A Conservation Blueprint for Alaska
A Tool for Prioritizing Conservation Action
Across the state, Alaskans face the difficult but rewarding task of planning a healthy future for the people and communities of Alaska. The decisions we make today about the use of our lands and waters have important consequences for the future of our economy and our environment.
A powerful question is inherent in all these decisions -- how much is enough? That is, how much development is enough? How much conservation is enough? What places are the most important to conserve?
This statewide assessment is a conservation blueprint for Alaska. It addresses these questions about biodiversity in Alaska:
- What are the places most important for conserving the biodiversity of Alaska?
- How many of these places are already under long-term conservation management?
- Which of these places are most at risk due to human activities in the near term?
Blueprint Products
1. A portfolio of areas of biological significance in Alaska
The blueprint maps areas of biological significance throughout the state. Referred to as a portfolio, this map represents areas that, if managed for biodiversity, will likely conserve the native species and ecological communities of those ecoregions. The portfolio is a conservation blueprint—a vision for conservation success—to guide public land managers, conservation organizations, private landowners, and others in conserving natural diversity within the ecoregion.
To design the portfolio, we first identified conservation targets—species and habitats that represent the biodiversity of Alaska and are of conservation concern. Statewide conservation targets included 14 bird species and one bird group, 6 fish species, 7 mammal species and one mammal group, 9 featured habitats, and 19 vegetation classes. To delineate areas of biological significance, we defined conservation goals for these species and ecosystems. We then defined spatial and quantitative components for these species and habitats in order to delineate the areas for the portfolio.
The statewide portfolio comprises 82.3 million hectacres and includes 219 areas of biological significance. The terrestrial portion of the portfolio contains 55.7% of the state. One hundred fifty-two areas of biological significance also have a marine component. The portfolio meets 20 of 22 breeding conservation goals for species targets and all 13 non-breeding goals and includes at least 30% of all 9 featured habitats and 18 of 19 vegetation classes.
2. A spatially explicit assessment of human impacts on biodiversity
Alaska is unarguably the wildest landscape in the United States, and for many, the last great American frontier, but Alaska has experienced changes in the level of human activity in the last 50 years. To quantify the pattern and the amount of potential impact caused by these activities in Alaska, we developed a spatially explicit model that quantifies the relative amount and pattern of human activity in each ecoregion in Alaska. This model provides the first quantitative assessment of threats to the Alaskan landscape statewide, focusing on four types of human impacts: human access, mining, logging, and energy extraction.
The Cook Inlet Basin ecoregion, with the highest human population, had the largest amount of human activity, including high levels of human access and resource extraction (oil and gas, timber, and mineral). In general the human activities assessed were widespread around the state, but the impacts were localized. Human activities have had little impact on most portfolio sites, with 127 sites (58.0%) showing less than 10% of area with higher levels of cumulative impact. Only 36 sites (16.4%) have greater than 20% of area with higher levels of cumulative impact.
3. An assessment of the conservation status of
lands in Alaska
The Conservancy examined the distribution of land management across Alaska and assessed how well the protected areas capture the terrestrial biodiversity of Alaska at a statewide scale and across the
environmental gradients of ecoregions and elevation. First we looked at different land management types in Alaska, using the framework of the USGS Gap Analysis Program, and developed conservation management status categories appropriate to the level of development and human use in the state. Then we re-examined an earlier study of how well the protected areas represent vegetation classes, a surrogate for terrestrial biodiversity, at a statewide scale and added analyses for representation across ecoregions and elevation.
We found that while 43.6% of Alaska is managed for conservation, a disproportionate amount (41.3 %) of those lands occur at high elevations (above 510 meters), which are typically less biologically diverse than low-lying areas. Taken at the statewide level, 5 of 19 vegetation classes are insufficiently represented in the existing protected areas (i.e. less than 30%), and when examining vegetation classes by ecoregion, 16 of 19 are found to be insufficiently represented in at least one of the ecoregions in which they occur.
We also assessed the potential contribution of Native-owned lands, which are the majority of private lands, to conservation of terrestrial biodiversity. If we assume that the largely undeveloped lands owned by Native entities are being managed for conservation, the representation of terrestrial ecosystems improves.
Read the series of five Alaska Ecoregional Assessments that preceded this Conservation Blueprint for Alaska.
Note: A series of Conservation Blueprint maps are available on an accompanying CD-ROM. To receive a copy of the Conservation Blueprint CD-ROM, contact the Conservancy at 907-276-3133 x117.
Join The Nature Conservancy on