Southeast Conservation Blueprint 2025

PRIORITY CATEGORIES The Southeast Blueprint covers 50% of the SECAS geography, as described below. Priorities for a connected network of lands and waters * Highest priority: Areas where conservation action would make the biggest impact, based on a suite of natural and cultural resource indicators. This class covers roughly 10% of the Southeast Blueprint geography. * High priority: Areas where conservation action would make a big impact, based on a suite of natural and cultural resource indicators. This class covers roughly 15% of the Southeast Blueprint geography. * Medium priority: Areas where conservation action would make an above-average impact, based on a suite of natural and cultural resource indicators. This class covers roughly 20% of the Southeast Blueprint geography. * Priority connections: Connections between priority areas that cover the shortest distance possible while routing through as much Blueprint priority as possible. This class covers roughly 5% of the Southeast Blueprint geography. COMBINING ZONATION RESULTS WITH CORRIDORS TO CREATE THE SOUTHEAST BLUEPRINT Input Data * 2025 Southeast Blueprint combined Zonation results (decimal version); the decimal version is too large to share, but the integer version produced in the following mapping steps is [available on the SECAS Atlas] and in the [Southeast Blueprint 2025 Ancillary Data Download] * [Southeast Blueprint 2025 hubs and corridors] * [Southeast Blueprint 2025 subregions] Mapping Steps Creating the Continental Blueprint * Start with mosaiced Zonation results for all continental subregions. This layer has been taken times 100 but has not been converted to an integer. In this layer, each pixel in the continental Southeast Blueprint geography has a continuous value ranging from 0 to 100 according to its rank by Zonation prioritization. * Pixels with values ≥90 are in the highest tier of indicator value. Select all pixels with values ≥90 and classify them as “highest priority for a connected network of lands and waters”. * Pixels with values ≥75 that aren’t already classified as highest priority are in the second-highest tier of indicator value. Select all pixels ≥75 and <90 and classify them as “high priority for a connected network of lands and waters”. * Creating the “medium priority for a connected network of lands and waters” is a bit more complicated. We need to add hubs that aren’t captured in the highest, high, or medium classes to the medium class. We must adjust the bottom threshold of the medium class to account for these non-captured hubs. This year we found that using a cut off value of 55.57 in the Zonation results allowed us to add in the non-covered hubs while maintaining the correct percentage of the landscape covered by each class. Select all pixels >55.57 and <75 and classify them as “medium priority for a connected network of lands and waters”. This makes up the first portion of the medium priority class. * Add to the medium priority class any hubs used in the connectivity analysis that that were not already classified as highest, high, or medium priority in the steps above. This ensures that the large patches of protected lands used as hubs in the connectivity analysis can score no lower than medium priority in the Blueprint. This adds an additional 0.57% of total area to the medium priority class. * Use the inland continental corridors to fill in the priority connections class. Classify as “priority connections” any pixel identified as a corridor in the inland corridor analysis that is not already assigned to the highest, high or medium priority categories in the steps above. This contributes an additional 5% to the total Blueprint area, ensuring the final Blueprint ultimately covers 50% of the Southeast Blueprint landscape. Creating the Caribbean Blueprint * Start with the mosaiced Zonation scores for the Caribbean subregions. This layer has been taken times 100 but has not been converted to an integer. In this layer, each pixel in the Caribbean Blueprint geography has a continuous value ranging from 0 to 100 according to its rank by Zonation prioritization. * Pixels with values ≥90 are in the highest tier of indicator value. Select all pixels with values ≥90 and classify them as “highest priority for a connected network of lands and waters”. * Pixels with values ≥75 that aren’t already classified as highest priority are in the second-highest tier of indicator value. Select all pixels ≥75 and <90 and classify them as “high priority for a connected network of lands and waters”. * Creating the “medium priority for a connected network of lands and waters” is a bit more complicated. We need to add hubs that aren’t captured in the highest, high, or medium classes to the medium class. We must adjust the bottom threshold of the medium class to account for these non-captured hubs. This year we found that using a cut off value of 55.27 in the Zonation results allowed us to add in the non-covered hubs while maintaining the correct percentage of the landscape covered by each class. Select all pixels >55.27 and <75 and classify them as “medium priority for a connected network of lands and waters”. This makes up the first portion of the medium priority class. * Add to the medium priority class any hubs used in the Caribbean connectivity analysis that that were not already classified as highest, high, or medium priority in the steps above. This ensures that the large patches of protected lands used as hubs in the connectivity analysis can score no lower than medium priority in the Blueprint. This adds an additional 0.27% of total area to the medium priority class. * Use the Caribbean corridors to fill in the priority connections class. Classify as “priority connections” any pixel identified as a corridor in the corridor analysis that is not already assigned to the highest, high or medium priority categories in the steps above. This contributes an additional 5% to the total Blueprint area, ensuring the final Blueprint ultimately covers 50% of the Southeast Blueprint landscape. Combining the Continental & Caribbean Components into Southeast Blueprint 2025 * As a final step, combine the continental and Caribbean results into a single raster representing final Southeast Blueprint 2025. Do this using the ArcPy Cell Statistics “MAXIMUM” function. Note: For more details on the mapping steps, code used to create this layer is available [in the Southeast Blueprint 2025 Data Download] or [Caribbean-only Southeast Blueprint 2025 Data Download] under > 6_Code. KNOWN ISSUES Continental Terrestrial Uplands * Some managed private grasslands are underprioritized. Examples include Prairie Wildlife grasslands west of Vinton, MS; an area southeast of Guadalupe Mountains National Park in TX; East Foundation lands in South TX; grasslands of special significance southeast of Starkville, MS and northwest of Egypt, MS; and a grassland restoration area northeast of Starkville, MS. Improvements to the fire frequency and grassland indicators could fix this in the future. * Some managed public grasslands are underprioritized. Examples include multiple prairies in MO (McGee Family Conservation Area, Jerry Smith Park, and Stilwell Prairie). These will likely be fixed in the next version of the Blueprint. * Parts of some important ecological corridors are underprioritized. Examples include parts of the corridor between Ocmulgee Mounds National Historic Park and Bond Swamp National Wildlife Refuge in GA; the South Fork of the Forked Deer River in TN; parts of the corridor between Fort Campbell, Land Between the Lakes, and Clarks River National Wildlife Refuge in KY and TN; some of the areas from Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge to Pocosin Lakes National Wildlife Refuge in NC; multiple corridors coming out of Okefenokee Swamp in GA; and the Osceola to Ocala corridor in FL. Improvements to prioritization methods and indicators will likely fix these in the future. * Some patches of open pine with good local conditions are underprioritized. Examples include parts of Yellow River Marsh Preserve State Park in FL; important gopher tortoise habitat in an area just east of Mauk, GA; a pitcher plant flat south of Rowlands, MS; the Farmer’s Home tract managed by Mississippi Sandhill Crane National Wildlife Refuge; wet pine savanna mitigation bank areas east of Pearl River Wildlife Management Area, MS; longleaf south of Pine Hill, NC; savanna northwest of Mississippi Sandhill Crane National Wildlife Refuge in MS; and a shortleaf pine site north of Marshes Siding in Daniel Boone National Forest in KY. Ongoing updates to the grasslands and savannas and fire frequency indicators could continue to improve this issue in future updates. * Some parts of small, low-elevation islands are underprioritized. The exact boundaries of these highly dynamic islands can be hard to predict. The boundaries used in the islands indicator and areas used for critical habitat of key island species don’t always align perfectly—especially in the most dynamic parts of the island. A potential improvement to address this is under investigation. Examples include Tybee Bar in GA, Crab Bank Seabird Sanctuary in SC, Lanark Reef in FL, and the Chandeleur Islands off of LA. * Some recently developed areas are overprioritized (e.g., a solar field near Wedgefield, FL; a limestone barren west of Lime, TN; and the Moncure Megasite in NC). Updated landcover and indicator updates based on newer landcover should fix this issue. * Some new conservation areas where restoration has only started recently are underprioritized. Examples include Wolfe Creek Forest in FL and the Wolf River corridor in MS. Updated landcover and indicator updates based on newer landcover should fix this issue. * Some important urban natural areas are underprioritized. Examples include Kapok Park in Clearwater, FL; the West Atlanta Watershed Alliance education hub in Atlanta, GA; Lost Corner Preserve in Sandy Springs, GA; and Blucher Park in Corpus Christi, TX. Improvements in indicators related to urban natural areas could fix this in the future. * Parts of some larger natural areas, especially forested areas, near urban centers are underprioritized (e.g., the Western Highland Rim in Nashville, TN; the ridge south of Elkins, WV; and Rocky Face Ridge in Dalton, GA). Improving how the indicators address the role these areas play in connecting people to nature and providing climate change solutions to urban areas, as well as updated corridor methods, could help address this in the future. * Some ridges in the Ridge and Valley ecoregion are underprioritized. Future indicator improvements should fit this. * Culturally important historic areas are underprioritized through the Blueprint. This is particularly true in areas outside of the Piedmont, Atlantic Coastal Plain, and East Gulf Coastal Plain subregions. Even within these subregions, where there is an indicator for these areas, there are significant gaps. Some low-urban historic areas in these subregions are underprioritized because 1) they are not yet part of the National Register of Historic Places (e.g., Lost Island Farm on Roanoke Island, the likely landing site for the Lost Colony at the mouth of the Chowan River, and Native American sites on the Dan River near the NC/VA border), 2) because their location isn’t publicly shared (e.g., sensitive archeological sites), or because 3) the GIS depiction of their spatial boundaries has significant errors (e.g., sites in GA and AL). * Some areas with important ecological communities are underprioritized in TX and OK (e.g., shinnery oak scrub). * Some upland areas in the Upper Coastal Plain of GA are overprioritized. Improvements in prioritization methods could improve this in the future. * Some sandy ridges with significant longleaf restoration potential and importance as movement corridors for longleaf-associated species are underprioritized. Examples include the Trail Ridge area east of Okefenokee Swamp in GA and a sand ridge off of Hwy 421 northwest of Wilmington, NC. Improvements in indicators and prioritization methods could improve this in the future. * Some small or newer quarries are overprioritized (e.g., American Stone Quarry near Chapel Hill, NC). While most quarries are classified correctly as developed, smaller or newer ones don’t have large enough areas of barren landcover in the 2019 National Land Cover Database to be filtered out in the resilient terrestrial sites indicator. If not identified as non-natural, quarries tend to score very highly on landscape diversity given all the elevation change that happens within them. This issue could be fixed in a future update to the resilient terrestrial sites indicator. * Some oil platforms north of Monahans, TX are overprioritized due to errors in the natural landcover in floodplains indicator that come from the EPA floodplain map. Indicator improvements in the near future could fix this. * Some urban areas are overprioritized due to issues with the potential access to parks indicator (e.g. areas east of Sarasota, FL). This indicator identifies areas where parks are needed but does not consider whether a site is available to become a park. It includes areas of low intensity development in order to capture vacant lots, which can serve as new park opportunities. However, as a result, this indicator also captures some areas that are already used for another purpose (e.g., houses, cemeteries, and businesses) and are unlikely to become parks. * Some dirt roads through forests are overprioritized based on the grasslands and savannas indicator (e.g., a road northwest of Hawthorne, FL). The mix of sparse tree cover and sandy soil in the pixel can look like a savanna. This can also cause speckling of priorities—especially in northern FL and southern GA and AL. * Some narrow powerline rights-of-way and roadsides important for sun-loving plants of high conservation concern are underprioritized. Improved methods for the grasslands and savannas indicator could fix this in the future. * Some mowed areas on military installations are overprioritized based on the grasslands and savannas indicator (e.g., parts of Camp Robinson in AR and Milan Army Ammunition Plant in TN). * Some greenways and trails are overprioritized in areas where those trails degrade important habitat (e.g., trails in Bastrop State Park, TX and their impacts on Houston toad habitat). * Greenways and trails missing from OpenStreetMap are underprioritized (e.g., Bayport Berm in Seabrook, TX). This will likely be fixed with future indicator updates. * There are some overprioritized speckles in highly developed areas due to issues with the greenways and trails indicator (e.g., North Raleigh, NC and NorthPark Center mall in Dallas, TX). Future indicator improvements could fix this. * At least one private easement southwest of Frankfort, KY is overprioritized due to its inclusion in the urban park size indicator. We will investigate ways to better exclude private easements from this indicator in the next update. Wetlands * Some important wetlands are underpriorized. Examples include the east and west sides of Felsenthal National Wildlife Refuge in AR; Ten Mile Pond Conservation Area in MO; the southeast part of Big Oak Tree State Park in MO; bottomland hardwood and xerohydric flatwoods in Clarks River National Wildlife Refuge in KY; white fringeless orchid habitat in Daniel Boone National Forest in KY; wetlands just east of Macedonia, TN; depressional wetlands southeast of Raeford, NC; the Stony Run wetlands in northeast Dunn, NC; and marshes in a TNC conservation easement off of Port Bay in TX. Improvements to indicators and prioritization methods could fix these in the future. * Some ephemeral wetlands are underprioritized. New prioritization methods under investigation for next year could address this. * A small set of bottomland forest areas in areas flooded by dams are underprioritized (e.g., the area between Summerfield and Faircloth, LA and the Little River wetlands in Millwood Recreation Area in AR). These areas are misidentified as open water reservoirs in the current reservoir mask used by the landscape condition indicator. Improvements to that mask for future Blueprints are under investigation. * Sections of the Everglades on either side of U.S. Hwy 41 are underprioritized. Indicator improvements under investigation could fix this in the future. * Important Carolina bays are often included in large patches of medium priority, but the bays and nearby areas should be higher priority. Different methods for resolving this issue are under investigation. * Some important areas of tidal freshwater marsh are underprioritized (e.g., Mackay National Wildlife Refuge). Indicators that better represent waterfowl habitat needs could improve this in the future. * Some areas along the shores of small lakes that are surrounded by development or agriculture are underprioritized (e.g., Lake Lawne in northern Orlando, FL; a historic wood stork colony northeast of Lake Poinsett in FL; and a sandhill crane roost east of Palm Bay, FL). These areas can provide important habitat for waterbirds and corridors for species like bobcat. * Some coastal wetlands in the coverage gap between resilient coastal sites and resilient terrestrial sites are underprioritized (e.g., Jamestown, VA). Species-Specific * Some important caves for Ozark big-eared bat, Northern long-eared bat, and Indiana bat are underprioritized. A potential indicator to address this is under investigation. * Some coastal marsh areas important for diamondback terrapin are underprioritized (e.g., Cedar Point marsh north of Dauphin Island, AL). * Some islands particularly important for species that don’t yet have critical habitat spatially mapped (e.g., red knot) or are not federally listed species (e.g., seabirds, heron rookeries) are underprioritized (e.g., Ogeechee Bar in GA and Walker and Robinson Islands in AL). * Some parts of Cape Sable seaside sparrow critical habitat are being underprioritized. All critical habitat for this species is prioritized in the Blueprint, but it is currently a mix of high and medium priority. Multiple indicator improvements under investigation could fix this in the future. * Important areas for beach birds that are not on islands are underprioritized in the FL Peninsula and all other Gulf coast subregions. * Some areas that are important for mottled duck nesting in the edge of the Texas Blackland Prairie and West Gulf Coastal Plain subregions are underprioritized. * Some coastal habitat important for aboriginal prickly pear in Florida is underprioritized. Future indicator updates could improve this. * Some habitat for cave and karst species is being underprioritized (e.g., Ozark cave fish habitat in Republic, MO and a watershed north of Key Cave in AL). * Some habitat for range-restricted plants is underprioritized (e.g., an area southwest of Manning, GA). Freshwater * Some river sections important for aquatic diversity are underprioritized. Underprioritized areas include some sections of Shoe Heel Creek in NC that are important for broadtail madtoms and other endemics; Neuse River waterdog habitat in the Trent River near Croatan National Forest in NC; the VA section of the Nottoway River; the lower section of the Little River in NC; some parts of the lower Neuse River in NC; the headwaters of the Flint River; and sections of the Flint River north and south of the Atlanta airport. Ongoing improvements in the imperiled aquatic species indicators and prioritization methods should improve these issues. * Some aquatic areas, particularly smaller rivers and streams, are overprioritized. The imperiled aquatic species indicator is at a subwatershed (HUC12) scale while the species hotspots it seeks to depict are often only a part of that subwatershed. * Some important areas for migratory fish in Gulf of America drainages are underprioritized. The source data for the Gulf migratory fish connectivity indicator didn’t include migratory fish species that are important for the Mississippi Alluvial Valley and all Gulf coast watersheds west of that subregion. * Some open water areas of artificial waterbodies are underprioritized. In some cases, parts of these waterbodies can provide important species habitat (e.g., American crocodile habitat in cooling canals in South FL and waterfowl habitat in parts of some reservoirs). * Some river areas are underprioritized in South FL (e.g., the north fork of the St. Lucie River and Ten Mile Creek). Potential aquatic indicator improvements under investigation could fix this in the future. * Some canals are overprioritized in South FL. Potential aquatic indicator improvements under investigation could fix this in the future. * Some streams are overprioritized due to lack of information on local hydrologic alterations (e.g., a stream just south of Bastrop State Park in TX). * Some sections of small streams are underprioritized where the estimated floodplain map doesn’t include them (e.g., parts of Upper Crabtree Creek in Durham, NC). Improvements to freshwater indicators to better capture small streams should fix this in the future. Marine * Mouths of many priority rivers are underprioritized where they transition into the estuarine ecosystem. Improved estuarine indicators should improve this issue in the future. * Some marine Blueprint priorities are at a coarser resolution due to the marine birds, sea turtles, and marine mammals indicators. The coarser data results in what looks like parts of large squares or hexagons and unnatural edges in priority. Improvements in indicator resolution should fix this in the future. * Some marine areas in the far eastern part of the Blueprint, particularly beyond the Blake Plateau, may be underprioritized due a lack of survey data for marine birds and mammals in that region. * Some areas along the Atlantic shelf break are overprioritized due to overprediction in deep-sea coral richness models (e.g., select areas east of GA). While the models predict high coral richness in these areas, surveys show that they are almost entirely sand. Improvements in the models could fix this in the future. * Some important areas of the Charleston Gyre upwelling are underprioritized. While the exact location of the upwelling and its high concentration of nutrients and fish larvae isn’t fixed, there are some areas where it commonly occurs that are underprioritized. * Some parts of the deeper waters off Onslow Bay, NC, which are important for reef fish and many tropical/subtropical species, are likely underprioritized. * Some areas important for corals in the Gulf are underprioritized (e.g., an area east of the West Florida Escarpment that’s being considered for a Coral Habitat Area of Particular Concern). Future coral indicator improvements will likely fix this. * Some important areas for Rice’s whale may be underprioritized. The Blueprint currently covers habitat predicted by the GoMMAPPS model for Rice’s whale, but NOAA core distribution polygons cover a much larger area. * DeSoto Canyon—an important area for corals, fish and nutrient upwellings south of Pensacola, FL—is underprioritized. Future improvements in coral, fish, or marine bird models could improve this in the future. * Parts of important species movement corridors are underprioritized (e.g., a marine mammal corridor southeast of LA, a Kemp’s ridley sea turtle corridor near the TX border). Improved corridor methods could fix this in the future. * Some important hardbottom and coral areas are underprioritized in the Atlantic (e.g., parts of Gray’s Reef in GA, part of the Savannah Banks off of GA, and some corals in Southeast FL). Future indicator updates could fix this. * Some paleo channels are underprioritized. These areas that were historically freshwater rivers have significant archeological value. No indicator currently targets paleo channel locations. Caribbean Terrestrial Uplands * Parts of some protected areas in the east part of St. Croix in USVI (e.g, Point Udall, Jack and Issac Bay) are underprioritized. Indicator and/or method improvements could fix this in the future. * Some relatively undeveloped areas that are important for maintaining water quality in nearby high priority marine areas are underprioritized (e.g., some areas east of the St. Croix cruise terminal in USVI). Improvements to indicators and/or corridor methods could fix this in the future. * Some important areas related to Taíno history are underprioritized (e.g., sections of Salt River Bay National Historical Park and Ecological Preserve in St. Croix, USVI). Work to better integrate this information into cultural indicators is ongoing. * Parts of the coastal hills in eastern PR, important for their unique vegetation composition, are underprioritized. Wetlands * The Altona Lagoon area of St. Croix, USVI—an important area for birds, sportfish, and the potential reintroduction of the St. Croix ground lizard—is underprioritized. * Some salt ponds, which provide important habitat for birds and other species, are underprioritized. Species-Specific * Some areas important for future Puerto Rican parrot habitat are underprioritized (e.g., northeast of El Yunque in PR; east of Lares, PR). Improvements to species-specific indicators could fix this in the future. * Some areas important for rare plants are underprioritized (e.g., east of Lares, PR). * Some areas that are important for coquí species in PR are underprioritized (e.g., Puerto Rican rock frog [Eleutherodcactylus cooki] habitat near water in Southeast PR). Work on a coquí-specific indicator is ongoing. * Habitat important for the Virgin Islands boa on the east side of St. Thomas is underprioritized. Improvements in prioritization methods should fix this soon. Marine * Some important areas for coral reef restoration are underprioritized (e.g., north of Teague Bay in St. Croix, USVI; north of Christiansted in St. Croix, USVI). Better incorporation of restoration in coral indicators could fix this in the future. * Some marine areas strongly impacted by point source pollution may be overprioritized (e.g., area of south St. Croix, USVI impacted by Cruzan rum distillery discharge). * Some marine corridor routes do not sufficiently account for variation in habitat quality between hubs (e.g., corridors south of Culebra, PR; corridors southwest of the big island of PR).