TIL about the International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s land classification system

The United States has the oldest and most formalized system of managing public lands. We have public lands owned by different levels of governments who each have “systems” to dictate land management objectives (i.e., our National Park System, National Wildlife Refuge System, etc). It has worked incredibly well since President Grant signed off on the original idea and the President Theodore Roosevelt formalized it.

What I did not know is that in 2008, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature – a UN-like body* – decided to create a formal system that countries can use to systematically conserve lands based on management objectives. It’s very similar to the US system, except that many US designations (like National Monuments) can span multiple IUCN categories depending on how they’re managed. It’s used by the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre.

*Claude says that The IUCN sits in a deliberately constructed middle ground — it has governmental legitimacy (states are members) and scientific credibility (researchers and institutions are members), without being subordinate to any single government or the UN bureaucracy.

I think it’s absolutely fascinating and exciting to have an exact standard like this – to keep politicians honest about what we are and aren’t conserving.

IUCN Protected Area Management Categories (with US Equivalents)

Here’s my cleaned up list via Wikipedia and their PDFs.

Category Ia — Strict Nature Reserve

Strictly protected for biodiversity and possibly geological/geomorphological features. Human visitation, use, and impacts are strictly controlled and limited. Research and monitoring are the primary permitted activities.

US equivalent: Research Natural Areas (RNAs), managed by the USFS and BLM — e.g., Swamp Lake RNA in California.

Category Ib — Wilderness Area

Large, unmodified or slightly modified areas retaining their natural character, without permanent or significant human habitation. Managed to preserve natural conditions, and limited non-motorized recreation is permitted.

US equivalent: Congressionally designated Wilderness Areas under the Wilderness Act of 1964 — e.g., the Bob Marshall Wilderness in Montana.

Category II — National Park

Large natural or near-natural areas protecting large-scale ecological processes, with species and ecosystems characteristic of the area. Provides a foundation for environmentally and culturally compatible recreation and tourism.

US equivalent: National Parks managed by the NPS — e.g., Yellowstone, Grand Canyon, Great Smoky Mountains.

Category III — Natural Monument or Feature

Set aside to protect a specific outstanding natural monument, which can be a landform, sea mount, submarine cavern, geological feature, or living feature such as an ancient grove.

US equivalent: National Monuments (natural/geological focus) managed by the NPS or BLM — e.g., Devils Tower National Monument (WY) or Dinosaur National Monument (CO/UT).

Category IV — Habitat/Species Management Area

Aims to protect particular species or habitats, with management actively reflecting this priority. Many will need regular, active interventions to address the requirements of particular species or to maintain habitats.

US equivalent: National Wildlife Refuges managed by the USFWS — e.g., Chesapeake Marshlands NWR; also some State Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs).

Category V — Protected Landscape or Seascape

Where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced a distinct character with significant ecological, biological, cultural, and scenic value. Protecting the integrity of this interaction is vital.

US equivalent: National Scenic Areas (e.g., Columbia River Gorge NSA) and National Recreation Areas — e.g., Golden Gate NRA. Some National Seashores like Cape Cod also fit here.

Category VI — Protected Area with Sustainable Use of Natural Resources

Conserves ecosystems and habitats, together with associated cultural values and traditional natural resource management systems. Generally large, with most area in a natural condition, with a portion under sustainable natural resource management.

US equivalent: National Forests managed by the USFS under multiple-use doctrine — e.g., Tongass National Forest (AK); also BLM National Conservation Areas.