1
Regional Planning for Wildlife in a Suburbanizing Landscape
The Triangle region of North Carolina is undergoing rapid development and major shifts
in land use that may alter our wildlife communities in undesirable ways. Some wildlife
species may be lost in the Triangle unless conservation plans are developed and
implemented. We are developing a wildlife conservation plan for the Triangle that focuses
on four groups of animals – birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. The ultimate goal
of this effort is to create a regional network of open spaces suitable for a broad range of
native birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians.
The approach we have chosen is based on the concepts of umbrella and keystone species. An
umbrella species is one whose habitat requirements, if met, will serve as an umbrella for a large
number of other species with similar requirements. A keystone species is one whose removal
will cause major shifts in community composition and ecosystem function. The idea is that once
several umbrella and keystone species are identified, conservation plans that focus on those
species will benefit associated species. We believe this approach provides a suitable framework
for identifying the quality, area, and configuration of habitat needed for the design of a reserve
network for this region. Selected references about umbrella species and keystone species are
provided at the end of the survey package.
We would like you to help us identify the umbrella and keystone species on which to focus
conservation planning in the Triangle. This questionnaire is the first in a three-part Delphi
survey designed to help us select those species. Delphi surveys are designed to address complex
issues by synthesizing expert judgement in the absence of detailed empirical data. In this
questionnaire, we will ask you to identify threatened and keystone species. In the second part of
the survey, we will share the results from the entire panel and seek refinement and ranking of the
species. In the final part of the survey, we will share ranking results, the selected species, and
seek consensus that the selection is reasonable.
2
In this first questionnaire, you will be asked to do five things:
1. Identify your level of expertise in each of four taxonomic classes.
2. Provide a list of birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians that are threatened by current
development trends in the Triangle region.
3. Provide a list of keystone species (any taxonomic group) in the Triangle region.
4. Make comments on our approach or on any part of this project you wish.
5. Mail back your response by Friday, 7 May. If you wish to make other arrangements,
please e-mail Teresa Olsen at taolsen@unity.ncsu.edu, 919.851.0984.
Return to (in enclosed envelope):
George Hess
Forestry Department
North Carolina State University
Raleigh NC 27695-8002
3
Regional Landscape Planning Questionnaire
Section I. Identification of Expertise
In this section, you will identify your level of expertise with regard to four taxonomic classes.
This will enable us to weight your species choices when compared to the choices of other
panelists in the survey. If your knowledge is limited to a certain portion of a taxa (e.g., game
mammals, neotropical migrant birds), please note that in the comment area.
Please use the following scale as a guideline when rating your level of expertise:
1. Very Knowledgeable: 99-80% confidence in your command of the subject.
2. Knowledgeable: 79-60% confidence in your command of the subject.
3. Somewhat Knowledgeable: 59-40% confidence in your command of the subject.
4. Minimal Knowledge: 39-20% confidence in your command of the subject.
5. Not Knowledgeable: 19-0% confidence in your command of the subject.
Question 1. Indicate your level of knowledge with regard to mammals (circle one).
Not
knowledgeable
Minimal
knowledge
Somewhat
Knowledgeable
Knowledgeable
Very
Knowledgeable
If you have any comments, please add them here:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Question 2. Indicate your level of knowledge with regard to birds (circle one).
Not
knowledgeable
Minimal
knowledge
Somewhat
Knowledgeable
Knowledgeable
Very
Knowledgeable
If you have any comments, please add them here:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
4
Question 3. Indicate your level of knowledge with regard to reptiles (circle one).
Not
Knowledgeable
Minimal
Knowledge
Somewhat
Knowledgeable
Knowledgeable
Very
Knowledgeable
If you have any comments, please add them here:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Question 4. Indicate your level of knowledge with regard to amphibians (circle one).
Not
Knowledgeable
Minimal
Knowledge
Somewhat
Knowledgeable
Knowledgeable
Very
Knowledgeable
If you have any comments, please add them here:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Question 5. Please note any other taxonomic groups in which you have expertise and indicate
your level of knowledge (using the same terms as above).
Taxonomic
Group
Knowledge
Level
Comments
5
Section II. Threatened Species
In this section, you will list individual species according to the type of threat that you think most
limits their population size. Choose the species from four groups of animals — birds, mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians — regardless of your area of expertise. We have defined the following
four threat categories:
1. Loss of sufficient area of suitable habitat (area-limited species).

Require relatively large patches of
suitable habitat to survive.

Unlikely to maintain viable populations
if remaining habitat patches are reduced
below a certain size.

Example: Habitat loss: conversion of
extensive areas of mature forest to
suburban development negatively affects
populations of the hooded warbler.
2. Barriers to movement among habitat patches (dispersal-limited species).

Species unable to move between
otherwise suitable habitat patches or
across barriers without a high risk of
mortality.

Example: Roads pose a significant
threat to the Eastern box turtle during
seasonal shifts in habitat.
3. Shortage of critical resources (resource-limited species).

Populations limited by the availability of
a critical resource - e.g., clean water,
escape cover, den sites, as well as
microhabitat.

Example: The availability of temporary
pools for breeding may be critical to the
survival of a population of amphibians.
4. Disruption of critical processes (process-limited species).

Populations limited because key
ecological processes have been
disrupted.

Example: Fire suppression in long leaf
pine ecosystems allows hardwoods to
grow tall enough to interfere with red
cockaded woodpecker nesting.
6
A separate page is provided for each threat category. For each threat category, please list the
five species you think are most at risk. Remember that we are interested in birds, mammals,
reptiles, and amphibians. For each species listed, please provide the following information:




A reason for assigning the species to the threat category. Please identify the specific threat to
survival.
Species for which the threatened species serves an umbrella function.
Species that serve an umbrella function for the threatened species.
Key literature citations for further information about the listed species.
We will use this information to identify umbrella species — species whose habitat requirements,
if met, will serve as an umbrella for a large number of other species with similar requirements. If
you feel strongly about listing more than five species in any threat category, please attach
additional sheets to your survey.
7
Area-Limited Species
Threatened
Species
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Reason/Specific Threat
Serves as
Umbrella for…
Umbrellas for
threatened
species …
Literature
Citations
8
Dispersal-Limited Species
Threatened
Species
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Reason/Specific Threat
Serves as
Umbrella for…
Umbrellas for
threatened
species …
Literature
Citations
9
Resource-Limited Species
Threatened
Species
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Reason/Specific Threat
Serves as
Umbrella for…
Umbrellas for
threatened
species …
Literature
Citations
11
Process-Limited Species
Threatened
Species
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Reason/Specific Threat
Serves as
Umbrella for…
Umbrellas for
threatened
species …
Literature
Citations
12
Section III. Keystone Species
In this section, we are asking you to list species in the Triangle region that play a keystone role in
ecosystem function and structure. The species you list may be from any taxonomic group
(i.e., not restricted to birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians), but should play a critical role in
supporting ecosystem structure and function necessary for the threatened species you listed in
Section II.
We define keystone species by these characteristics:

Plays a pivotal role in maintaining
ecosystem structure and diversity
through their activities.

Impacts on ecosystems are large and
disproportional to the species abundance
in a given area.

Affects ecosystem through several
mechanisms: by altering landscape
structure (via burrowing, grazing, seed
dispersal, cavity drilling), or by their
position as consumers at the top of the
food web.

Example: The sea otter, a top carnivore
in the Pacific near-shore community, has
a positive effect on populations of harbor
seals, fish and bald eagles. Its activities
limit populations of other species,
particularly mussels and barnacles. In
the absence of sea otters, mussel and
barnacle populations would increase
dramatically, altering the species
composition and function of the entire
ecosystem.
In the following table, please list the four most important keystone species in the Triangle
region.
For each keystone species . . .
 Briefly describe how the species affects the ecosystem.
 List other species or species guilds that are impacted by the activities of the keystone species.
Be sure to include relevant species you listed in Section II.
If you feel strongly about listing more than four keystone species, please attach additional sheets
to your survey.
13
Keystone Species
Species Name
1.
2.
3.
4.
Effects on Ecosystem
Species and Guilds
Impacted
Literature Citations
14
Section IV. Comments
The purpose of this section is to give you a chance to comment on our approach to conservation
planning within the context of a suburbanizing landscape.
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:
Statement 1. The ultimate goal of this effort is to create a regional network of open spaces
suitable for a broad range of native birds, mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. This goal is
reasonable and appropriate (circle one response).
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Agree Strongly
If you have any comments, please make them here:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
15
Statement 2. Conservation planning using the umbrella species approach, as described in the
introduction, is a reasonable and appropriate way to attain the project goal (circle one response).
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Agree Strongly
If you have any comments, please make them here:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Statement 3. Conservation planning using the keystone species approach, as described above, is
a reasonable and appropriate way to attain the project goal (circle one response).
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Neutral
Agree
Agree Strongly
If you have any comments, please make them here:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
16
Please add any additional comments or suggestions here:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Section V. Conclusion
Please write your name in the space below, for our records. Individual responses will be kept
confidential.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
17
The second part of the survey will be mailed to you by 1 June.
Thank you very much for your participation !!
18
References
Adler, M. and E. Ziglio. 1996. Gazing into the Oracle: The Delphi Method and its Application to
Social Policy and Public Health. Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London and Bristol,
Pennsylvania.
Crance, J.H. 1987. Guidelines for using the Delphi technique to develop habitat suitability index
curves. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 82(10.134).
Lambeck, R.J. 1997. Focal species: A multi-species umbrella for nature conservation.
Conservation Biology 11:849-856.
Miller, B., R. Reading, J. Strittholt, C. Carroll, R. Noss, M. Soulé, O. Sánchez, J. Terborgh, D.
Brightsmith, T. Cheeseman, and D. Foreman. 1998. Using focal species in the design of
nature reserve networks. Wild Earth 8(4):81-92.
Neimi, G.J., J.M. Hanowski, A.R. Lima, T. Nicholls, and N. Weiland. 1997. A critical analysis
on the use of indicator species in management. Journal of Wildlife Management
61(4):1240-1252.
Noss, R.F., M.A. O’Connell, and D.D. Murphy. 1997. The Science of Conservation Planning:
Habitat Conservation Under the Endangered Species Act. Island Press, Washington, D.C.
Paine, R.T. 1995. A conversation on refining the concept of keystone species. Conservation
Biology 9:962-964.
Power, M.E., D. Tilman, J.A. Estes, B.A. Menge, W.J. Bond, L.S. Mills, G. Daily, J.C. Castilla,
J. Lubchenco, and R.T. Paine. 1996. Challenges in the quest for keystones. Bioscience
46(8):609-620.
Simberloff, D. 1994. How forest fragmentation hurts species and what to do about it. USDA
Forest Service General Technical Report RM-247.
_________. 1998. Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: Is single-species management passé in
the landscape era? Biological Conservation 83(3)247-257.
Soulé M.E. 1991. Conservation corridors: Countering habitat fragmentation. Theory and
strategy. Pp 91-103 in W.E. Hudson, ed., Landscape Linkages and Biodiversity. Defenders
of Wildlife and Island Press, Washington, D.C.
Terborgh, J. 1988. The big things that run the world --- A sequel to E.O. Wilson. Conservation
Biology 2(4):402-403.
Westman, W. 1985. Ecology, Impact Assessment, and Environmental Planning. John Wiley and
Sons Inc., USA.