Fact Pack

Ill-Planned Development Damages the Environment

• Increasing populations and ill-planned, sprawling growth are resulting in the disproportionate development of greenspace in the U.S. From 1982 to 1997, the population of the U.S. increased by 17 percent, but the amount of developed land increased by 47 percent.(1)
• The areas most affected by sprawl are those surrounding urban population centers – the same land where 86 percent of the fruit and vegetables and 63 percent of the dairy products made in the U.S. are produced.(2)
• The amount of land lost each year to development in the U.S. is significant and increasing. From 1982 to 1992, an average of 1.37 million acres of land was developed per year but, from 1992 to 2001, an average of 2.2 million acres was developed per year.(3)
• Development results in the loss and fragmentation of wildlife habitats. Of the 6,700 species considered to be at risk of extinction in the U.S., 85 percent have been primarily affected by habitat loss.(4) An estimated 20 percent of U.S. land is ecologically impacted by roads.(5)
• Habitat fragmentation not only reduces the area available to wildlife, but also increases competition among species, with “edge dwellers” (like raccoons and some grasses) enjoying an advantage. The results include a decrease in the diversity as well as the number of native species,(6) and an increased risk of the spread of invasive (non-native) species.(7)
• Other negative effects from the development of greenspace include the degradation of water resources (decreased water filtration, groundwater recharging, stormwater control, and aquatic species diversity), decreased ecosystem health (limited habitat areas, genetic diversity, species populations, and wildlife movement), reduced nutrient recycling and soil enrichment,(8) increased public services costs (for new built infrastructure), and increased taxes (for expanded services and infrastructure).(4)

See SERC’s Suburban Sprawl package for more information on sprawl and how to avoid it, and SERC’s Stopping the Spread on Invasive Species package for information on how to protect your state against invasive species.

Healthy Ecosystems Benefit Human Communites

• Native plant and animal species in their natural habitats – healthy ecosystems – provide free “services” to human communities, including water filtration, groundwater recharging, stormwater control, air purification, nutrient recycling, crop pollination, and soil enrichment.(5)(8) Across the country, local governments have found that conservation is the most effective water management plan.
  • New York City saved an estimated $6 billion in the 1990s by purchasing and protecting watershed regions in the Catskill Mountains instead of building new water treatment plants.
  • Arnold, Missouri, dramatically reduced disaster relief and flood damage repair costs by conserving flood plain regions.(5)
  • Gastonia, North Carolina, saves $250,000 per year on water treatment by using lake water from a region it acted to protect.(9)
• A 1992 American Farmland Trust study of three towns in Massachusetts documented that conserved land generates more revenue through taxes than it costs to service, while residential development costs more in services than it raises in tax revenue.(6)
• One-third of U.S. agricultural products depend on pollinators like birds, bats, bees, and other insects. The pollination services bees provide are worth up to more than 100 times the value of their honey.(10) Estimates of the benefit of native, wild pollinators to U.S. agriculture lie in the range of $5.7 to 13.4 billion per year.(11)
• Protected natural areas increase the health, desirability, and property values of nearby human communities,(12) and provide residents and visitors with more outdoor recreation opportunities and scenic areas.
• In 2001, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found that 82 million people participated in at least one wildlife-related activity, including watching, feeding, and photographing wildlife, spending $108 billion – 1.1 percent of the gross domestic product.(13)
• Other benefits from well-managed, healthy ecosystems may include revenue from increased tourism; a more sustainable and predictable environment for businesses based on natural resource use (like farms, ranches, and timber companies); and, medical and other science-related benefits from the study of diverse plants and animals.
• In 1990, the Environmental Protection Agency’s Science Advisory Board identified species extinction and habitat loss as two of the most severe threats to “natural ecology and human welfare.”(14) In 1995, the board warned: “Failure to maintain healthy terrestrial ecosystems could lead to natural resource damage, irreversible losses of species, and fragmentation of habitats, thus endangering both economic and environmental sustainability and seriously threatening human and ecological wellbeing.”(15)

See SERC’s Biodiversity package for more information on the importance of biological diversity.

Greenspaces Must Be Connected for Native Species and Ecosystems to Be Healthy

• Native plants, animals, and ecosystem processes need an interconnected network of conserved regions to thrive.(6) This is especially true for migratory species, fish like salmon that travel between different bodies of water, and large predators. Large predators, like wolves and bears, are essential to maintaining balance within an ecosystem. Without predators, smaller plant-eating animals overpopulate the area and decimate local plants.(16)
• Fragmented, isolated preserves leave native species vulnerable to harmful invasive species, disruptive “edge effects” (including increases in temperature, light levels, and pollutants from adjacent developed areas), and other pressures. These factors increase the likelihood and the rate at which native species become locally extinct and ecosystems degraded.(17)
• Connections between larger preserves, including greenways and riparian buffers, allow native species to maintain genetically diverse and robust populations, to react to local threats, and to adapt to changing conditions.(16) Even the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem could not, in isolation, provide a suitable habitat for animals like wolverines and grizzly bears.(18)
• Connected networks of natural areas provide animals with safe passage through their natural habitats; assist the seed and pollen transport needed for healthy, varied plant communities; and, keep bodies of water clean by preserving adjacent vegetation, which filters and absorbs runoff, prevents erosion, and buffers aquatic bodies from disruptive edge effects. Connected natural areas ensure the long-term survival of healthy ecosystems.(19)

Green Infrastructure Is a Smart Conservation Solution That Works

• A recent comprehensive review of state land use laws impacting biodiversity conservation found green infrastructure principles to be highly important, including the need for “large blocks of contiguous habitat and linkages between existing open space [to] help protect biodiversity.”(14)
• An earlier review of the laws, policies, and programs in all 50 states that impact biodiversity concluded that the model approach is, in effect, a green infrastructure program. The model state program includes cooperation among “the many agencies whose mission is significantly related to resource conservation,” identification of “biodiversity ‘hot spots’ through an assessment of all plant and animal species in the state,” and the acquisition or protection of “habitat identified as a high priority for biodiversity.”(20)
• A study of land use in Maryland over the three years prior to enactment of the state’s green infrastructure program found that “development…occurred in Maryland without much attention to ecological functions,” that “development is proceeding at a rate greater than that forecast,” and that “the GreenPrint program seems to have great potential to protect Maryland’s green infrastructure.” The report also found that strong development pressures made “redundancy within the network… useful if the web of hubs and corridors in Maryland is to remain functional.”(21)
• The state Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s “Closing the Gaps in Florida’s Wildlife Habitat Conservation System” has provided several detailed analyses of native species, landscapes, and other natural resources in need of protection. Since 1994, the program has protected 1 million acres, or 20 percent of the identified high-priority areas.(5)

Conservation and Green Infrastructure Programs Enjoy Wide Public Support

• Many state and local green infrastructure programs, although relatively new, have already enjoyed wide success engaging public and private partners as well as the general public.
  • Since 2000, Massachusetts has held spring “Biodiversity Days,” where volunteers help inventory and monitor plant and animal species in their towns. More than 15,000 people have participated annually; in 2003, 174 towns across the state organized Biodiversity Days events.(22)
  • The Chicago Wilderness coalition is comprised of more than 160 public and private organizations. Coalition members contribute expertise, volunteers, and other resources to study, protect, manage, and restore natural resources in the Chicago area.(23)
• A 1999 National Association of Home Builders survey found that nearly 90 percent of respondents believe development should protect environmentally sensitive areas such as wetlands and should maintain as many trees and other plants as possible. The preservation of wildlife habitat was a major development concern for nearly 60 percent of respondents. Access to park areas was one of two top factors that respondents said would strongly influence their choice among potential new neighborhoods.(24)
• From 1998 to 2001, voters across the U.S. passed nearly 400 measures funding conservation programs – some 85 percent of all local and statewide conservation measures placed on ballots. Together, these measures provided $17.6 billion for the protection of greenspace in 35 states.(25) In 2002, three-quarters of all local and statewide conservation ballot measures passed, generating $10 billion for conservation programs, including $5.7 billion for land acquisition and restoration.(26)