Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning

Significant Ecological Areas

Conservation Planning

Increasingly, conservation plans have employed more fluid approaches to conserving the ever-increasing list of sensitive resources (e.g., endangered species, habitats of limited distribution, and “patchy” habitats such as coastal sage scrub). The previous Los Angeles County Significant Ecological Areas Study in 1976 applied a pragmatic interpretation of island biogeographic theory to its SEA delineation rationale, the primary principles for determining SEA boundaries were that: species extinction rates are lower on larger islands than smaller islands; and isolated habitat areas have less opportunity to regain species by re-colonization from other areas.

These principles have moved from theory to demonstrated fact during the intervening years, but even as the scientific community came to understand that conserving intact biotic diversity requires providing very large, physically connected parcels, land use changes were dramatically reducing the natural open space remaining within the County. When England and Nelson, authors of the 1976 SEA Study, translated the early biogeographic concepts into SEAs, for the 1980 General Plan, they did not foresee the rates of growth which have occurred within the County, and despite what seemed, at the time, to be an adequate application of the theory, they created SEAs which have over time proven to be either too small to conserve habitat biodiversity internally, and/or too distant to provide essential connectivity between them.

Recent studies of biological diversity have demonstrated that there are two essential components needed within land use plans to conserve native species and their habitats in an urbanizing environment: sufficient size (of the conservation or open space use area), and connectivity (with other like or supporting systems). Urban “islands” lose biological diversity at a fairly steady rate, commensurate with size (smaller habitat patches losing more, faster), and isolated habitat areas, regardless of size, have less opportunity to regain species by re-colonization from other areas. The distance between habitat areas, and land use within the intervening areas, also influence both the rate of loss and the potential for gain.

Based on updated evaluation principles, the revised SEAs reflect a more modern and scientifically-grounded concept regarding size and connectivity. Rather than focus on a single resource or habitat type, existing SEAs are connected into a linkage system which should greatly improve the maintenance of critical resources. SEAs are not preserves or conservation areas; rather, SEAs are areas in which planning should be sensitive to resources and maintenance of biological functions as well. By creating larger SEAs, habitat linkage zones are provided between related habitat types (such as the Antelope Valley buttes, or the San Andreas Rift Zone wetlands), and areas of sufficient width, to function as wildlife movement routes between open space areas. The linkages may serve to sustain populational genetic diversity of low-mobility species (such as plants, amphibians, reptiles, rodents), as well as provide refuge areas for migrant species.

Corridor routes provide for dispersal between habitat areas by supporting more mobile species. The need for buffer areas has also been reduced in many areas, with SEAs incorporating not only local resources (such as sensitive species) and their habitats, but also the seasonal support habitats for those species, with connections to essential sustaining resource areas (such as corridor areas and hydrological systems). Additionally, potential impacts of non-native species, feral pets, lights, noise, etc., on sensitive habitats have been alleviated to some degree by reducing the “edge effect” of urbanization relative to the overall size of the SEAs. In short, by “bridging the current SEA islands” wherever possible, zones of lower intensity human impacts between essential habitat resources have been provided, which help maintain overall species and habitat diversity in Los Angeles County.

Related Material

DRP en Español

Online Appointment Now Available!

Covid-19 Covid-19 UAS Drone Housing Element Update Woolsey Fire Recovery Oil Well Tree Pest Disease FFCP Homeless Buying Property SEATAC Historic Preservation DRP Video Library

Follow Us

Twitter Facebook Instagram YouTube

©2009 Los Angeles County Department of Regional Planning.

All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Privacy Statement.

Please send website questions and comments to webadmin@planning.lacounty.gov

Many of our documents are in PDF format. You can download Adobe Reader by clicking this link.

Department of Regional Planning
320 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
T: (213) 974-6411 . F: (213) 626-0434
TDD: (213) 617-2292
Twitter Facebook Instagram YouTube