1 / 18

STRANGE BEDFELLOWS? - NOT! CONSERVATION ORGANIZATIONS AND THE MILITARY

STRANGE BEDFELLOWS? - NOT! CONSERVATION ORGANIZATIONS AND THE MILITARY. CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIPS NGA CENTER FOR BEST PRACTICES SEPTEMBER 17, 2004 Bob Barnes Senior Policy Advisor (Department of Defense) The Nature Conservancy

idalia
Download Presentation

STRANGE BEDFELLOWS? - NOT! CONSERVATION ORGANIZATIONS AND THE MILITARY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. STRANGE BEDFELLOWS? - NOT!CONSERVATION ORGANIZATIONS AND THE MILITARY CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIPS NGA CENTER FOR BEST PRACTICES SEPTEMBER 17, 2004 Bob Barnes Senior Policy Advisor (Department of Defense) The Nature Conservancy bbarnes@tnc.org 703-841-7406

  2. TheDoD - TNCCollaboration TheMasterCooperativeAgreement Conservation groups like The Nature Conservancy, NatureServe, and others have been partnering with the military for many years

  3. Benefitsto DoD • Speciesinventoriesandmonitoring • GISandother data sharing • Advice on natural resource plans • Ecoregional conservation plans • Hands-on conservation work • Networking with regulators, NGOs • Meet ESA goals

  4. Benefits to Conservation • Protect and restore biologically • important areas • Large areas in key ecoregions • Contribute to ecoregional goals • Develop and test best practices • Model of successful partnership • (leverage)

  5. So What’s New? • DoD has participated in on-base conservation partnerships and local land use planning for decades • Recent major developments • Recognition that planning alone is not enough • Recognition that compatibility of near-in development, while essential, is insufficient - need to look state-wide for lands of military concern - habitat, flight paths, etc • Recognition of the benefits of forming enduring partnerships involving multiple players (federal, state, and NGO) to address common long-term concerns • Authority to expend funds to protect off-base lands

  6. Benefits to the States • Helps ensure the long-term viability of military installations - a major economic consideration • Assistance in local land use planning, protection of ecologically significant lands, and preservation of open space/recreational opportunities in the face of accelerating growth trends

  7. Benefits to the States (Con’t) • Brings a significant new partner (with $) to state-wide conservation efforts • Integration of DoD conservation planning with Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategies • Comprehensive use of state and federal conservation programs to protect lands of military concern • Can be a source of revenue for State Trust Lands • Bottom line: assists in sustaining the ecological health of the state and the economic welfare and quality of life of its people

  8. Camp Ripley, MN Fort Carson, CO Fort Bragg, NC Camp Lejeune, NC MCAS Beaufort, SC Fort Stewart, GA Townsend Range, GA Fort Benning, GA NW FL Greenway Camp Blanding, FL Whiting Field, FL Pensacola NAS, FL Fort Sill, OK Fort Hood, TX Camp Pendleton, CA US Army Hawai’i CURRENTBUFFER PROJECTS (FY 04/05) .

  9. CampRipley 53,000 Acres Figure No. 1 Location Map

  10. Ft Carson Project Overview • Walker I • Easement over ~14,000 acres along 9 miles of fenceline on the south boundary • Conservation lease over ~30,000 acres • Status: Ready to go, pending funding • Walker II • Easement and conservation lease over ~20,000 acres along 8 miles of fenceline on the southeastern boundary • Status: In negotiation

  11. Eglin Restricted Airspace Military Training Routes Tyndall MOA Tyndall Low Level Area Cruise MissileCorridors Nov 2003 7

  12. Accident potential and noise contours greater than 65 db. Prevent Development Along Boundary Stillman Area where Zone II and III artillery and blast noise contours go off post. CarversCreek Tracts Fayetteville development Fayetteville Development RCW Core McCain Johnson Calloway BlueTract Upchurch Drop zone lost due to safety concerns State Protected Under negotiation Future Area where Zone II artillery or Blast noise contours go off post. NC Gamelands

  13. Camp Pendleton

  14. BUFFER PROJECTS BEING CONSIDERED (FY 06) • Fort Huachuca, AZ • Fort Lewis, WA • Fort Richardson, AK • Camp Roberts, CA • Jacksonville NAS • Others? • All Projects from 04/05 • Fort AP Hill, VA • MCB Quantico, VA • Fort Campbell, KY • Camp Atterbury, IN • Camp Shelby, MS

  15. Potential Buffer Projects Beyond FY 06 • All projects from FYs 04-06 • Others? Over time,ALL military bases and ranges will have buffers - the only issue is which side of the fenceline those buffers will be on

  16. WHAT STATES HAVE DONE AND CAN DO TO HELP • Enact specific legislation relating to land use planning affecting the military • Leverage existing state conservation funding and planning programs • Create specific funding mechanisms to help protect bases and lands of military concern • Urge DoD and Congress to significantly increase DoD funding for the buffer program in FY 06 and beyond

More Related