scaling up - essex national heritage commission · and cultural organizations, philanthropies,...

ESSE X NATIONAL HE R I TAG E AR E A

SCALING UP:New Strategies For

Landscape-Scale ConservationOctober 7, 2016

10 Federal Street | Suite 12 | Salem, Massachusetts 01970 | 978-740-0444 | www.EssexHeritage.org

Coast of Essex County, MA, Photo Greg West

ESSE X NATIONAL H E R ITAGE A REA

We are very grateful to the many individuals and organizations that made this symposium

possible. Sponsors for the day included the Peabody Essex Museum, which donated the

space and other organizations that participated and promoted the event: National Park

Service, Essex County Greenbelt Association, Ipswich River Watershed Association, US/

ICOMOS, Litchfield Hills Greenprint Collaborative, Living Landscape Observer and North

Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative.

We are also very grateful to our symposium planning committee: Brenda Barrett, Editor of

the Living Landscape Observer; Bob McIntosh, former Associate Regional Director of the

Northeast regional office of the National Park Service; Brent Mitchell, Senior Vice Presi-

dent of the Quebec Labrador Foundation and Atlantic Center for the Environment; Janey

Winchell, the Sarah Fraser Robbins Director of The Dotty Brown Art & Nature Center of

the Peabody Essex Museum; and Jessica Brown, Executive Director of the New England

Biolabs Foundation.

Welcome!The impacts of globalization, climate change, loss of working landscapes, and environmental degradation are challenging conservationists, resource stewards, and public officials to embrace a much larger, whole ecosystem approach to conserving natural and cultural landscapes. This new approach requires building complex networks of partnerships and overlapping jurisdictions, which must work in concert to conserve the resources in a regional landscape while at the same time taking into account the needs of the residents and the economic development imperative of their communities.

On October 7, 2016, the daylong “Scaling Up” symposium provided an overview of current international and national landscape-scale initiatives and gave an understanding of the many kinds of partnership im-plementation strategies that are being utilized by governmental and nongovernment practitioners.

The symposium was organized by Essex Heritage as part of the 20th anniversary of the designation of Essex County, Massachusetts as the Essex National Heritage Area. There were over 100 attendees repre-senting municipal governments, nonprofits, state and federal agencies, regional and local planning agen-cies, academic institutions, arts and culture organizations, philanthropies and businesses. The attendees included a wide range of interests from cultural heritage and historic preservation to biodiversity conser-vation and habitat management.

This summary report presents the key conversations, questions, and elements of the day, but there is no way to capture the energy, enthusiasm, or all of the ideas. The hope is to spark more conversation, more connectivity and more success as we go forward sharing ideas and models into the future – looking to expand 21st Century conservation and strengthen the connection between nature and culture.

We thank all who participated and all who do the important work in conserving our natural, cultural, and historic landscapes for current and future generations.

Annie Harris, CEOEssex Heritage10 Federal StreetSalem, MA 01970

SCALING UP: NEW STRATEGIES FOR LANDSCAPE-SCALE CONSERVATION ESSE X NATIONAL H E R ITAGE A REA

CALL TO ORDERAnnie HarrisChief Executive OfficerEssex National Heritage CommissionSalem, Massachusetts

The Essex National Heritage Area was established by an act of Congress in 1996. The area encompasses the 34 cities and towns of Essex Country, Massachusetts with its 750,000 residents. As one of the oldest counties in our nation, this area contains a great wealth of nationally significant historic, cultural, and natural resources.

The national heritage area designation is not just about recognizing the importance of a place; it is also an approach to conserving large, lived-in landscapes. It is a strategy by which local people are brought together to work to conserve their resources, to tell their stories, and to build networks that will conserve and sustain their landscapes into the future. Heritage areas are like building a national park from the ground up with local residents in control of the process.

We have not made national heritage areas the focus of the conference today but the prin-ciples that we will talk about – partnerships, networks, connections between nature and culture – form the core of our work, and many of the participants in this room work with Essex Heritage and other National Heritage Areas.

It is particularly appropriate that we are holding this symposium in the Peabody Essex Muse-um as we talk about the intersections of nature and culture, historic resources and their role in the future, and the relationship of people and places. This museum is a perfect example of how we can work together to conserve and energize historic places to ensure that they are relevant now and into the future.

WELCOME FROM THE PEABODY ESSEX MUSEUMJay FinneyChief Marketing OfficerPEM/Peabody Essex MuseumSalem, Massachusetts

On behalf of our trustees and our Director Dan Monroe, I welcome you. At PEM we are acutely aware of the environment in which the museum exists and strive to work within the context of our urban setting. We are not a single facility but have a campus of 24 historic properties within the city. We are poised to begin a major 40,000 sq. ft. expansion, which will reconfigure our complex and allow us to exhibit more of our permanent collection. It is particularly appropriate that you are here today to discuss the nexus of culture and land-scape. This museum was founded in 1799 by Salem merchants who encountered cultures around the world and brought things back to create America’s first privately funded public museum. This was globalism in its earliest days, and we greatly value the vision of these early entrepreneurs and their interest in the intersection of people and places which is still very relevant today.

Bakers Island, Salem, MA, Photo Annie Harris

1


SYMPOSIUM INTRODUCTIONJessica BrownExecutive DirectorNew England Biolabs FoundationIpswich, Massachusetts

I am very pleased to provide the overview for this day especially as this question of “scaling up” is an ongoing aspect of my work as is the nexus of nature and culture. Threats to the long-term stewardships of seascapes and landscapes are issues both locally and around the world. As we look at the effects of deforestation, land grabs, and climate change, it is clear that no single organization can work alone to combat these myriad threats. Scaling up or creating various partnerships between local, state, federal, and nonprofit organizations, be-tween landowners, cities, and the countryside have been shown to be successful in address-ing these challenges. It is important that we adopt more holistic approaches to the prob-lems, approaches that take into account cultural, historical, and natural issues and which engage people in every community in finding the solutions. In order to achieve this more holistic approach, it requires forging partnerships and building complex networks that bring the various needs into account. All three aspects – cultural, natural, and historic – need to be considered. We must break down the silos that exist between land conservationists and historic preservationists.

At this symposium, we have the perfect opportunity to make these connections and bridge these divides. In the room today, we have representatives of non-profit organizations, arts and cultural organizations, philanthropies, academic institutions, businesses concerned with social responsibility, town and city government, state and federal agencies, along with indi-viduals who are concerned with cultural heritage, historic preservation, ecosystem manage-ment and biodiversity. We all share this concern – how can we take conservation to scale? I hope if there is one take-away from today it is that you will all ask and start to answer: how can we work more closely together?

Essex, MA

2


SESSION: Keynote SpeakerLynn ScarlettGlobal Managing Director for Public Policy and Climate ChangeThe Nature ConservatoryWashington, D.C.

As we contemplate this conversation today, I am reminded of the explorer and scientist John Wesley Powell who recognized the interaction of people and nature and the interde-pendency and unified interests of ecological functions and processes. He observed more than a hundred years ago that “people must necessarily work together for common purposes within interconnected places and spaces.” This is a very apt observation for this symposium.

Fast forward to the present, and we see a growing embrace of this vision. Landscape scale conservation and restoration initiatives are broadening in scope, scale, and extent. Increas-ingly these efforts link economies, communities, culture, history, and nature. Think of the Penobscot River Restoration Project along 1,000 miles of the river. Restoring fish flows and river connectivity required working with many towns to blend conservation with com-munity needs. It required thinking about recreation, historic preservation, power supplies, fish passage, and more. The effort included federal agencies, state agencies, towns, tribes, companies, and individual people having to work together in a shared environment to search for solutions. The project was recently completed, and I was delighted to be part of the ceremony for the removal of the final dam.

The Penobscot River Restoration Project is not unique. We are seeing across the globe a broader focus on landscape scale conservation. Why this efflorescence now? Nature doesn’t recognize boundaries. The scale and complexity of 21st Century issues – climate change, invasive species, land transformation, disappearance of habitat, pollution and so on – are forcing us to think more broadly, creatively, and collaboratively. Modern day conservation requires bridging political boundaries, handling the urban/rural divide, and factoring in myriad economic, cultural, social, and ecological impacts.

These issues unfold in the cities as well as the countryside. This is not just about rural land-scapes. It involves sustaining natural spaces and also the places that support our history and culture. Consider Essex County – the Essex National Heritage Area – with its historic seaports, mill cities, agrarian landscapes, open land and marshlands interspersed with work-ing waterfronts, heritage tourism, and sustainable agriculture. These places are complex, multi-dimensional and interconnected – and the current rate of change is increasing this complexity. Herein lay our challenges and also our opportunities.

I am optimistic. I see communities coming together to problem solve across their bound-aries and between their urban and rural environments. There are large-scale conservation tableaus happening in places such as the Gulf of Mexico, the Chesapeake Bay, along the Connecticut River, within the Essex National Heritage Area, and across many more large landscapes. Many of these efforts span hundreds of miles, involve multiple communities, and frequently cross state boundaries. They require the cooperation of federal, state, and local agencies working with industry, private landowners, and non-profits. All of these efforts require the coordinated action that John Wesley Powell contemplated. They also involve shared ideas, joint visions of healthy lands and thriving communities, and the recog-nition of the power of conversation and connections.Courtesy of The Nature Conservancy

PROFILE OF 21ST CENTURYCONSERVATION ISSUES

INTERSECTCITIESAND

COUNTRYSIDE

INVOLVEECONOMIC,CULTURAL,

SOCIAL ANDECOLOGICAL

EFFECTS

TRANSCENDJURISDICTIONAL

BOUNDARIESAND AGENCYAUTHORITIES

REQUIREPUBLIC AND

PRIVATESECTORACTION

SPAN TIMEAND

GEOGRAPHICSPACE

Penobscot River, Photo Thom Adorney

3


Landscape scale, collaborative conservation is not new. Yellowstone and Yosemite were born from this same idea. But what is new is the recognition of the central role that collaboration must play in conservation today. A successful approach requires multiple communities, organizations, and people working in concert. Collaboration is the “must-do” of 21st century conservation.

Collaboration at scale presents daunting challenges, which are often beyond our current governmental structures, our usual decision making apparatus, and the capacities of our organizations. To meet these challenges, there must be clearly defined goals and inclusive dialogue. “Dialogue is conversation with a center, not sides” to quote William Isaacs. To work at scale, we must have processes and decision structures that help nurture cooperation and foster cooperation.

Coordination challenges are compounded by the current limits to our scientific knowledge of complex systems and are constrained by the interaction of human and ecological pro-cesses. Success depends on three elements:

There is good news in that inter-disciplinary science, large scale planning and mapping is happening. We are even seeing international cross-border studies such as the terrestrial hab-itat mapping of the continuous northeastern forest shared by New England and Canada. These efforts are hard work, gaps remain, and it requires great persistence to coordinate the knowledge between and among organizations, but progress is being made.

There is also another dimension of knowledge that should be recognized. This is what I call “local knowledge.” It is the knowledge of time, place, circumstance, situation, experi-ence, culture and tradition. It comes from living and working on the land and in the local communities. This is often critical knowledge in defining what is doable, in pinpointing what is possible, and in finding the shared vision. Therefore, we need both scientific and local knowledge for effective landscape scale conservation and for community networks.

To be successful we need to look at new forms of governance for working in large land-scapes. They need to be cross-jurisdictional and support public-private coordination. The complexity of landscape conservation requires a “mosaic” of landowners and participating partners working through and with a coordinating organization with shared management goals and coordinated actions. I call this “network governance.”

We need to generate and use all the relevant knowledge about a place - its history, cultural,biology, hydrology, agriculture, industrial processes and more; We need to apply planning and policy tools to identify solutions and motivate the actionsof many partners with many purposes;And our governance structures and decision frameworks need to support coordinationand sustained action over long periods of time.

Courtesy of The Nature Conservancy

WORKING AT LARGE SCALES PRESENTS CHALLENGES

GOVERNANCEAND

COORDINATION

LIMITEDSCIENTIFIC

KNOWLEDGEAT

RELEVANTSCALES

INTERSECTINGHUMAN ANDECOLOGICAL

SYSTEMS

CLEAR ANDSUSTAINED

GOALS

IMPERATIVEOF INCLUSIVE

DIALOGUE

Essex, MA, Photo Bob Wilson

4


I’m not here to offer a primer in how to do networked governance but rather I want to give you a sense of its possibilities. Examples such as the Blackstone River Valley National Her-itage Corridor and Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area use constellations of collaboration at an ever growing scale. One of the benefits that I see in the national heritage areas is the work they do to provide a shared context for networked decision-making.

While we can all agree to collaborate, the long-term nature of these endeavors requires some certainty in terms of sustainable governance. There needs to be a decision mechanism that in some formal way links people. Therefore, joint power agreements and things like this become very important.

As I look at the examples of networked governance, I see several key characteristics that are especially important: accountability, inclusivity, shared agreement on decision processes, resilience and learning processes, and supportive underlying policies and rules.

Network governance requires a continuum of approaches from the informal to the formal, starting with informal networks that build relationships, exchange information and identify common interests and then building these into partnerships that coordinate existinginstitutions (government, non-profits, for-profits, and land owners) and that negotiate com-pacts which in turn lead to new, more formal structures such as regional institutions and/or intermediary institutions. There is both a linear and a cyclical nature in this work. While it is necessary to build coordinating entities, it also requires constant reassessment to ensure that all the voices are fully heard. There is no end point to large-scale conservation.

To move back to the big picture, the noted biologist E.O. Wilson wrote of the tug of histo-ry on our minds and souls. He remarked that who we are is partly a matter of our stories and that our stories often spring from a place. We need to sustain our natural and cultural places in part for the stories that give meaning to who we are.

Accountability: When you have one entity in charge it is easy to tell where “the buck stops,” but in networks it is much more difficult to determine who is responsible for what. Inclusivity and shared agreement: While it is necessary to give expression to multiple values and points of view, we also need shared agreement on the processes and rules. With networks it is difficult to know how much consensus is enough and when an idea can become a decision.Policies and rules: Underlying the work, there must be processes and tools that facilitate coordinated action and strengthen connections.


5 KEY CHARACTERISTICS

ACCOUNTABILITY INCLUSIVITY

SHAREDAGREEMENTON DECISIONPROCESSES

RESILIENCEAND

LEARNINGPROCESSES

SUPPORTINGPOLICIES

AND RULES

Newbury, MA, Photo Lee Yeomans

5


Each of us has our own stories to tell of connecting with places. My seven-year-old grand-son recently observed while looking out the window of his house in Cambridge, Mass., “None of this was here without the creativity of humans.” And I realized that ultimately our greatest hope lies in our continued creativity to embark on sustaining the linkages be-tween city and countryside, culture and nature, people and place.

But I also want to note that it is not just our stories that are important or indeed the beauty of these places. Nature is not just nice, it is essential. If we go back a hundred years to the open space and parks movement, it was often about the romantic beauty of places or about having a place to walk. While these are important attributes, we are increasingly learning that nature is essential to every aspect of our wellbeing. Sustaining nature is important for clean water, coastal protection, pollination, soil health, biodiversity and more. It is intrinsic to the health of this nation.

Recently I took part in an event with the Houston Methodist Research Institute and an organization called Texas by Nature. It focused on the linkages between nature and health. Most of you here know about the connection between recreation and health, but what was really intriguing about this event was the medical research that has uncovered the important role that nature can play in cognitive function, memory, learning capacity, post-traumatic stress syndrome, and nature’s contribution to sustaining whole person health. The early results of this research are quite extraordinary.

Nature matters. It is part of the health of our nation, but sustaining those functions simply cannot be done in small increments and within bounded islands of preservation. Sustaining nature requires real scale and linkages between the countryside and our cities. Nature ought not to be someplace we “go”, it needs to be where we “are”. It needs to be with us in all its many dimensions - from the urban places to the wild spaces. Conservation at the landscape scale is not optional if we want to sustain ourselves, and to be successful, it requires the connectivity of whole systems pursued in unison.

I will close with the observation of the Greek philosopher Heraclitus who said, “a won-derful harmony is created when we join together the seemingly unconnected.” This is whatscaling up and connectivity are all about; to achieve success our approach must include cul-ture, history, nature, economy and community – considered at scale – together.


WORKING ACROSS BOUNDARIESA CONTINUUM OF RESPONSES

NETWORKS PARTNERSHIPS NEW STRUCTURESinformal formal

build relationshipsexchange informationidentify commoninterests

coordinate existinginstitutions

negotiate compacts

create regionalinstitutions

create intermediaryinstitutions

Magnolia Swamp Trail, Ravenswood Park, Gloucester, MA, Photo Bill O’Connor

6


Questions and Answers with Lynn Scarlett:

Question: What is your perspective on the Paris Climate Change Agreement?

Despite all the strife, 196 countries came together in Paris to address the issue of climate change. For thirty years prior to this meeting, this had not happened. The goals set forth in the agreement are not enough to get emission reductions that will allow us to hold tem-perature increases at two degrees Celsius, which is the level that scientists now think we will need if we are going to avoid the impacts of climate change. However, there is also a lot of good news that resulted from this meeting. The agreement’s goals will be reviewed and revised every five years.

There are companies in both the public and private sector that made commitments to try to combat climate change in their work, including the International Aviation Association, which has announced a commitment to reducing airplane emissions. There were 1,000 mayors who participated and a large portion of them agreed to do

what they could to address climate issues in their cities. Scientists have estimated that about 30-40% of the emission reductions can come from

natural solutions.

The agreement has motivated people around the globe to find solutions to climate change and should help to shape the necessary commitment of money and government policies to make real changes happen.

Question: What effect may the upcoming presidential election have on landscape scale conservation?

True knowledge of conservation and environmental issues resides at the community level, not in the White House. However, it is important to recognize that language has the capa-bility to take on symbolism, and phrases like “climate change” and “landscape scale” can trigger assumptions about costs and regulations that are counterproductive. Therefore, it is important to frame the conversation carefully. The Nature Conservancy tests language usage, and, for example, “ecosystem services” tests badly and phrases such as “open space” and “parks” are losing their impact. The language with more immediate resonance today has to do with water – such as “watershed,” “water security,” and “water quality.” But in the long run, it is important that our conservation becomes less about the terms we use, and more about the outcomes we achieve. Health and natural resource communities are starting to work more closely together, and this holds great promise for wider acceptance of conservation.

Question: How can network governance work in New England with our strong tradition of “home rule?”

Network governance is about working with a cluster of activities, some of which are shared and others which may remain distinct. People often fear that their voices will not be heard and can be hesitant to work across town or organizational boundaries. Despite the fact that communities may be different, some may be industrial cities and others harbor towns, they often have shared commonalities such as how can they ensure that they are sustaining clean

Middleton, MA, Photo Judy Schneider

7


and sufficient water. Commonalities of interests bring people together. If one town restores a marsh to provide a storm surge buffer, but the town next to it does not, the solution will not be useful. Therefore, we are seeing increasing recognition, especially when it comes to water concerns and hurricane impact, of the need to find a context for a shared conversation. Communities of all kinds are looking for ways where they can talk about the values that they care about and decide how they can work together and where they should continue to work separately.

Question: Do you favor land set-a-sides or working landscapes as the best way to conserve large landscapes?

Places and spaces are different, and they have different needs. Therefore, there is no one solution. We need some really wild places and set aside parks, but we also need working landscapes that remain in agriculture use or in sustainable timber. None of the built land-scapes that surround us would be here without human activity and creativity. All of our endeavors to conserve landscapes would be more sustainable, durable, and successful if right up front there was robust public engagement which gives voice to all interested and affected parties, including disadvantaged communities. If everyone is engaged at the start, these conservation issues are far more likely to be embraced and accepted.

Newbury, MA, Photo Alison Colby-Campbell

8


SESSION: Regional, National, and International Perspectives on Landscape-scale Conservation

ModeratorBob McIntoshAssociate Regional Director, Northeast RegionNational Park Service (retired)

What do we mean when we say large landscape conservation? Lynn Scarlett pointed out that it varies all over the map, from your own personal experiences, to your work orientation, to where you live. For me, I’ve started to think about it as landscapes for sustainability. I rec-ognize that what we need from our landscapes and seascapes is the sustainable fabric of our existence, not just as humans, but also for all living things that comprise the universe that we live in. Our sense of place is important for who we are and how we live, and it is vital that we nurture a sense of place for all of us in Essex County, for everyone who lives here thousands of years after Native Americans first settled this region. It is especially import-ant that we include recent immigrants because the stories that we relish are often foreign, abstract and have no real value to recent immigrants. For the future of this place, everyone needs to share in the story.

The essence of why we must care about large landscapes is that they prescribe the health of our lives. Landscapes sustain fisheries in the wetlands, food in our agricultural fields, clean public water from nearby lakes and streams, and clean air through the absorption of carbon dioxide and the production of oxygen from fields and woodlands. More and more, we are coming to recognize that healthy landscapes are inextricably connected to the health of our very existence. Therefore, we have no choice but to think about large landscape scale conser-vation because it is fundamental to the long-term sustainability of our places, our homes, our families, and our future.

Brent MitchellSenior Vice PresidentQLF/Atlantic Center for the EnvironmentIpswich, Massachusetts

In September 2016, the IUCN World Conservation Congress met in Hawaii. With over 10,000 people from 193 countries in attendance, this is believed to have been the largest conservation meeting ever held. The congress meets every four years to discuss issues im-pacting the environment and natural resources, and this was the first time it convened in the USA. The major themes of IUCN’s new program of work are:

Valuing and conserving biodiversity; Promoting and supporting effective, equitable governance of natural resources; Deploying nature-based solutions for societal challenges.

Until very recently conservationists would have only concerned themselves with the first theme - that of biodiversity - but now recognize that the other two goals are equally import-ant if we are to be successful. This is a significant shift in focus.

Plum Island, Ipswich, MA , Photo Andre Beaupre

9


The European Union has identified all areas of natural importance in a comprehensive strategy called “Natura 2000”. This includes many conventional parks and reserves but it is clear that all areas of conservation value cannot be protected only on public lands. A lot of important areas are in private hands and increasing attention is being given to “privately protected areas” in which nature can still benefit even when the land is held in private ownership.

In the United States, we have federal land holdings in the West, but in the East we have more of a mosaic of federal, state, and private property. To achieve natural connectivity, it is imperative that the management of these properties be networked together. A great example of this is the newly designated Katahdin Woods and Waters National Monument adjoining Baxter State Park and thousands of additional acres of public and private lands. Although many independent Mainers are still fearful of this approach, we are hearing reports that some local businesses are already seeing an uptick from the new monument which was just designated five or six weeks ago.Networked governance requires that we work across the whole spectrum of interests and reach out to organizations and individuals whose first, second, or even third objective may not be conservation. A lot of what we know about networked approaches comes from the National Heritage Areas, and there is some good science behind how to network different organizations.

We know that we need to collaborate to manage resources at greater scales, with a diversity of partners, but how exactly is the continuing challenge. Systemic obstacles include orga-nizational mandates, funding that is structured to promote competition and not collabora-tion, and regulation that interferes with cooperation. The cultural obstacles are perhaps even harder. They include workforce constraints, differences in skill sets and beliefs, and narrow value propositions.

There is no distinction made between nature and culture by indigenous populations, but in the West this is an issue that we are finally starting to work on. A good example is a new program of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) at select World Heritage Sites where teams are studying how both nature and culture can be better integrated into the management of these important sites. There are even greater challenges when landscapes cross political boundaries. It is important to make connections across these divides. One example is in West Texas where black bears had not been seen for fifty years until Big Bend National Park made connections with three reserves in Mexico and now the bears are back – a tangible result of connectivity.

SPECTRUM

“Networked Governance”

CONSERVATIONOBJECTIVE

SECONDARYOBJECTIVE

ANCILLARYCONSERVATION

CONSERVATIONOPPORTUNITIES

NOCONSERVATION

PROTECTEDAREAS

CONSERVEDAREAS

SOUNDLAND USE

TRANSPORTATION,ENERGY, &c.

RAPACIOUSDEVELOPMENT

Courtesy of Brent Mitchell

10


Diagram of Barcelona’s “superblocks”Courtesy of Brent Mitchell

What we are talking about here applies not only to large, open landscapes; it is relevant to urban areas and everything in between. The City of Barcelona, Spain, has a wonderful ex-ample of a new approach to the integration of urban culture and nature. They are creating new “super blocks” in the heart of the city – where the vehicles are pushed to the edge of these blocks, the hard paved surfaces are being dug up and replanted with trees, and the city is undergoing “rewilding” with nature being given a greater role in the urban environment. Currently, the National Park Service’s is looking hard at its “Urban Agenda,” seeking to strengthen the role of their urban parks and programs, as well as establishing collaborative approaches that integrate parks into people’s everyday lives.

This comes to a final point that the Park Service and everyone in conservation need recog-nize. We need to be more inclusive and move away from always saying “no” to sometimes allowing for “yes” or at least “yes maybe.” Network governance is simple in concept but difficult in practice because organizations often have different needs, timelines, and authorities. While groups may cooperate on specific projects they are structured to make decisions alone.

In closing to quote Tony Hiss: “Landscape-level conservation — the term is still relatively new — is a different way of making sense of the world and of assessing and nurturing its health beyond the laudable, but limited, 20th century practice of designating reserves and cleaning up pollution.”

Stephanie ToothmanAssociate Director for Cultural ResourcesNational Park ServiceWashington, D.C.

I will speak today about the National Park Service’s efforts to promote collaboration across boundaries, across disciplines, and to achieve our shared goal of preserving our cultural and natural heritage. I will start by talking about how the National Park Service’s vision has changed to meet the challenges of the 21st Century.

11


In 2011 with the publication of A Call to Action, the National Park Service announced its goal to change its approach to the preservation and management of America’s special places. On the eve of its centennial, the leadership of the Park Service recognized that the agency needed to reposition itself for the next 100 years of stewardship and set an ambitious new agenda for NPS engagement both inside and beyond its park boundaries. Four strategies were identified as priorities:

Increase resilience in the face of climate change and other stresses; Cultivate excellence in science and scholarship in its parks and programs; Achieve a standard of excellence in its stewardship to serve as a model for the world; Seek great connectivity by collaborating with other land managers and partners.

To move on this new agenda, the Leopold Report, which shaped the Park Service’s wildlife management policy for nearly five decades, was revisited and its goals updated. A new framework was set with the recognition that:

Conservation requires an expansion in the spatial, temporal, and social scales of re-source stewardship; An interdisciplinary approach to resource management is essential to meet the chal-

lenges before us; Collaborative landscape management is imperative in order to face climate change,

biodiversity decline, loss of cultural resources, and the impacts of pollution.

These studies, along with other reports and scientific reviews have led to the National Park Service’s commitment to the concept of collaborative landscape management. To para-phrase Brent, we are moving from ‘no’ to ‘yes’ based on science and collaboration.

This shift is being manifested in a number of ways. Using the federal Land and Water Con-servation Fund, the National Park Service is working with US Fish & Wildlife, the Bureau of Land Management and the US Forest Service to prioritize the acquisition of new lands for federal protection, especially to create lands that will enhance better linkages. This is called the Large Landscape Collaborative and it also considers critical cultural resources as well as natural.

Within the cultural resource sphere of the NPS, we are working to modernize historic preservation methods and technologies. We are working to show how historic structures can be made more sustainable and are used to support rebuilding the economic vitality of urban and rural communities. The “Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties” is being updated. The National Register of Historic Places has moved from single property listings to complex cultural landscape designations, recording the significance of the barn but also all the fields and setting too. We encourage multiple property nominations that capture thematically related properties that can include hun-dreds of thousands of acres. Our documentation programs such as the Historic American Building Survey, Historic American Engineering Record, and Historic America Landscape Survey are also looking at much larger landscapes than they had traditionally considered.

Many large landscapes also have cultural values and practices associated with them, such as Mt. Shasta in California, and increasingly these values are being recognized and given a voice. With our managers and staff we are encouraging more understanding of and ac-counting for traditional knowledge in the preservation and interpretation of these places. Newburyport, MA, Photo Rod Parker

12


The national scenic, historic, and recreational trail systems, such as the Oregon Trail and the Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail, are also a blend of natural, cultural, and rec-reational resources within a large geographic area. Many of these tools are being used in the National Heritage Areas, one of the most successful programs we have for conserving large working landscapes. Heritage areas use resource conservation, historic preservation, and cultural interpretation to engage people in protecting large working landscapes and are often also successful in bringing new economic vitality to economically depressed regions. An example of making this historic-natural-economic linkage is the Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor where the canal trail has helped to revitalize Main Streets in the towns along this historic and newly redeveloped recreational trail. The thirty-seven county Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area, located in America’s tall grass prairie in northeastern Iowa, is another example of the way in which an extensive working landscape is being sustained by programs that connect the landscape, the people, and the communities.

Here are some statistics on the National Heritage Areas in 2015. There are 49 heritage areas across the country. In 2015, they leveraged more than $57 million for their projects and programs, made 1,500 formal partnerships, and engaged 43,000 volunteers. Through heritage area programs, 230 historic sites were preserved and more than 6,000 acres of cul-tural landscapes conserved. They improved land and air quality for people and supported healthy ecosystems by restoring more than 11,000 acres of land through invasive species re-moval, plantings, and toxic site clean-ups. In this same year, they worked to educate current and future leaders with 210 education programs that were offered to more than 1.8 million participants and made 447 grants to support educational programs.

The work of the heritage areas frequently compliments the efforts of the National Park Service units that are located in or adjacent to a National Heritage Area. In this region the Essex National Heritage Area collaborates closely with the two park units, Salem Maritime and Saugus Ironworks, on projects in preservation, education, youth engagement, and in-terpretation.

I will briefly mention again the NPS urban agenda and our efforts to be relevant to all Americans. In the coming weeks, we will be publishing studies and launching initiatives related to African Americans, LGBTQ, Latinos, women, Haitian Americans, and other constituencies whose voices have not been fully incorporated into the Park Service family.

In summary, the emphasis on collaboration at the landscape level will define how the Na-tional Park Service approaches both its stewardship and advocacy responsibilities in the next century. To accomplish this we are undergoing a significant cultural shift in our ranks emphasizing collaboration as an essential leadership skill. We believe that as we pursue this course not only will the national parks and heritage program support be strengthened for another 100 years but we will cultivate a nation of inspired, motivated conservationists and preservationists for whom collaboration will be the core principle.

Salem Maritime National Historic Site, Salem, MA

13


Emily BatesonCoordinatorNetwork for Landscape ConservationBoston, Massachusetts

We have been talking this morning about the need to advance landscape-scale conservation in order to effectively tackle climate change, habitat destruction and fragmentation and other large-scale ecosystem threats. The modern day collaborative approach to conservation really began more than 20 years ago when efforts like the Yellowstone to Yukon Conserva-tion Initiative (Y2Y) got underway.

By then, an increasing amount of scientific research had documented that even out west, with large tracts of public land, protected areas were not big enough or connected enough to safeguard larger species or biodiversity overall, or to be resilient in a time of global climate change. This led to the growth of collaborative conservation across larger areas, and across private as well as public landscapes. And this required new tools and new skills, as people worked together across sectors and geographies, and wrestled with working at multiple scales and with complex science and conservation planning. But too often, people were recreating the proverbial wheel; they were not talking to each other, and opportunities for shared learning and innovation were being lost. There was simply no central place to gather and no efficient ways to network. We were all working very hard but not as effectively as we should.

The vital need to help support and advance a community of practice in the rapidly growing field of landscape conservation led to the creation of the Network for Landscape Con-servation. Launched in 2011 by conservation leaders in the private and public sector, the Network provides an arena for practitioners to connect and share thinking, perspectives, and strategies on how to work together across large geographies and many jurisdictions to achieve conservation that is both locally and regionally significant for the sustainable futureof nature and people. Current initiatives include an emerging peer exchange program; analy-sis and dissemination of information on best practices; and a policy working group focused on removing barriers to landscape conservation. Our website, LinkedIn group, Facebook page, and bimonthly e-bulletin provide additional opportunities for practitioners in NorthAmerica and beyond to connect to each other and the newest information in the field.

Rocky Hill Meeting House, Amesbury, MA, Photo Ken Jordan

14


Turning now to New England, more than 80% of our landscape is privately owned. We depend deeply on these lands for clean water, clean air, flood control, and climate resiliency. We also depend on these landscapes for food, jobs, recreation, and for our cultural identity and sense of place. But much of the land is in very small parcels with a variety of owner-ships; conservation at a meaningful landscape scale is a challenge. I will speak about three innovative approaches in the New England region.

Staying Connected is an initiative of Two Countries, One Forest (2C1Forest), a landscape conservation collaborative focused on the Northern Appalachian/Acadian region of the Eastern U.S. and Canada. Launched in 2004, 2C1Forest (“to see one forest”) assembled a comprehensive bi-national ecological database and analyzed which forested areas were particularly valuable for landscape connectivity — if these lands were lost, the region’s long-term ecological health would be at real risk. The Staying Connected Initiative is an out-growth of this work, focusing specifically on the nine key linkage areas identified. It works collaboratively with communities in each of these important linkages and provides them with tools, resources, and helps develop creative conservation solutions. Staying Connected focuses strategically on the tools of conservation science, land protection, community out-reach, land use planning, transportation, and policy. In the last five years, the Initiative has helped conserve more than 500,000 high priority acres.

Regional Conservation Partnerships (RCPs): Starting in the 1990s, local communities and land trusts across New England started to reach across town and even state borders to work collaboratively in larger landscapes to achieve a shared conservation vision. Fueled by the need to work at meaningful ecological and cultural scales, these collaboratives bubbled up organically, and often did not know of each other’s efforts, until the Highstead Foundation started researching this trend, and eventually brought the groups together as the Regional Conservation Partnership Network. Today there are 44 RCPs in New England covering more than 70% of the region. Working within their own manageable landscapes, but learn-ing from each other, these collaboratives are making a significant conservation difference to their communities and to the region as a whole.

Highstead has taken the lead in analyzing what makes these RCPs tick; what makes them succeed, and how to help the entire community grow. Because of this research, we know some of the key elements of success shared by effective RCPs as they move through the “emerging, maturing, and then conserving” stages of growth, such as a strong lead partner, agreed upon vision, a science-based conservation plan, an implementation plan, and core staffing. These steps to success are outlined in Highstead’s Regional Conservation Part-nership Handbook. A tangible RCP example is the two million-acre Quabbin-to-Cardi-gan Initiative (Q2C). Over the past 10 years, Q2C has protected 90,000 acres of land in Massachusetts and New Hampshire, — increasing the pace of conservation by more than 25%.These New England efforts are not at the scale of Yellowstone to Yukon, nor do they need to be. Regional Conservation Partnerships are working at the scale that makes the most sense for our region, given land ownership patterns, governance structures, and New England culture. Collectively, the conservation impact is considerable, and growing.

15

Eastern Point Light, Gloucester, MA


The Appalachian Trail Landscape Conservation Partnership is an emerging new initiative of the National Park Service, the Appalachian Trail Conservancy, and a growing list of private and public partners. The Appalachian Trail of course extends far beyond New England, wending its way for 2,190 miles from Maine to Georgia, through fourteen states, several national parks and forests, and numerous state owned lands. Unfortunately, this iconic foot-path is increasingly threatened by encroaching power lines, noise, roads, and development. The goal of the Partnership is to broaden the focus of protection beyond the narrow trail right-of-way and conserve the rich array of natural, cultural, scenic, and community values of the broader landscape. In launching this exciting initiative, the group hopes to achieve the original vision of the A.T. founder, Benton MacKaye, who foresaw the vital importance of landscape-scale conservation almost 100 years ago. MacKaye also advocated that the dense-ly populated east coast was a particularly important region to conserve and connect natural and cultural landscapes, and thus provide easy access for millions of people to experience wild nature in all its quiet beauty. These three efforts reflect the considerably energy and innovation in the rapidly growing field of landscape conservation, and provide us with information, inspiration, and new tools that will help us all sustain the broader landscapes that in turn sustain us.

Questions and Answers

Question: Can you speak to the question of traditional knowledge and how it is being used in decision-making? What are some of the issues around the sacredness of the landscape and the conflicts you see between sacred sites and recreational uses?

Stephanie Toothman – This is a big topic but let me start with the policy issues. One of the things that we are doing is revising the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifica-tion Standards. This identifies what the professional standards should be; including how traditional knowledge should be dealt with. These standards provide guidance to federal agencies in terms of recognizing and respecting who should represent a group’s traditional knowledge. As we look towards more integration of cultural and natural resources, we are finally really focusing our efforts on understanding the interactions between humans and their environment.

Ipswich, MA, Photo Sherry Gruber

16


Question: How do you look at the Dakota Pipeline protests and the kind of conflicts it is creating, politically, socially, culturally, and economically, particularly as to how it relates to indigenous people?

Stephanie Toothman – These protests reflect the fact that the National Park Service still has a lot of work to do in carrying out our trust responsibilities, our government-to-government responsibilities, and our understanding of how to consult with Native American and other indigenous groups. From what I understand, the Army Corps of Engineers hit every dot and crossed every “T” in terms of the formalities of consultation. I think the protests re-flect not only a disagreement with their conclusions, but also a frustration about how federal agencies are interpreting that consultation mandate. Too often, that is based on an exchange of letters, maybe an appearance before a tribal council, but it is not built on a foundation of understanding the cultural values that these groups are fighting for.

Question: If someone is interested in establishing a new National Heritage Area, how should they go about it?

Stephanie Toothman – These are community, grassroots proposals. There is guidance at the NPS website on the National Heritage Areas in terms of what we are looking for in pro-posals. There needs to be a nationally significant story to tell, and this is something that you need to make sure is clearly established. There must be a viable organization that can take the lead in coordinating collaboration, and you need to have a group of partners who are committed to the type of collaboration that a National Heritage Area requires. Also, there is a matching requirement for the federal funding which is very variable so there is an economic viability aspect to establishing a heritage area as well. For people to talk to, I recommend Annie Harris and also Peter Samuels, the Northeast Regional Coordinator for the National Heritage Areas.

Question: When I look around this room today, I don’t see many younger people, so how do we encourage young people to become more involved in these conservation efforts?

Stephanie Toothman – I just came from the Acadia National Park Science Symposium, which was filled with Millennials, most of who are eager to work for the kinds of organizations that are in this room today. There is tremendous interest out there with the younger genera-tions, but often the rigors of trying to find a job at a public agency can be very discouraging. Also, it is important to understand that people connect to organizations and conservation efforts on a personal level. People have trouble making a connection when they do not see their stories being told, or don’t see the contributions that the people in communities of diversity have made. That is an important piece of what we need to emphasize.

Brent Mitchell – I agree with Stephanie and one of the opportunities of this networked approach that we are discussing today is that networking is where a lot of young people are naturally. Through technology they are connected like never before. They may not have the same loyalty to the kinds of institutions that we know, but if they can connect in ways that relate to where they are, if they can network quickly and be nimble and get excited about the opportunity, then I believe that they will come on board. We had a session at the IUCN World Conservation Congress on privately protected areas and the new things that are going on. We had a lot of young people who came because they were excited about the ideas so if

Winter Island, Salem, MA, Photo Rick Matthias

Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site, Saugus, MA

17


we can work in ways that are more like the way they are working now rather than the ways we are used to working, then it will grow.

Emily Bateson – It is a big issue and I would like to give you one example of a New England initiative. I was previously coordinator of an initiative called Wildlands and Woodlands. Through the leadership of Harvard Forest, we started bringing together academics working on land protection in New England (now ALPINE for short). This group has now mapped where all the academic institutions are and where all the regional conservation partnerships are. One of the projects they have planned is an internship program to match these aca-demic institutions and their students with these conservation groups. The goal is to get students out there; working on conservation projects from tracking wildlife to working in the office — whatever it takes to give them a love for conservation and nature that will last for a lifetime.

Bob McIntosh – I’m going to get a plug in too. One of the things that I have been doing since retirement is working in Mongolia. We do a Junior Ranger Program that is an in-school and weeklong summer camp. In 2015, at the end of the summer, I got a call from a kid who said “We just followed an illegal fisherman back to his house and we want to know what to do now?” So you can get kids involve but be careful what you ask for.

Question: As a practical matter, how do young people who are interested in what we are discussing today break into the field and get jobs and experience?

Stephanie Toothman – At the National Park Service, more avenues for younger people are opening up. A new bill was passed a few years ago that makes this easier. This bill provides people who have served in seasonal or term positions the opportunity to compete for per-manent positions, pathway positions, or recent graduate positions. These provide pathways for recent graduates and people who are still in school. Volunteering also provides a chance to make connections and can help people find a way into a long-term career.

Brent Mitchell – The Peace Corps can provide job training as well. It is a way to get experience in many different areas.

Emily Bateson – The Mount Grace Land Trust oversees an AmeriCorps program that places college-age students with Massachusetts land trusts.

18

Essex Heritage-NPS Future Leaders at Appleton Farms, Ipswich, MA


Welcome from the City of SalemMayor Kimberly Driscoll

I am very pleased to welcome all of you to the City of Salem. We have many important organizations within this city that work together to preserve and enhance this community. We are very grateful to Essex Heritage, the Peabody Essex Museum, and the many other organizations in Salem and in the region that work on strategies around the cultural and historical assets of the county. The issues that you are talking about today have many par-allels in Salem. We are also using strategic partnerships to improve the city. Not long ago, Salem was a very different place than it is today. Tourism was not a big industry, and we did not have a very good visitor experience. There was very little activity downtown, and many of the storefronts were vacant.The highest concentration of people living downtown was in the Crombie Street Shelter. We had a coal-fired power plant on our waterfront, which we actually valued because it was our largest taxpayer. The city’s industrial manufacturing base had drastically declined because companies such as Parker Brothers and GTE Sylvania had recently left town, and when these companies went, they sometimes left behind some bad brownfields, too.

Then starting about twenty years ago, things began to change in Salem. People began to really focus on the potential here, and quickly recognized that this could not be done alone. We needed to work collectively and create partnerships. There have been many institutions in Salem that came together in the past two decades to revitalize the city including non-profits, such as the Peabody Essex Museum, Salem State University, and the North Shore Medical Center, as well as private sector businesses such as the local banks, the hospitality industry, and technology companies. Local government, state government, and the feder-al government had a hand in this revitalization as well. The city worked with the federal government to open a visitor’s center with the National Park Service, supported a business climate that encouraged the private sector to transform buildings that had long been dor-mant, and worked with the Peabody Essex Museum to expand and open this remarkable new addition. All these changes required organizations with different interests to work together. It didn’t just happen. There were difficult conversations about what was best for the community and who would have what role in making it happen.

Today, the city is a place that is much more welcoming and inclusive. There is still work to be done, issues that need to be dealt with, and hard conversations between our many part-ners. We need to be sure that we don’t lose our livability, that the needs of our residents are respected, and that our historic and cultural assets are fully integrated into our community. These issues are often not easy to resolve, and working one agency at a time, it can feel like we will never get there, but now when we work collectively we know that we can achieve success because we have seen it happen.

Juniper Cove, Salem, MA, Photo Jerry Jones

19


SESSION: Snapshots! Landscape-scale Conservation in Action

ModeratorAnnie HarrisChief Executive OfficerEssex National Heritage CommissionSalem, Massachusetts

The purpose of this session is to take what we heard this morning and bring it home, to help us visualize some of the big ideas that we heard today and see how we can make them work locally for us in our communities. The seven panelists who are about to present “snapshots” of their programs are all experts in working within complex partnerships.

Panel

Edward BeckerPresidentEssex County GreenbeltEssex, Massachusetts

Organization: Essex County Greenbelt is a regional land trust in Essex County, MA. We are involved in land acquisition, stewardship, and community engagement. Greenbelt works to conserve scenic landscapes, farmland, wildlife habitats, and properties that are essential for public access. We acquire land by gift, by purchase, and by conservation easement. Current-ly, we complete about 20 projects a year and save on average about 500 acres.

Project: Several years ago we realized that we needed to do more, and we launched the cam-paign for 10,000 acres in 10 years. Our goal is to scale up and double our annual goal of land protection. We did this because there is a lot more land in this region that needs to be protected, and we are running out of time. The good news in this region is that 25% of the important open space is protected, but there is still another 25%, or 80,000, acres that is not yet developed and not protected. Not all of these acres should be protected, but from a bottom-up analysis we concluded that we need to save 10,000 acres over the next decade to preserve the character and connections necessary in this region.

Challenges and accomplishments: There is a real sense of urgency. We think that we may only have 15-20 years to be in the land acquisition business. The demographics of our landown-ers are changing. They are older and are at a point where they are making decisions about the future of their property. Because of our proximity to Boston and the attractiveness of the quality of life here, we have some of the highest land values anywhere in the country and the rate of development is accelerating again. Also, climate change is a real issue. We are in a region that is impacted by observable and measurable climate change. These factors combine to make our organization feel that we need to do more and at a faster pace.

We are scaling up to meet these challenges. To deal with climate change, we understand the importance of making sure that we build in resiliency by creating new greenbelts and con-nections. We need corridors for native plants and animals to have access to existing reserves. We need larger scale, green infrastructure to adapt to sea level rise. Also, we understand that

Great Marsh, Essex, MA, Photo Alene Taliadoros

20


our communities are changing. They are becoming younger and more diverse, and this means that another challenge is to continually prove the relevancy and value of our acqui-sitions.

To accomplish our work, we are relying more and more on partnerships. We are working with our cities and towns, with state agencies and with other non-profits to put together land protections deals. We are also looking beyond the “bucks per acre” approach. We are looking at ways, for example, to provide support to farmers to continue farming, to promote local markets for agricultural goods, and to help with succession planning so that the next generation can continue to preserve their open space.

In conclusion, to meet our goal of 10,000 acres in 10 years, we understand the need to be working at a larger scale, to be expanding our partnerships, and to focus on the interface of people – nature – culture.

Amanda BabsonCoastal Landscape Adaptation CoordinatorNational Park Service, Northeast RegionNarragansett, Rhode Island

Organization: The North Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative (NALCC) is a con-servation partnership made up of state and federal agencies, Native American tribes, and private organizations in thirteen states and portions of Canada. We work together to sustain natural and cultural resources and to support landscape-scale climate adaptation. Our goals are to coordinate partners, identify urgent threats, empower effective responses, and support work-on-the-ground by delivering science to people who need it.

Project: Under the leadership of NALCC, the North Atlantic Aquatic Connectivity Collab-orative (NAACC) is an excellent example of a new partnership that enables organizations to work together at different scales to improve aquatic connectivity across several states. NAACC brings together fish and aquatic interests with transportation and flood risk com-munities, and looks at the issues of river crossings and culverts. Many organizations are in-volved in this work, including the University of Massachusetts, Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services. The NAACC is advised by a workgroup comprising over 70 states, federal and non-governmental partnerships. Another example of a successful network at a more local scale using the NAACC tools is the Resilient Taunton Watershed Network (RTWN).

Challenges and accomplishments: NALCC seeks to develop the scientific and resource man-agement tools needed to guide large-scale conservation efforts. We think a lot about scale – both scaling up and scaling down. Some of the tools that we have developed are to pro-vide the foundational data for the entire area, but we also do assessment and research that is designed for local partners, such as land trusts and Regional Conservation Partnerships, who can use these tools to take local action. With our tools, local partners can do their own local community assessments, and then they can increase their conservation impact by incorporating their local data into the much larger, regional landscape scale data map. For example, we have developed a standardized protocol for assessing culverts, and we provide training for local staff and volunteers so they can do on-the-ground assessments. These North Andover, Photo Elaine Gauthier

21


local assessments are then put together in an online regional database, and this allows for coordinated decision making at the much larger landscape scale. The result is that it is now possible to prioritize the removal or redesign of culverts along an entire watershed and this has resulted in expedited improvements in aquatic connectivity across the region.

Robert O’ConnorDirector of Land and Forest PolicyMassachusetts Executive Office of Energy & Environmental AffairsBoston, Massachusetts

Organization: The Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) collectively manages over 500,000 acres of state owned forest lands and also sup-ports the highest standards for forest management on the state’s more than two million acres of private forest land. The Director of Land and Forest Conservation coordinates land conservation efforts among five state divisions and works with the state’s land trusts and municipalities. This position also manages EEA’s grant programs, plus a variety of other important conservation-related initiatives, such as the relatively new Land Conservation Tax Credit and Massachusetts’ Global Warming Solutions Act.

Project: In the year 2000 a statewide plan determined that there were one million acres of land that should be conserved in Massachusetts. Since then 330,000 acres have been protected, showing that it is possible to make progress if we work together. I am currently working on the Mohawk Trail Woodlands Partnership with 21 communities, and two re-gional planning agencies, on a forest conservation effort in the northwestern part of the state.

Challenges and Accomplishments: After lots of talk and fifty-five meetings, the communities have developed three goals for this effort:

Forest conservation and stewardship; Economic development and tourism; Rural community sustainability.

To go forward with this plan, we have what I believe is a very good example of network governance. In the committee there are community representatives, state officials and the USDA Forest Service, and we are looking for a new designation from the Forest Service, similar to the heritage areas, which will designate the importance of our working forests.

I am pleased to say that the land partnerships in this state have been very creative, especially using the state’s new Landscape Partnership (Grant) Program. I have great admiration for the Quabbin to Cardigan initiative mentioned earlier. There is a significant effort with partners in Mt. Greylock who are leveraging together to assemble 40 acres. We have also managed to form a remarkable new partnership over the state line with Connecticut, despite the fact that we are “never” allowed to cross state boundaries. Along with the New England Forestry Foundation we are helping to conserve the main reservoir for the City of Hartford. Finally, I will mention a project that connects communities to the land conservation move-ment. There was a dairy farmer going out of business who needed money to conserve his land. Landowners in the communities around his parcel got together and donated part of

Methuen, MA, Photo C.A. Carpinone

22


the value of their land to match the value of the state grant so that 1,000 acres of farmland were protected.

Janey WinchellThe Sarah Fraser Robbins DirectorThe Dotty Brown Art & Nature CenterPeabody Essex MuseumSalem, Massachusetts

Organization: The Peabody Essex Museum is an international museum of art and culture. Our mission is to celebrate creativity and to offer experiences that transform peoples’ lives.

Project: The purpose of the Art & Nature Center at PEM is to foster a sense of place in our landscape and heritage. We seek to provide a lens for young audiences to look at art and humanity, around the globe and across time.

Challenges and Accomplishments: Nature offers a portal for innovation, creativity and agency. At PEM, we look at art and nature across time and cultures with an emphasis on looking at ways for people to interact with nature and make it personal. Through both our perma-nent and our changing exhibitions, we have explored a whole range of topics with artists and scientists looking at the interface between people and nature. Our most recent exhibit “Sizing It Up” dealt exactly with the issues under discussion today – those of changing scale and perspective.

Eric HoveStrategic Initiatives DirectorMetropolitan Area Planning CouncilBoston, Massachusetts

Organization: The Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) is the regional planning agency serving the 101 cities and towns of the greater metro Boston region. MAPC encour-ages regional planning, including open space plans and sub-regional climate resiliency plans. MAPC works to prioritize areas for development and those for preservation.

Project: Our work is guided by the MetroFuture Plan, a long-term regional plan that sets our goals and helps us to assess projects. The MetroFuture Plan includes all of the 163 communities in the transportation planning region of the Boston MPO, beyond the 101 of MAPC, and includes areas for housing and economic development as well as open space preservation

Challenges and Accomplishments: MAPC is concerned with identifying areas where we want to steer development and others where development is not appropriate. As you have heard today, it is not possible to protect all the land we should through acquisition and easements, and so MAPC looks at the regulatory tools that are also available to help direct develop-ment and promote resource protection.

Zoning is one of the most important tools we have. The root of many of our problems in

23


Massachusetts is the zoning code, which encourages inefficient, low-density one and two acre residential lots in most of our communities. In too many cases, the local zoning code does not allow us to build the traditional compact, walkable, town-centered communities of our past which many people want today. The growth projections for the Boston region show that in the next 30 years we will need over 400,000 units of housing if we are to sustain our economy and quality of life.

The question is what pattern will the creation of this housing follow? Will we continue to have low density, residential sprawl, or can we change this and focus again on town centers, transit oriented development, and a mix of housing types? At MAPC we believe the key is to provide more options under the zoning code. The Great Estates Bylaw in Ipswich is a great example of preserving open space while allowing for redevelopment of the property and its attendant economic development. Salem and Beverly are model cities in using tran-sit oriented development tools. But to have a statewide effect we need to change the state zoning code to allow more flexibility and density in the appropriate places, and to relieve development pressures on the areas that we want conserved. Development and conservation cannot be seen as separate issues. They are two sides of the same issue and we need everyone who cares about conservation to advocate at both the local and state level for the new tools that will allow smarter development.

Colin NovickExecutive DirectorGreater Worcester Land TrustWorcester, Massachusetts

Organization: The Greater Worcester Land Trust is a small organization with one and a half staff people and twelve board members who meet twice a month. We are currently involved with 73 properties comprising 2,490 acres and we serve nine municipalities. I represent the urban point of view at this symposium and all of my work is focused on making con-nections between the land and people who live in our nine communities.

Projects: In Worcester we have built a four-town greenway project, and I am very proud of how much of the greenway has been acquired over a relatively short period of time. More recently we have a large-scale (for us) conservation effort called the East Side Trail. It is a partnership project in which a 3.3-mile trail passes through public and private property allowing people to hike through forests, quarries, and meadows. Our partners on these proj-ects include municipal authorities, land trusts, and even small neighborhood associations. The best part is that you cannot tell who owns which parcels of land. It is one trail, and for the trail user, there is a seamless transition from one property to the next. This makes for a fantastic user experience.

Challenges and Accomplishments: Partners are critical to our work both in acquiring and manag-ing land. We own relatively little land; 37 properties in fee, totaling more than 1,100 acres, which is a lot for our very small organization. However, it is not the size of the organization that is important to get stuff done in the landscape; it is about having a very clear vision, building partnerships, and being around long enough to see the projects to completion. To be successful, it’s important to be the voice for the landscape. The landscape cannot speak for itself, and someone has to bring the landscape to the attention of those who can

Ayer Clock Tower, Lawrence, MA, Photo C.A. Carpinone

24


bring about change. In urban areas, residents are separated from nature and you have to make the landscape relevant to them. Wildlife in urban areas is exciting. We had a moose in Worcester two weeks ago, and while I have been here today, volunteers have been calling me because we have a bear wandering around. This is a big deal in a city. Seeing wildlife really gets people inspired.

We are not just an organizational partnership; we build community partnerships. There was a micro burst awhile back with a tremendous amount of blow down of trees and branches. We were able to handle the entire cleanup with volunteers. Not only does this allow us to maintain our greenway on a tiny budget, but this volunteerism also fosters strong steward-ship in our communities for these resources.

If you are not worried about who takes credit for what, a lot more can get done. Having a consistent vision over a long period of time is also very important. Time can be a key element because it allows your project to outlive the personalities and the problems. If you last long enough, your organization becomes the “pre-existing condition,” and instead of being the crazy visionary, you are the “given.”

Wayne CastonguayExecutive DirectorIpswich River Watershed AssociationIpswich, Massachusetts

Organization: The Ipswich River Watershed Association works to protect and restore the valuable aquatic resources of the Great Marsh, the salt marsh region between the Merri-mack River and Cape Ann, with a focus on the major contributing watersheds of the Parker River, Ipswich River, and Essex River.

Project: In 2011, the Ipswich River Watershed Association established the Parker-Ip-swich-Essex Rivers Restoration Partnership (PIE Rivers). There are twenty partners in-volved, including state and federal agencies and municipalities. The goal of PIE Rivers is to promote healthy rivers and ecosystems in the coastal rivers of northeastern Massachusetts. Its purpose is also to promote increased communication and collaboration between various groups involved in preservation, management, and restoration of the watersheds.

Challenges and accomplishments: At PIE Rivers, we are all about implementation and measure-ment. We focus on what needs to be done to improve the three coastal rivers in the Great Marsh and how can we measure our success. When we started the clam beds were at risk of being closed and the rivers were severely threaten. Although there are twenty partners, PIE Rivers has no budget and no staff. Using the collective impact model, we have been success-ful identified many of the key ecological threats in the region, and we are now developing fifty priority actions to fix these threats to our water-related resources.

One of our biggest challenges is that most of these actions require the cooperation of local municipalities. We have to work very collaboratively with our towns, but they are also (in many cases) the worst polluters because they control the municipal sewer systems, the road salt, and the culvert systems.

25

River exploration, Saugus Iron Works, MA


It has been a real educational process to bring everyone together to understand the threats and the solutions. What has helped has been the connectivity mapping we have completed which shows what needs to be done across the region for proper flow restoration and resil-iency.

We have also developed a complicated matrix for measuring our progress. It is very effective and funders love it. Check it out on our website. The PIE Rivers partnership enabled us to recently obtain a $3million “Sandy Grant” which wouldn’t have been possible without this region wide alliance. This grant is going to give our action plan a tremendous boost.

Questions and Answers

Question: How do you deal with industrial land use and brownfields?

Colin Novick – The best experts in brownfields development are the Groundwork people, such as Groundwork Lawrence. Groundwork is a program done jointly between the EPA and NPS. They have extensive experience in redeveloping polluted areas. Locally, it is diffi-cult do a lot of brownfield work in Massachusetts because a lot of the funding that is avail-able is for development loans which requires the project to have an economic return. This makes it difficult for the “brown space” to become “green space,” so more often “brown spaces” become “gray spaces” (such as parking lots). But in any case the Groundwork folks have mastered the art and are the ones to ask.

Ed Becker – It is not easy, but there are ways to convert these properties to make them usable. The question really is: what is the final result? If it is parkland that’s one thing, but if it is something that has more economic value, then it’s more challenging. But there are plenty of opportunities out there, and as an organization, we are looking to establish more of these partnerships.

Annie Harris – This is something that the mayor of Salem deals with a lot because if you want to do development in our urban centers where infrastructure and transportation are, you often have to work in brownfield areas. It is an important issue that can take a lot of money, but there are some federal and state grants that can make it happen.

Ipswich River, Middleton, MA, Photo Judith Schneider

26


Question: Can you speak to the issues of economic growth and its impact on natural resource protection?

A. Wayne Castonguay – I can speak to the issue of economic growth and the natural resource based shellfish industry. The shellfish business in the Great Marsh is a $20 million industry and employs over one thousand people. The industry partners very closely with my organi-zation because water quality is vitally important to preserving their business. Without clean water, there is no local shellfish industry.

Bob O’Connor – At the Mohawk Trail Woodlands Partnership (the 21 town coalition men-tioned earlier) they talked for many years about using the wood from the local forests to heat their schools with wood pellets. Advocates wanted to harvest wood, manufacture the pellets locally, and use these pellets to heat community buildings. The partnership has taken this on as a project and they are now working on creating a community-owned, pellet manufacturing facility. This is an example of a forester industry that can be sustainable if done properly.

Eric Hove – The greening of our cities is essential. I like the “super block” example in Bar-celona. Climate change has had a severe impact in our cities and especially on low-income residents.The Trust for Public Land has developed a green infrastructure prioritization tool for the inner core communities around Boston. The tool helps identify where trees should be planted for the most impact. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has made planting street trees a priority in urban areas.

Question: The panel has discussed trying to move development back into the urban centers, but historic preservationists feel that we need to preserve the scale, shape, and feel of these town centers and that new development isn’t always compatible with this. How are people who are working on these new urban developments also working with the historic preservation community?

Colin Novick – It depends on the community context. Maybe this is true in a village, but if you have an urban center or a gateway city, there are often warehouses and all sorts of historic buildings that can be repurposed and preserved. We have many historic buildings in Worcester that we would love to see some new development happen in so that they don’t disappear.

Eric Hove – It is a challenge since the development needs to happen somewhere. In Bos-ton, the trend is towards building more multifamily, mixed-use and higher density projects. However, it often seems that every development project that comes up, no matter where it is, turns into a community fight if it is denser than current zoning allows. It is definitely a challenge, and part of it is about educating our communities as well as doing a good design that does not detract or destroy the existing character.

Bob O’Connor – There are a lot of communities outside of route I-495 that would like to have this type of development. They have the capacity and often their schools are only half full. As more people are able to work from home perhaps this will help to make develop-ment happen in these places.Clamming in Ipswich, MA, Photo Judith Schneider

27


Question: Can you talk about low-income groups and have they been involved in your work? How can we build bridges to groups like that?

Bob O’Connor – We have a Greening the Gateway Cities Program which plants trees in ur-ban communities in Massachusetts. The program was started in Chelsea, and then moved to Holyoke, Chicopee, and is now in 13 gateway cities. Gateway cities are by definition the poorer cities in Massachusetts. The program was started in Chelsea because people claimed there was no place to plant a tree in this city, but today, 1,000 trees have been planted. The program employs local people who learn how to plant trees, and some of these community people now have jobs with landscaping companies or with local Department of Public Works (DPW). It’s the best thing going. We did the metrics on this project and overlaid it with the census of the number of people living within 50 feet of each tree (the expected canopy of a mature tree), and it is over five thousand people who are impacted by the trees that have been planted to date. This is a ratio of 5 to 1 – it’s great leverage! It is import-ant to reach into the community in a way that speaks to the residents. In our tree planting program, we have a little sticker that we put on the door, like a UPS sticker, only this one says “Do you want a free tree?” in whatever language the people in that neighborhood speak.

Question: Are there other ways to make connections and increase connectivity? Are there new ways we can look at natural resources and increase connections to the surrounding community?

Janey Winchell – At PEM, we do programs in the Art and Nature Center that are designed for school classes and afterschool groups as part of the museum’s mission of connecting the PEM with local schools. We also foster opportunities between artists and the community, which sometimes focus on natural resources. For example, Patrick Doherty’s Stickwork project has been a great way to connect with a whole range of people including the 50 volunteers who came together to assist in assembling this stick built sculpture project. They were a mix of community members, college students, and others. Working with an artist who has dedicated his life to constructing with natural materials was a real connector for these volunteers on a deep experimental level. I think that the question you raise, also leads us to ask: what are the kinds of programs we can offer that don’t rely on language? This is a direction that PEM has been pursuing for some time. Using again the example of Doherty’s Stickwork, I find that whenever I am over there making minor repairs people will approach me and ask questions about it. It is an immediate connector. This is a way we can look at properties and create opportunities for engagement that are outside of the norm.

Annie Harris – The heritage area does work in education both with teacher and students. We have had a program for the past four summers working directly with English Language Learners. We help these students connect to resources in the greater Salem community. When the kids get into the resources, language becomes less important. They become en-gaged, and you can really see them making a connection. The place becomes alive for them.The workshop that we hold each summer, in partnership with the National Park Service, trains teachers in the ways to use real resources in their curricula. When their students get involved in studying a vernal pool, inventorying a nature trail, recounting the history of the Lynn shoe industry, or measuring the currents on the river, they become deeply engaged in their learning. They are making connections that have real impacts on themselves and their communities. It has been inspirational not only for the students but also for their teachers.

Newburyport, MA, Photo Steven Perlmutter

28


Question: How do organizations prevent duplicating their efforts since many of them seem to have the same mission and goals?

Colin Novick – It depends on your community. In Worcester, there are many environmental groups but each has taken an important niche. For example, Mass Audubon engages people in education; the Regional Environmental Council does community garden work; the Toxic Lead Busters are doing site remediation for family housing; and the Greater Worchester Land Trust is focused on trails and open space preservation. We divide up the work in terms of the areas of responsibility and focus on different things without much duplication.

Ed Becker – There is so much work to be done that most organizations can establish their own niche of expertise. There is a lot of communication that occurs within the community. We have a great deal of experience talking together and we are able to determine which or-ganizations would be the best one to affect change in a certain area. Also, the nonprofits in this region have a great relationship with the state agencies. It is rare to have organizations overlap or repeat. There’s a lot of work out there, and the communication is making sure it’s happening quite efficiently.

Bob O’Connor – I’ve never seen two different groups try to buy the same piece of land.

Annie Harris – There is more than enough to do, and as long as everyone communicates, it’s easy for people to figure out who can do what. Sometimes funders get confused and think that there is overlap when there isn’t but the people in the field are pretty clear on how to divvy up what needs to be done. There is plenty to do and we can do it better together.

Amanda Babson – Communication is crucial. For the landscape conservation cooperatives, this is something that they have seen as their role, but it has also been a struggle. Especially as new partnerships are developing, it can be unclear which organization is doing what. Each group has its own niche but it takes quite a bit of coordination. The duplication can be minimized but not eliminated. Question: What are the connections being made between environment and health? Are there any partnerships between the hospitals and health industry that connect them in significant ways to our natural resources and open spaces? Do any of you work together?

Colin Novick – After years of trying to make this connection, I have found that there is a lot of talk but no money. There are great healthcare studies. The hospitals hand out little books where patients can keep track of their steps, but in terms of actively participating in and supporting our projects, it has been very difficult to engage them. In healthcare, there seem to be two communities: there are the people who are running the institutions whom we would like to engage, and there are the PR departments who are usually the people we get to speak to. The PR people are trying to put on events, and often these are fundraising walks. These walks usually do not relate well to what we are trying to do. It has been my experience that we are working with the wrong group of people in these institutions. The people who are running the hospitals may care but the PR departments don’t. We have not been successful making any meaningful connections. Salem Maritime National Historic Site, Salem, MA

29


Eric Hove – From a planning perspective, there has been a huge amount of collaboration between the public health sector and the planning sector. In the last five years, the connec-tion between how we build our towns, and the public health impacts of those decisions, is understood much better. But in terms of hospitals as partners, we haven’t had much expe-rience or success working with them.

Bob O’Connor – Recently, I tried to do an application for an EPA grant, but it was designed-for doctors and hospitals and was too complicated for me to fill out. The purpose of the grant was to connect the environment and health. It would have been great if the grant had required that the healthcare applicants must have a community partner to apply but it was silent on this.

Editor’s Note: These questions from the audience about making connections between health providers and the natural resource community generated a very lively discussion among members of the audience. There were several examples of connections including working with local YMCAs and a description of a successful diabetes trail. To judge from the amount of conversation that was generated, this is an area that many participants felt would be very worthwhile to pursue further. Unfortunately for the purposes of this docu-ment, this portion of the symposium is mostly inaudible on the tapes.

30

Great Marsh, Plum Island, Newbury, MA


SESSION: Implementing Partnership Strategies for Natural and Cultural Landscapes: A moderated roundtable-style session in which speakers share and discuss the creation and implementation of strategic partnerships for landscape-scale conservation.

Moderator:Jessica BrownExecutive DirectorNew England Biolabs FoundationIpswich, Massachusetts

Panel

Question: Could you give an example of a strategic partnership that you’ve been involved in that was successful?

Kathy AbbottPresident and Chief Executive OfficerBoston Harbor NowBoston, Massachusetts

The Boston Harbor Islands National Recreation Area was created by federal legislation in 1996 to manage the 13 harbor islands. It had been a state park since the 1970s, but the legislation established the Boston Harbor Islands Partnership and created a new kind of national ‘partnership’ park – managed by thirteen partners including two federal agencies, two state agencies, three nonprofit organizations, and two advisory committees. It was a leg-islated partnership – essentially a forced marriage – that made a huge difference because all the partners were required to work together. The involvement of the National Park Service helped to unite the various groups and their standards for management planning, and in the process raised the bar for everyone. Peer pressure was also a critical ingredient for success, demonstrating an early success as we did at Little Brewster Island. The islands have been transformed over the past 20 years; public access and enjoyment has exponentially grown; and over $50 million has been raised from public and private entities. The vision has shifted now from protecting the islands to connecting them to the greater Boston waterfront and the city at large.

Rebecca Stanfield McCown, Ph. DDirectorNational Park Service Stewardship InstituteWoodstock, Vermont

The National Park Service is currently working to encourage people to visit, use, and engage with their local urban parks. The Park Service is applying our brand to programs such as Healthy Parks Healthy People in order to inspire people to visit public parks and recreation areas. The program collaborates with parks, businesses, healthcare practitioners, and orga-nizations to expand upon the role parks play in peoples’ lives and thereby improve the lives of people in communities.

Clipper City Trail, Newburyport, MA, Photo Geordie Vining

31


In the San Francisco Bay Area, the NPS is working with the Institute at the Golden Gate to explore what is keeping people from being able to access recreation areas, looking to really understand what stops people from using parks and open space. The NPS is working with hospitals, doctors, and insurance companies to understand what is happening in these localities and create seamless opportunities for people to engage in the outdoors, including organizing groups for guided walks and weekly exercising workouts in the national, state, and city parks. It is important to get doctors onboard with this initiative and to have them connect their patients to these outdoor recreational opportunities. Many of these efforts involve using these parks in non-traditional ways.

Tim AbbottDirector, Litchfield Hills GreenprintHousatonic Valley AssociationCornwall Bridge, Connecticut

The Housatonic Valley Association (HVA) is a nonprofit environmental group whose goal is to conserve the natural character and environmental health of the communities in the Housatonic Watershed, which spans three states– New York, Massachusetts, and Connecti-cut. HVA includes people, groups, organizations, and businesses that work together to preserve the natural environment. We do this through partnerships with state, local, and national organizations collaborating together to achieve conservation on a larger scale.

The formation of the HVA was driven by the fact that some counties within the watershed did not have any county government or even any land conservation organizations within them. The conservation that was being done was occurring within the jurisdictions of in-dividual towns, all working independently. It was very obvious that there was a need for collaboration between organizations and units of government to achieve conservation on a larger scale.

A concrete example of one of HVA’s successes has been with invasive species. Several years ago the Nature Conservancy did an extensive study about the invasive plants in our region, and they published an excellent pocket guide on the subject. Although many people agreed that invasive species are a recognized problem, the landscape and horticulture industry was entirely left out of the process. The industry strongly objected to the guide and was so vocal in its opposition that the book was taken off the market. After this, for the next five years, a multi-stakeholder group of scientists, landscapers, and members of the horticultural indus-try worked together with the respected local botanist to develop criteria about invasive spe-cies. The result was the publication of a new book with the agreement of everyone including those in the landscaping industry. Because of this collaborative process, new relationships were formed, respect for our various points of view was established, and there is now a new transparency between the regulators, conservationists, and the horticultural industry. Part-nerships are messy, but if we want to change behaviors, we need to understand the causes of our differences so that we can work through them in an inclusive and collaborative process to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes.

Schooner, Gloucester, MA-Christopher Parker.

32


Question: What are some examples of non-traditional partners with whom you have worked?

Rebecca McCown: The Urban Agenda has pushed the National Park Service to work much more closely with our partners to identify community leaders and opportunities that we have not thought about before. Instead of just offering a guided tour in a park, we are identifying new opportunities to engage kids in their afterschool programs and during the summertime at their community breakfast and hot lunch programs. The NPS has many cultural and natural resources, as well as fantastic interpreters and educators, but we used to stay inside our parks and invite people to come. Now we are going out and engaging people where they are in their communities and giving them the tools to use the park resources as their own.

Kathy Abbott: Boston Harbor Now is a new organization formed from the merger of the Boston Harbor Island Alliance and the Boston Harbor Association. We have positioned ourselves as a civic organization instead of a conservation group. It is our position that Boston Harbor’s natural resources have a direct impact on the economic, social, and envi-ronmental health of the City of Boston and the whole region. Our very first project is a new business plan for water transportation in Boston Harbor. We are partnering with the transportation agencies, waterfront developers, the tourism industry, and the traditional elements of the park. The fact that Boston Harbor Now is leading this effort instead of a transportation agency or a public economic development group is really different.

Question: Shared governance and decision making is very challenging. How does it work?

Kathy Abbott: The first step is to define the problem and establish a shared understanding of what needs to be done. Then everyone needs to put some skin in the game, especially money, so that they have a vested interest in the outcome. Then, as the work goes along it is import-ant to make sure that everyone stays involved so when the shared plan is completed, it is one that really solves the issues that everyone has agreed upon. It is actually very straightforward but not necessarily easy to execute. You need to answer real questions for real people and then be poised to implement once there is agreement.

Question: Can you give some examples of the networked governance approach?

Tim Abbott: The Housatonic is a three state watershed basin, but HVA is the only entity thinking about the area as a single, connected resource. Ten years ago, the basin was getting overwhelmed by the rapid pace of development in this largely rural area. We didn’t have the benefit of regional planning or GIS. There were only small land trusts that were trying to deal with the problems. There was a huge void in information.

HVA started with a regional mapping and data gathering effort. This quickly grew into looking at how we could achieve better regional conservation. We had to build from scratch a new structure and new funding mechanisms. We needed to get people to expand their vision and their willingness to care about saving resources outside their immediate sphere. We had to get donors excited about the vision of regional conservation so that they would donate to land trusts outside of their usual areas of interest.

33

Urban Art, Salem, MA


It took 10 years but we have been very successful, and today the situation continues to evolve. We are expanding our vision to see who else is interested and finding new part-ners such as the educational community and real estate developers who want thoughtfully planned growth. We have learned that we need to take a larger role beyond that tradition-ally taken by watersheds and land trusts. We need to look at other factors that impact our natural resources such as a local dairy farm that rents 3,000 acres in twelve towns. If the situation with this farm changes, it will have an immense impact on our whole region.

We are recognizing that in the future we will most likely have a hybrid model with the state owning the land while the land trusts still have to raise most of the money. We are looking to emulate the success of other places like the Forest Legacy Project in the Quabbin Reser-voir watershed. These changes will mean that we will also need different metrics to measure our success. HVA used to measure success as dollars-per-acre for protecting land but this will have to transition to using qualitative measures as well as quantitative. Question: What about the roles of time, funding, capacity?

Rebecca McCown: Being successful is not building a trail if you did it by yourself. Success comes from the partnerships that you are able to build with others and from the networks that get people involved. People need to be making decisions together that impact their lives. Looking across urban landscapes, we try asset mapping that uses a range of values and not just financial values. We look at diagramming the Park Service’s values, the community’s values, safe places for kids to play, quiet places to sit, recreational spaces, trails and more.

Kathy Abbott: We have learned that you shouldn’t be afraid that the funding is limited. It’s always possible to grow “the pie” from a dollar perspective if you understand how to make new connections and think big. The National Park Service’s Urban Agenda has consolidat-ed the national parks in Boston into one big city park, the “Boston National Park”, which is one of ten such model city parks in the country. We have also experienced the merger of two major Boston Harbor nonprofits into the new Boston Harbor Now (BHN) organization that I direct. BHN has greatly broadened the mission – as the stewards of the islands, har-bor, and waterfront we aim to contribute to the economic, social, and environmental health of our region for all. This is allowing us to grow our constituency, to raise more money, and to have a bigger impact.

Tim Abbott: We don’t come to collaboration naturally, and being self-reliant is a strong tradi-tion for Americans, but it is very limiting. Most people are open to things that work. If we are more transparent with each other, we can bring larger groups of people together because they can see the great purpose and impact.

Question: What are some of the key elements of successful partnerships? Are written agreements necessary?

Kathy Abbott: Clear roles and responsibilities are important and written agreements can be very helpful, especially when working with public agencies. We usually use a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with a state agency or when there is joint planning to be done. Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) are used for federal projects too. With local entities we try to keep paperwork simple, especially if no money is changing hands.

Burham Boat Yard, Essex, MA, Photo June Rhodes

34


Tim Abbott: A general understanding of the goals/relationships often will suffice, until someone starts to feel uncomfortable. Then it is important to clarify or find a way to avoid the problems, and written agreements can be very helpful here. To galvanize more effective collaboration, you sometimes need to formalize some of the elements. When there is money involved, written agreements are often necessary.

Question: Can you offer examples of failures?

Kathy Abbott: I was involved with a budding partnership a few years ago, but since it was a start-up, the roles of the partners were not clearly defined, the goals were still in flux, and the funding was uncertain. We brought a great idea to the table, but before we could come together around it, one of the other groups took off with the idea to the exclusion of every-one else. It was unfortunate, but partnerships are messy and they don’t always work.

Question: What happens when there’s a change in institutional culture?

Kathy Abbott: If a project ends, but the partnership remains, the whole process will shift and it’s crucial to revisit all the assumptions.

Rebecca McCown: With communities of practice, if you’re holding a group together, you need to see if it’s just your ego holding it together or is there a new purpose? There’s no way to be successful in parks without partnerships but the purpose has to still be there and not just the personalities.

Question: What are key elements for success?

Tim Abbott: Trust that you have to build, maintain, and repair when frayed.

Rebecca McCown: Inclusivity, respect for values and goals of others, and fun!

Kathy Abbott: Communication and commitment. Just like a marriage, it’s a conscious choice that you make daily and work to succeed.

35

Great Marsh, Ipswich, MA, Photo Conrad Aubin


Symposium Wrap-up – A Call to ActionJessica Brown, Bob McIntosh and Annie Harris

Today, we talked about scaling up to create critical impact, and we reviewed the importance of the intersection of nature and culture. Our presenters have described partnerships from multiple points of view – from local coalitions to regional collaborations and then scal-ing up to national and international consortiums. The significance of time, patience, and shared responsibility has been discussed. We have heard about the importance of large scale approaches and the growing consensus around the need to be holistic when tackling landscape conservation — including the recognition of cultural sites and local residents as integral components in the preservation of a natural landscape. Whether we are conser-vationists, preservationists, scientists, educators, government affiliates, or business leaders, we have been challenged today to get out of our “silos” and think about how we can work more closely together to achieve the preservation of our natural and cultural environment.

What are the next steps we should consider as we leave today? How do we work more closely together?

The ideas that have come through very clearly in this conversation are four overarching concepts. These should be our guiding principles as we consider how to address the conser-vation challenges facing us in this country and around the world. Briefly stated, we need to:

EMBRACE THE NEXUS BETWEEN NATURE AND CULTURE

BUILD PARTNERSHIPS AND GOVERNANCE NETWORKS

WORK AT MULTIPLE SCALES – LOCAL, REGIONAL, NATIONAL, AND INTERNATIONAL

TAKE A HOLISTIC APPROACH – EVEN IN FUNDRAISING

Nature and Culture

To achieve success in large landscape scale conservation, the full scope of the problem must be taken into account. Natural resources cannot be conserved in isolation. It is critical that land conservationists see local residents not as the “problem” but as a critical part of the solution. The communities living in the landscape, and their diverse cultures and histories, must be included in the conversation. It is not sufficient to consider ecological threats alone. Local residents and their economic and social needs have to be taken into account too. It is a complex equation not only encompassing the ecosystem but also the culture, history, and economy of the region. If the residents are left out of shaping the solutions, it is nearly impossible to achieve long-term success.

There are very few places left in the world where people and their cultures are not having a profound impact on the natural world. The same can be said for the impact of the natural world on our historic resources. There are very few cultural resources that can escape the impacts of environmental degradation and climate change. It is unfortunate that the pro-fessions of natural conservation and historic/cultural preservation have been considered separate and distinct fields of endeavor. This ‘silo’ thinking needs to change. As individuals

36

Rockport, MA, Photo Christopher Parker


who are deeply concerned with preserving our natural and cultural environment, we need to look beyond our particular spheres of operation and understand how closely aligned our missions are. Conservationists and preservationists have a great deal in common and much to learn from working with one another. Each profession needs the other if we are to achieve meaningful progress in the preservation of large natural areas and working cultural landscapes.

Keynote speaker Lynn Scarlett spoke at length about the link between nature and culture. She said that to work effectively at the regional landscape level it requires understanding everything there is to know about the place, including its culture and history. To achieve this understanding, we need to create a “mosaic” of approaches and governance structures. We must plan at a large scale, but at the same time also collect the detailed local knowledge that comes from being intimately involved with a place. It takes working at multiple levels of scale to understand the complexity of the issues so as to build an effective strategy. Fortu-nately, with technology, we have the tools to be able to work simultaneously at various scales – provided we engage people “on the ground” to observe and collect the necessary data.

The issues discussed today are relevant to urban as well as rural areas. Cities play an essential role in developing solutions. Land conservation and real estate development cannot be seen a separate and distinct issues. They are two sides of the same coin. Many of the presenters spoke about their efforts to conserve landscapes through direct acquisition and easements, but they also noted that it is simply not possible to protect all the land that should be con-served through these traditional methods. Therefore, we must look at the other tools that are available or could be available to preserve lands and resources. For example, there are regulatory tools, such as local zoning and overlay districts, which can direct real estate devel-opment away from undeveloped green spaces towards more appropriate places such as town centers nearer to public transportation and existing infrastructure. Likewise, there are new urban planning efforts to green-up urban areas making them more desirable places to live. Making our cities more livable is important not only for social fairness, but also because it reduces the pressures for new development on existing open space. In recent times, there has been a worldwide trend towards increasing urbanization. As more people are choosing to live in cities, the pressure on our green spaces is reduced. We must support this trend by ensuring that our urban spaces remain inviting places to live. Urban improvements such as the “super blocks” in Barcelona and the aggressive street tree plantings occurring in many cities, not only provide for better places for our city dwellers but also allow our more ruralareas to remain undeveloped.

Great Marsh, Newburyport, MA

37


The extent to which experts have come to realize the importance of human participation in the preservation of our natural resources can be seen in the new approach that the National Park Service is taking to its mission. With the Urban Agenda, NPS is transforming how and where the agency is interacting with the American public. Instead of only engaging the public inside the national park units, the Park Service is taking the parks to where the people are. Park rangers are attending community gatherings and providing information about the parks throughout the “gateway communities.” They are working with community groups to give their members the information and tools they need to connect to park lands whenever and whenever they chose.

One of the most promising developments for connecting people to nature involves doctors and the healthcare industry. Doctors are beginning to make the prescriptive link between their patient’s health and the recreational opportunities near to where their patients live. When a patient’s health starts to improve because of a daily trail walk or bike ride, they usu-ally become ardent supporters of the open space resource. Many in the audience expressed great interest and enthusiasm about making this connection. It is an approach for engaging a much larger community of people in a way that is directly meaningful to their lives, but many also said that they have found it challenging to get the attention of the medical com-munity as a whole. Their success has, for the most part, been limited to individuals in the healthcare industry.

Takeaways!

Understand the symbiotic relationship between the spheres of natural, cultural and his-toric preservation. Climb out of your silo and align your work across the boundaries be-tween these professions. We have much more in common than many assume and we will be more effective if we learn to work together. Involve local people in developing the solutions, whether it is open space conservation,

environmental degradation, or cultural preservation. If local people aren’t part of the solu-tion, they will become part of the problem. Listen to them, engage with them, and learn from their intimate knowledge of the place. Consider the human and economic drivers that are involved in any landscape scale proj-

ect. Not only can they pose problems for you but they can also present opportunities. Whether it is removing fish barriers or conserving a hunting reserve, there is often a way to align divergent interests around a common cause. Support the new economic urbanization trends and the proposed local zoning tools

because everything cannot be conserved through acquisition and easements. Vital urban centers help to relieve some of the pressures on green space development. Take to heart that nature is not just nice, it is essential to every aspect of our health and

well-being. When we succeed in making this connection for people, they become some of our best advocates. Engage the healthcare industry and connect to their patient wellness programs. Patients

whose doctors prescribe exercises such as walking and hiking become some of the strongest supporters of conservation. The healthcare industry isn’t reaching out to us, so we need to engage them.

38


Partnerships and Governance NetworksWithout exception, our speakers emphasized that very little can be accomplished single-handedly anymore. No government agency or organization can work alone if they want to be successful in landscape-scale conservation. Even if they could, the results are never as good as when there are multiple parties bringing their expertise and strengths to the table. Lynn Scarlett called this governing through networks. Her phrase “network governance” captured the essential nature of the conversation throughout the day.

Most of our speakers spoke about partnerships. While partnerships are very straight for-ward in concept, they are often not easy to execute. In fact, everyone acknowledged that partnerships are “a lot of work”. They demand more time. They are tricky and sometimes fail. It is easier to make decisions and get something done more quickly alone, but doing so does not ensure long-term success. All voices need to be heard. If we invest the time in listening and taking into account multiple points of view, the likelihood of success in-creases exponentially. We need to understand the causes of our differences so that we can work through them in an inclusive and collaborative process to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes.

Fortunately, there exist some very effective models of partnerships for us to consider, and many are producing significant success. Several models were mentioned at the symposium: regional conservation partnerships, national heritage areas, regional land trusts, legislated partnerships, and joint ventures between state agencies, municipalities, and private land owners. All of the panelists said, “If you are not partnering, you are not working as pro-ductively as you could be.”

To be successful we must foster strategic connectivity by reaching out to organizations and individuals whose primary objectives are not necessarily the same as ours. It is important that we expand the definition of who our partners can be. For example, conservationists can identify ways to engage with the medical community to promote more outdoor exercise for their patients; historic preservationists can spur the preservation of heritage landscapes by including descriptions of historic landscapes in their historic structures inventories and National Register nominations; fish and wildlife experts can work with transportation plan-ners to promote widening culverts and removing river barriers like dams; and communities at risk of flooding can partner with engineers and scientists to mitigate sea level rise.

Clear roles and responsibilities are very important for successful partnerships. Account-ability is more challenging within networks because it is more difficult to determine where the responsibilities lie. Written agreements can be very helpful especially when working with public agencies, and are almost always necessary when money is involved. But we also need to avoid having too much paperwork and rigidity, especially when working with local groups. If we are too worried about who takes credit for which project, less will get done. Therefore, effective partnerships have to maintain a strong vision while enabling multiple points of view and must balance clarity with flexibility. While each partnership has the same core principles, each also has to be shaped to fit its particular context. The speakers emphasized that this is a balancing act requiring the willingness to be inclusive and to listen.

Parker River, Newburyport, MA, Photo Rod Parker

39


Successful partnerships typically go through a number of similar and important steps as they form and mature. These “emerging, maturing, and conserving” stages include a com-mon vision, a science-based conservation plan, an implementation plan, acquiring paid staff, and fundraising. Volunteerism can be very helpful and should be encouraged. Not only does it save organizations money, it fosters a strong stewardship ethic among the grassroots supporters of a community’s open space and cultural resources. Today’s volunteers often become tomorrow’s advocates and donors. However, to grow in any significant scale, part-nerships usually require paid staff, and this can be a very difficult transition.

Perhaps the biggest challenge in partnerships comes with decision-making. Everyone needs to be included, but at some point the decision has to be made so that the work can move forward. Within networks it can be difficult to know how much consensus is enough and when an idea can become a decision. While inclusivity and shared agreement are crucial to successful partnerships, reaching a consensus is not always possible, and moving forward with only a majority is sometimes necessary. In many of the most successful partnerships, there are governance policies and rules in place that facilitate coordination, and there is an understanding that action can be taken when the majority decides rather than requiring unanimous consent.

Takeaways!

Recognize the central role that collaboration should play, and resist the temptation to work alone just because it is easier and quicker. In the long-term, the results will be more successful if multiple organizations and individuals become engaged. Working alone should not be an option. Understand that partnerships are complex and require more time. They need patience

and a willingness to listen to multiple points of view, but the investment will be worth it because the outcome is more likely to be successful. Pay attention to trust. Trust takes time to build and maintain, and if it becomes frayed,

it must be repaired if the partnership is to remain viable. Appreciate that there are many good models of partnerships functioning out there with

years of experience, and you can use these models to guide your work. Consider the im-portant steps or “life cycle” that partnerships go through and include these in your plans. Look for the similarity of objectives with your partners and not the differences. Accept

that you will need to work with individuals and organizations whose primary goals may not be the same as yours but with whom you still may have a shared vision. Conservationists and hunters; resource preservationists and doctors; historic preservationists and real estate developers, can work together on a mutual goal even when their agendas vary. A strong but flexible shared vision is necessary. Consider volunteers as part of your partnership team too. If you run a small organiza-

tion, volunteers are probably already a key part of your team, but even for large organiza-tions, volunteers are an important part of building your grassroots constituency. Don’t be afraid of failure. Partnerships are difficult but success comes from networks

that engage people. Be inclusive and demand accountability but also recognize that consensus is not always

possible. Partnering demands checking back but also moving forward. Look for the areas of agreement and implement these.

Appleton Farms, Ispwich, MA, Photo David Stone

40


Work at Multiple Scales

Every presenter spoke about the challenges today to both our urban and rural landscapes, and the necessity of taking a whole ecosystem approach. They also said how very fortunate we are that we have so many powerful new tools for gathering and analyzing large quantities of data over very wide regions. These tools are extremely helpful because they make region-al analysis not only possible but also very accurate. The analyses allow regional groups to understand and agree upon specific areas of action. They enable collaborating networks of partners to align their focus and arrive at a shared vision.

For best results, we need to make sure that data tools and action planning are occurring at every level from the most local to the regional, national and even, in some cases, to the in-ternational scale. While scaling-up is important, it is also crucial to include local expertise, traditional cultures, and ‘boots-on-the-ground’ activists as part of the planning too. Our data analysis tools work best if they are deployed up and down the scale. Given the tools available today, we can understand landscape scale changes as never before. The best exam-ples that were given today described situations in which there were regional governance en-tities that developed the analysis templates, shared these templates with local organizations who gathered and input local, on-the-ground data, and then all this local data was combined and analyzed at very large scale. The accuracy and detail that this approach is producing has never before been possible and it is transforming how we understand entire eco-systems. It is incredibly exciting and valuable work.

Even with the success of big data, there still remain many challenges. There are diverse groups whose interests must be taken into consideration. There are many governmental, funding, and cultural impediments as well. There are the challenges of disparate govern-ment jurisdictions. There are conflicting government regulations, and competitive grants that do not allow for cooperation. There are conservation objectives that are too narrowly defined and workforce constraints. Working at scale demands inclusivity and constant com-munication. It is not necessarily the size of the organization that is important to get things done, it is more about having a very clear vision, building partnerships, and being around long enough to see the projects to completion. Many of the presenters mentioned that open and constant communication is vitally important to their success.

Large-scale conservation requires creativity and reimagining how preservation and sustain-ability can succeed. It necessitates that we look at what brings people together and not dwell on what separates us. Where are those places of common interest? How do we get people involved while still protecting species? It requires that we constantly look at ways to build connectivity between private property owners, non-profits, and public agencies. It demands that we work across the whole spectrum of interests and seek to align organiza-tions and individuals whose primary interests may not be the preservation or conservation of resources. It requires conservationists and preservations to move from “no” to “yes”, or at least “yes maybe.”

41

Amesbury, MA. Photo Suzanne DeGeorge


Takeaways!

Employ the new capacity that technology gives us for gathering copious amounts of information across very large systems. Make sure that the tools for collecting and inputting this data are deployed and coordinated at every scale from local to regional, to national, and even to international. When properly employed, the information that is obtained from the data gathered locally and analyzed regionally/nationally gives an accurate and powerful picture of an area that is tremendously effective for getting agreement on a common vision. Anticipate when working at scale that you will continue to encounter challenges such

as governmental, funding, and regulatory issues. Even though large data enables us to un-derstand far more clearly what needs to be done, there are still many built-in impediments that can prevent coordinated action. But the examples of organizations and people who are succeeding despite these challenges is growing every day, and even very small organizations are achieving success through partnering, networking, and building a common vision. Concentrate on what brings people together. Discover what makes the residents, busi-

nesses, and organizations care about a particular region, and see if you can find common ground together. Try not to start with “no”, but instead look for the places where there may be agreement, whether it is teaming up with hunters to preserve a landscape; working with a tribe on preserving their cultural sites first; or reaching out to the medical community to foster an appreciation for a trail network, the landscape will benefit if we can develop a shared vision for its conservation. Communicate, communicate, communicate! Working with diverse individuals and

groups across a large area requires constant communication if your partners are going to feel included. As more than one speaker said, “It’s just like a marriage.” Large scale conser-vation/preservation entails taking the long view and making a long term commitment with give and take along the way.

Maudslay Park, Newburyport, MA, Photo Suzanne DeGeorge

42


Take a Holistic Approach in Fundraising

Even in the best of times securing adequate funding is always a challenge, but it can be especially difficult when working with complex networks. A project which depends on mul-tiple partners does not fit neatly into the standard grant application required by traditional funders. However, several participants spoke about the changes that they are starting to see with grantors.

Funders are beginning to realize that to gain a bigger impact, it requires a larger, networked effort and more creative solutions. Although many grant guidelines and requirements still do not reflect this change, some speakers said that they have seen an increased openness from funders to accept more complex grant proposals. But it is also incumbent on those of us seeking grants not to just follow the guidelines. We must educate our funders to think about the problems at a larger, more universal scale. As we demonstrate our success in prob-lem solving at a greater scale, more funders are starting to notice. The accomplishments of projects and programs as diverse as the Penobscot River Project, regional conservation partnerships, and the National Park Service’s Urban Agenda are showing grantors the ad-vantages of looking holistically, and more of them are taking notice and providing grants to cooperative projects.

It is also important for all of us who are seeking funds to recognize that we are not engaged in a zero sum game. Whether we are a non-profit organization or an agency, if one of us “wins” a grant, it does not mean that the rest of us necessarily lose. We must move beyond thinking that obtaining grants is a competition between various non-profit organizations and agencies and instead look for ways to pool our resources together. Several presenters said, “the pie can grow” and spoke of their own experiences with organizations that have achieved bigger impacts working collaboratively. Locally, in the Great Marsh, the recent “Sandy Grant” was cited as an example of this successful approach.

As our networks get larger and more complex, measuring success presents another challenge. It used to be relatively easy to measure the financial return on investment and the benefit in a specific community when conservation was measured as the number of acres of open space acquired or the amount of square feet preserved in a downtown office building. But as the scale grows and the length of time extends, direct investment measured against results becomes more difficult to calculate – especially when several organizations are involved and the project can take years to complete. Therefore, we need to be mapping our impact over a range of values. In addition to clearly defining the value of a conserved area to the nat-ural environment, we must demonstrate the value of the resource area to a larger and more diverse audience. Conserved open spaces create safe places for kids to play, quiet places to sit, and recreational spaces for all our citizens. Preserved buildings provide new places for economic development, local jobs, and a more livable urban place. When all of the commu-nity benefits are included then a funder can see that the advantages are far greater than the retention of a few acres of open space or the repair of an historic structure

The projects described during this symposium were, almost without exception, long-term ventures involving years of effort by numerous organizations and entities. The presenters spoke about their multi-year collaborations and the need for long-term certainty about the governance framework under which they tried to operate but which was not always there.

Annisquam Harbor Light, Gloucester, MA,Photo Gregg Mazzotta

43


In many cases sustaining these long-term efforts with changing government and/or private funding parameters has been, and continues to be, very challenging. Despite this on-going challenge, most of the presenters spoke about the consistent growth and steady success of their projects over the years. As one speaker remarked, “With enough time, you become the given.” Work long enough and everyone comes to recognize that they cannot do without you.

Takeaways! Understand that funders are coming to recognize the advantages of more complex con-

servation efforts. Present your case and the shared vision, as clearly as possible. As the clarity of the idea grows and the on-the-ground successes develop, the funding will follow. Educate your grantors at every opportunity to the advantages of working at larger scale

and in complex networks. The success that conservationists and preservationists are having in the field is changing perceptions in the board room and in the circles of government. Stretch “the envelope” whenever you can when you apply for funding. Describe the re-

gional vision and ask for collaborative funding. Funders are starting to understand the value of allowing more breadth and flexibility in their grants. Recognized that the funding “pie” does not have to be finite. There is more room for

growth than you may think. This is not easy, but more of us are having success each year. Look to measure your success in terms of the benefits you are providing to the commu-

nities as well as your impact on the natural resources or historic structures. Determine the effects that your efforts are having on local resident’s health and wellbeing, on the places where they live and recreate, on the quality of life in the region and its economy. These are important factors in large scale landscape conservation, and they help to build the case for increased support from a larger set of donors. Try to carry on even when governance and other external factors keep changing. In most

cases, your colleagues who have persisted despite these challenges have been able to achieve significant success.

Rockport, MA, Photo Donna Parker

44


Resources and ReferencesListed in Order of Speaker

Jessica BrownNew England Biolabs Foundation http://www.nebf.org

Lynn ScarlettThe Nature Conservancy http://www.nature.orgPenobscot River Restoration Project http://penobscotriver.orgYellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative (Y2Y) https://y2y.netEssex National Heritage Area http://www.essexheritage.orgBlackstone Valley National Heritage Corridor https://www.nps.gov/blac/planyourvisit/index.htm Texas By Nature http://texanbynature.orgDetroit River International Wildlife Refuge https://www.fws.gov/refuge/Detroit_River/about.htmlSonoita Valley Planning Partnership https://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/partnerships_home/tools/case_studies/sonoita.print.html

Brent MitchellIUCN World Conservation Congress http://www.iucnworldconservationcongress.orgKatahdin Woods and Water National Monument https://www.nps.gov/kaww/index.htmWorld Heritage Sites http://whc.unesco.org/en/listBig Bend National Park https://www.nps.gov/bibe/index.htm“Expanding Horizons: Highlights from the National Workshop on Large Landscape Conservation.” A summary of the held in Washington, D.C. in October 2014 https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1412/natural-resources.htm

Stephanie Toothman“A Call to Action: Preparing for a Second Century of Stewardship and Engagement.” This NPS publication set a goal by 2016 of creating “a national system of parks and protected sites that fully represents out natural resources and the nation’s cultural experiences.” https://www.nps.gov/calltoaction/“Revisiting Leopold: Resource Stewardship in the National Parks” Published in 2012, this 24-page report by the NPS Advisory Board Science committee sets a new framework for the NPS in the 21st Century https://www.nps.gov/calltoaction/PDF/LeopoldReport_2012.pdfSecretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards https://www.nps.gov/history/lo-cal-law/gis/html/introduction.htmlOregon National Historic Trail https://www.nps.gov/oreg/index.htmLewis and Clark National Historic Trail https://www.nps.gov/lecl/index.htmNational Heritage Areas https://www.nps.gov/heritageareas/Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor http://delawareandlehigh.orgSalem Maritime National Historic Site https://www.nps.gov/sama/index.htmSaugus Ironworks National Historic Site https://www.nps.gov/sair/index.htmSilos and Smokestacks National Heritage Area http://www.silosandsmokestacks.org

Emily BatesonNetwork for Landscape Conservation http://www.largelandscapenetwork.orgStaying Connected Initiative http://stayingconnectedinitiative.orgTwo Countries, One Forest https://programs.wcs.org/2c1forest/#.WD-Zt3eZPjACox Reservation, Essex, MA, Photo Matt Cegelis

45

http://www.nebf.org

http://www.nature.org

http://penobscotriver.org

https://y2y.net

http://www.essexheritage.org

https://www.nps.gov/blac/planyourvisit/index.htm

http://texanbynature.org

https://www.fws.gov/refuge/Detroit_River/about.html

https://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/partnerships_home/tools/case_studies/sonoita.print.html

http://www.iucnworldconservationcongress.org

https://www.nps.gov/kaww/index.htm

http://whc.unesco.org/en/list

https://www.nps.gov/bibe/index.htm

https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1412/natural-resources.htm

https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1412/natural-resources.htm

https://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/partnerships_home/tools/case_studies/sonoita.print.html

https://www.nps.gov/calltoaction/

https://www.nps.gov/calltoaction/

https://www.nps.gov/calltoaction/PDF/LeopoldReport_2012.pdf

https://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/gis/html/introduction.html

https://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/gis/html/introduction.html

https://www.nps.gov/oreg/index.htm

https://www.nps.gov/lecl/index.htm

https://www.nps.gov/heritageareas/

http://delawareandlehigh.org

https://www.nps.gov/sama/index.htm

https://www.nps.gov/sair/index.htm

http://www.silosandsmokestacks.org

http://www.largelandscapenetwork.org

http://stayingconnectedinitiative.org

https://programs.wcs.org/2c1forest/#.WD-Zt3eZPjA


Regional Conservation Partnership (RCP) https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/farmbill/rcpp/ https://q2cpartnership.orgAppalachian Trail Landscape Conservation Initiative http://www.appalachiantrail.orgWildlands and Woodlands http://www.wildlandsandwoodlands.orgMount Grace Land Conservation Trust http://www.mountgrace.org

Ed BeckerEssex County Greenbelt http://www.ecga.org

Amanda BabsonNorth Atlantic Landscape Conservation Cooperative (NALCC) http://northatlanticlcc.orgNorth Atlantic Aquatic Connectivity Collaborative (NAACC) https://streamcontinuity.orgResilient Taunton Watershed Network (RTWN) http://www.srpedd.org/manager/external/ckfinder/userfiles/resources/Environment/RTWN%20powerpoint%20%5BCompatibility%20Mode%5D.pdf

Robert O’ConnorMassachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) http://www.mass.gov/eea/

Janey WinchellPeabody Essex Museum http://www.pem.orgThe Art and Nature Center at the Peabody Essex Museum http://www.pem.org/visit/art_na-ture_center

Eric HoveMetropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) http://www.mapc.orgMetroFuture Plan http://www.mapc.org/metrofutureGreat Estates Bylaw http://www.historicipswich.org/ipswich-historical-commission/great-es-tates-bylaw/

Colin NovickGreater Worchester Land Trust http://www.gwlt.orgWorchester East Side Trail http://www.worcesterma.gov/uploads/b9/50/b950ed9649d920a-c3a293ecc2a35a63b/east-side-trail.pdfMassachusetts Audubon Society http://www.massaudubon.orgRegional Environmental Council http://www.recworcester.org

Wayne CastonguayIpswich River Watershed Association http://www.ipswichriver.orgParker-Ipswich-Essex Rivers Restoration Partnership (PIE-Rivers) http://www.pie-rivers.org

Kathy AbbottBoston Harbor Now http://www.bostonharbornow.orgBoston Harbor Islands National Recreation Park https://www.nps.gov/boha/index.htm

Tim AbbottHousatonic Valley Association (HVA) http://www.hvatoday.org

Rebecca Stanfield McCownHealthy Parks Healthy People https://www.nps.gov/public_health/hp/hphp.htm

46

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/

https://q2cpartnership.org

http://www.appalachiantrail.org

http://www.wildlandsandwoodlands.org

http://www.mountgrace.org

http://www.ecga.org

http://northatlanticlcc.org

https://streamcontinuity.org

http://www.srpedd.org/manager/external/ckfinder/userfiles/resources/Environment/RTWN%20powerpoint%20%5BCompatibility%20Mode%5D.pdf



http://www.mass.gov/eea/

http://www.mass.gov/eea/

http://www.pem.org

http://www.pem.org/visit/art_nature_center

http://www.pem.org/visit/art_nature_center

http://www.mapc.org

http://www.mapc.org/metrofuture

http://www.historicipswich.org/ipswich-historical-commission/great-estates-bylaw/

http://www.historicipswich.org/ipswich-historical-commission/great-estates-bylaw/

http://www.gwlt.org

Worchester East Side Trail http://www.worcesterma.gov/uploads/b9/50/b950ed9649d920ac3a293ecc2a35a63b/east-side-trail.pdf

Worchester East Side Trail http://www.worcesterma.gov/uploads/b9/50/b950ed9649d920ac3a293ecc2a35a63b/east-side-trail.pdf

http://www.massaudubon.org

http://www.recworcester.org

http://www.ipswichriver.org

http://www.pie-rivers.org

http://www.bostonharbornow.org

https://www.nps.gov/boha/index.htm

http://www.hvatoday.org

https://www.nps.gov/public_health/hp/hphp.htm


Additional Resources:

Evaluations of the National Heritage Area www.nps.gov/heritageareas/toolbox/evalresource.html Blog by Charles C. Chester discussing key elements of the Leopold Report https://islandpress.org/blog/revisiting-leopold-national-parks“Scaling Up: Collaborative Approaches to Large Landscape Conservation” Issued in 2014 by the National Park Service. “A second-century National Park Service will manage parks as cornerstones in protecting broad natural and cultural landscapes. Threats unforeseen a century ago have emerged beyond park boundaries and demand solutions that are large in scope and require collaboration with partners.” https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1412/upload/Scaling-Up-2014.pdfEurope’s mapping project “Natura 2000” is discussed in IUCN’s, “The Future of Privately Protect-ed Areas.” https://www.iucn.org/content/new-iucn-report-futures-privately-protected-areas“A Thinking Person’s Guide to America’s National Parks,” edited by Robert Manning, Rolf Diamant, Nora Mitchell, and David Harmon https://georgebraziller.squarespace.com/a-thinking-persons-guide-to-americas-national-parks/New Directions for the NPS: The NPS Urban Agenda https://www.nps.gov/subjects/urban/urban-agenda.htmIUCN Nature-based solutions to address climate change https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2016-062.pdfIUCN: Technical Guidelines for the Design and Management of Participatory Connectivity Conser-vation and Restoration Projects at the Landscape Scale in Latin America https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2016-059.pdf IUCN: Resilient Communities, Resilient Environments https://www.iucn.org/content/resil-ient-communities-resilient-environments

Panelists A. Harris, R. McIntosh, S. Toothman, B. Mitchell and E. Bateson at Intersections exhibit at Peabody Essex Museum, Salem, MA

47

www.nps.gov/heritageareas/toolbox/evalresource.html

https://islandpress.org/blog/revisiting-leopold-national-parks

https://islandpress.org/blog/revisiting-leopold-national-parks

https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1412/upload/Scaling-Up-2014.pdf

https://www.iucn.org/content/new-iucn-report-futures-privately-protected-areas

https://georgebraziller.squarespace.com/a-thinking-persons-guide-to-americas-national-parks/

https://georgebraziller.squarespace.com/a-thinking-persons-guide-to-americas-national-parks/

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/urban/urban-agenda.htm

https://www.nps.gov/subjects/urban/urban-agenda.htm

https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2016-062.pdf




https://www.iucn.org/content/resilient-communities-resilient-environments

https://www.iucn.org/content/resilient-communities-resilient-environments

ABOUT ESSEX HERITAGE AND THE ESSEX NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA

Essex Heritage is the non-profit organization that manages the Essex National Heritage Area by developing programs that enhance, preserve, and encourage recreation, education, conservation and interpretation projects on Boston’s North Shore and the Lower Merrimack River Valley. The Essex National Heritage Area is comprised of the 34 cities and towns of Essex County, MA.

ESSEX HERITAGE10 Federal Street | Suite 12 | Salem, Massachusetts 01970 | 978-740-0444 | www.EssexHeritage.org

ESSE X NATIONAL H E R ITAGE A REA

Bakers Island, Salem, MA

scaling up - essex national heritage commission · and cultural organizations, philanthropies,...

Documents