
Development Loss of Water Quality Loss of
Habitat, Natural Areas
Rank Biodiversity Higher
15
Places Mentioned Most by Meeting Location
16
Places Mentioned Most by Conservation Value
17
Threats by Values
18
Wall Maps
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
Computer Maps
27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)
34
Pencil and Paper Maps
35
(No Transcript)
36
Composite Maps
37
(No Transcript)
38
(No Transcript)
39
(No Transcript)
40
(No Transcript)
41
(No Transcript)
42
(No Transcript)
43
(No Transcript)
44
Sociodemographics by Meeting Site
45
Conservation Value by Sociodemographics
46
TTThTh..Thats all Folks!
47
Extra Tables and Maps
48
Conservation Value by Sociodemographics (Percent
by Row)
49
Conservation Value by Sociodemographics (Percent
by Column)
50
Conservation Value by Sociodemographics (Percent
by Total)
51
Attendee Participation
52
Points by Location
53
Quintiled Surfaces
54
(No Transcript)
55
(No Transcript)
56
(No Transcript)
57
(No Transcript)
58
(No Transcript)
59
(No Transcript)
60
(No Transcript)
61
(No Transcript)