The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Integrating Scientific Methods with Habitat Conservation Planning: Reserve Design for Northern Spotted Owls
Abstract
To meet the requirements of Congressional legislation mandating the production of a "scientifically credible" conservation strategy for the threatened Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), the Interagency Spotted Owl Scientific Committee employed scientific methods to design a habitat reserve system. Information on the current and historical distributions of the owl and its habitats was reviewed in light of economic, political, and legal constraints; results were used to develop a preliminary reserve system of habitat "polygons." A map representing these polygons and their attendant properties served as a set of hypotheses that were tested. Statistical analyses of empirical data, predictions from ecological theory, predictions from population dynamics models, and inferences drawn from studies of related species were used to test properties of the preliminary map, including the number and sizes of habitat conservation areas (HCAs), their distribution, configuration, and spacing, and the nature of the landscape matrix between HCAs. Conclusions that failed to confirm specific map properties were used to refine the reserve system, a process that continued iteratively until all relevant data had been examined and all map properties had been tested. This conservation planning process has proven to be credible, repeatable, and scientifically defendable, and should serve as a model for wildlife management, endangered species recovery, and national forest planning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Landscape Ecology: What Is the State of the Science?
Turner, M. G. (2005) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.36.102003.152614 · Cited by 990
HABITAT LOSS AND POPULATION DECLINE: A META-ANALYSIS OF THE PATCH SIZE EFFECT
Bender, D. J., Contreras, T. A., & Fahrig, L. (1998) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/0012-9658(1998)079[0517:hlapda]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 868
Ecologically justified charisma: preservation of top predators delivers biodiversity conservation
SERGIO, F., NEWTON, I., MARCHESI, L., & PEDRINI, P. (2006) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2006.01218.x · Cited by 477
CARNIVORES AS FOCAL SPECIES FOR CONSERVATION PLANNING IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION
Carroll, C., Noss, R. F., & Paquet, P. C. (2001) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[0961:cafsfc]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 371
Selecting indicator taxa for the quantitative assessment of biodiversity
Pearson, D. L. (1994) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1994.0088 · Cited by 368
Metadata
- Authors
- Murphy, D. D., & Noon, B. R.
- Venue
- Ecological Applications
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1992-02
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-17
- ISSN
- 1051-0761 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-5582
- OpenAlex
- W2115074890
- Cited by
- 166
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 68.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Integrating Scientific Methods with Habitat Conservation Planning: Reserve Design for Northern Spotted Owls. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1941885
- The paper
- Murphy, D. D., & Noon, B. R. (1992). Integrating Scientific Methods with Habitat Conservation Planning: Reserve Design for Northern Spotted Owls. Ecological Applications. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941885
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.