American Bison - Buffalo Field Campaign

The types of socioeconomic data relevant for ecological restoration
planning will vary among locations across the continent. However,
certain information is relevant for all landscapes. Detailed and
current information on land use, including land use maps, is critical
for assessing the impacts of habitat loss and trends. Development
plans and targets for important resource sectors (agriculture,
energy, and transportation) provide the basis for evaluating
impacts of foreseeable change over time. Spatial information on
land ownership and management authorities contribute to the
identification of stakeholders and assessment of conservation
potential.
Loucks et al. (2004) provided the following list of socioeconomic
variables useful for conservation planning. The list should be
reviewed and customised for each project in consultation with
local managers:
1. Current patterns of land and resource use:
Major land and resource uses (including forest,
water, wildlife use, agriculture, extraction);
Development plans and projected changes in land
and resource use;
Existing zoning regulations;
Major existing and planned infrastructure (roads,
dams, etc.);
Existing protected areas.
2. Governance and land/resource ownership and
management:
Political boundaries (provinces, districts);
Land tenure (private, public, ancestral/communal
areas);
Agencies responsible for management of land/
resource areas (e.g., forest, agriculture departments).
3. Population data:
Human population density and growth;
Population centres;
Migration patterns (in- and out-migration);
Social characteristics: income, ethnicity,
indigenous areas;
Economic data;
Economic growth and loss areas;
Land prices;
Potential values and opportunities for ecological
services;
Potential for incorporating natural assets into the
local economy.
108 American Bison: Status Survey and Conservation Guidelines 2010
4. Additional factors that affect biodiversity and
potential for bison restoration:
Access (e.g. roads, rivers, energy corridors, etc.);
Trends in habitat conversion.
Bison occupy a distinct
iconic status as wildlife
with both indigenous
and non-indigenous
North Americans. The
cultural and historic
significance of bison is
particularly important
to many Native North
Americans (Stephenson
et al. 2001; Wyckoff
and Dalquest 1997). In
recent decades, bison
have increased in value
as private property in the
form of livestock (Chapter
7). In the grasslands
of the continent, the cattle ranching culture and economy
replaced a 10,000-year-old bison economy, and cattle ranching
now occupies more than 95% of the Great Plains grasslands.
The potential for restoration of plains bison at a meaningful
ecological scale in this region therefore depends on support
by people involved in this sector. Similarly, support from
regulatory authorities, and harmonisation of policies and
planning processes is necessary to ensure a feasible start, and
sustainable outcomes of bison conservation projects.
To ignore or contradict cultural or local interests, or the authority
of agencies, can generate unnecessary on-going resistance
to conservation initiatives. An example of this is the concept
Stakeholders are
people who will be
impacted by the
decisions; they
have the knowledge
to make the best
decisions, and the
power to implement
or block decisions.
“Current conservation
initiatives—parks, land
conservation, regulatory
programs—offer
important contributions
but provide solutions to
only 10% of the problem.
The remaining 90%
exist at the interface of
human populations and
ecological systems”
(Child and Lyman 2005).
of the “Buffalo Commons” or
“re-bisoning” of the Great Plains
proposed by Rutgers University
geographers Frank and Deborah
Popper (Popper and Popper 1987).
The Popper’s predicted economic
and human population declines in
the Great Plains, now borne out by
current trends (Forrest et al. 2004).
The idea of replacing the cattle
ranching culture with a Buffalo
Commons created a firestorm of
protest among agriculture-based
communities in the region, and
continues to haunt discussions about bison conservation and
ecological restoration. The general lesson learned from this
case is that the ecological restoration of bison is not possible