Comparing Tools for Understanding Land Use Decisions

The grassland ecosystem supports a unique and biodiverse assemblage of plants and animals and provides many ecosystem services to humanity. However, the stability of North America’s grassland ecosystem is in peril. Only... [ view full abstract ]

The grassland ecosystem supports a unique and biodiverse assemblage of plants and animals and provides many ecosystem services to humanity. However, the stability of North America’s grassland ecosystem is in peril. Only 30-50% of the landscape is intact native habitat. Conversion of remaining grasslands to row crop agriculture is ongoing. Conservation professionals need to understand landowners’ land use decisions to address the growing environmental impact of agriculture. The Plains and Prairie Pothole Ecoregion (PPPE), part of North America’s grasslands, is a grassland and wetland ecosystem lying in the north-central part of the country. Over 80% of the PPPE is privately owned, over 70% is used for farming and ranching, and conversion rates of remaining grasslands to row crops are some of the highest in the nation. To improve grassland conservation efforts in the PPPE we collaborated with the state wildlife departments of Iowa, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota to survey landowners about their land use practices, conservation behaviors, demographics, environmental attitudes, and their Wildlife Value Orientations. The Wildlife Value Orientations scale (WVO) has a strong record of use in the literature for understanding public values of wildlife. The surveys of Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota also included the Land Use Value scale (LUV), which we developed to improve understanding of farmers’ and ranchers’ conservation land use values. We compared the utility of both scales in predicting conservation and agriculture attitudes, behaviors, and demographics and found that both scales produced many significant relationships. The WVO was better at predicting age, gender, work status, amount of land owned, and hunting. The LUV was better at predicting agriculture occupations and land use, wildlife and conservation behaviors, and landowners’ rationales for land use decisions. Out of 79 variables the WVO had 11 stronger effect sizes than the LUV, while the LUV had 41 stronger effect sizes than the WVO. The LUV was developed to understand the land use values of farmers and ranchers and it demonstrated higher predictive capacity than the WVO. We therefore believe this tool will benefit resource administrators’ capacity for facilitating conservation in a complex, working landscape.