Minnesota Statewide Conservation and Preservation Plan www'lccmr'leg'mn

1
Minnesota Statewide Conservation and Preservation
Plan www.lccmr.leg.mn/
2
Goals of the Project
In context of changing demographics, protecting
public health, promoting a healthy economy and
in face of climate change

• Comprehensive inventory and assessment of
  Minnesotas environment and natural resources
• Review, analyze, integrate, build upon existing
  information and plans pertaining to Minnesotas
  environment and natural resources
• Identify prioritize important issues and trends
  affecting MNs environment and natural resources
• Develop and prioritize recommendations for
  strategies to best address issues and trends

3
Team members and project advisors
Over 100 scientists, professionals, agency staff,
and citizen groups involved from the beginning of
the project
4
Project phases and timeline
5
Identification of Drivers of Change
Development/ Demographics
Ultimate Cause of Change to Resource
Where people live and what they consume
Higher Order Driver of Change
Shoreline Development
Proximate Driver of Change
Nutrient Loading
Change in the Resource
Effect on Fish
6
Main Drivers of Change
Preliminary Plan
Affected by Drivers of Change
Nutrient Loading
Solids Loading
Toxics Loading
Habitat Fragmentation
Consumptive Use
Hydrologic Modification
Invasive Species
GHG emissions
Soil Erosion
Natural Resources
Air
Water
Land
Fish
Wildlife
Recreation
One example (among many) of a trend contributing
to several drivers of change.
7
0
8
Key issues identified in Preliminary Plan
Land/Water Habitat Fragment/Degrade/
Conversion/Loss
Invasive Species
Impacts of Resource Consumption
Toxic Contaminants
Land Use Practices
Energy Production and Use
Transportation
9
Interconnections
10
Issue integration Final Plan and beyond
Land/Water Habitat Fragment/ Degrade/
Conversion/ Loss
Impacts of Resource Consumption
Invasive Species
2009 Trust Fund Project Future of Energy/ Water
Land Use Practices/ Transportation
Energy Production and Use/ Mercury
Toxic Contamination (Other than Mercury)
11
Final Plan Products

• Priority area mapping
• Recommended conservation strategies
• Trend analysis supporting recommendations
• Evaluating conservation strategies

12
Stakeholder evaluation of recommendations

• Multiple avenues inviting people to comment
• Advisors to the project teams
• Website
• Presentations
• Outreach Forums
• Reached over 2,000 people at presentations
• Comments compiled in Appendix VII
• Comments reviewed by teams in writing final
  recommendations

13
Complementary efforts

• There are many complementary efforts such as
• Clean Water Council
• Great Outdoors Minnesota/ Campaign for
  Conservation
• MN Climate Change Advisory Group
• Lake Pepin TMDL process
• Regional Council of Mayors sustainability
  initiative
• Multiple State agency efforts
• We have reviewed and learned from their efforts

14
Team Recommendations

• Land and Aquatic Habitat Team
• Land Use Team
• Community
• Agricultural
• Forestry
• Transportation
• Energy Production and Use/ Mercury

15
Framework for Integrated Resource Conservation
and Preservation
Exec. Summary Fig. 1, Page 10-11 Appendix IX
Integrated Planning IP
Critical Land Protection LP
Land Water Restoration Protection RP
Sustainable Practice SP
Economic Incentives for Sustainability ES
Knowledge Infrastructure
16
(No Transcript)
17
Evaluate Conservation Strategies

• Assess relative costs of implementation for
  action and policy recommendations (appendix VI)
• Identify relative cost low, medium, high
• Identify who bears cost public, private
• Assess costs environmental benefits - seven
  recommendations
• Identify key costs and key benefits
• Search literature for estimates
• Quantify to the extent possible

18
SCPP GoalTo achieve a better future for
Minnesotas natural resources
This Workshop Complementary way to prioritize
implementation. Broaden discussion.
19
Access the plan atwww.lccmr.leg.mn/