Conservation Projects in Prison: The Case for Engaging Incarcerated Populations
in Conservation and Science
Author(s): Thomas N. Kaye, Kelli Bush, Chad Naugle and Carri J. LeRoy
Source: Natural Areas Journal, 35(1):90-97. 2015.
Published By: Natural Areas Association
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3375/043.035.0113
URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.3375/043.035.0113

BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, andenvironmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books publishedby nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.
Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of
BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use.
Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries
or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder.

BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, researchlibraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research.

CONSERVATION ISSUES•
Conservation Projects
in Prison: The Case forEngaging Incarcerated
Populations inConservation andScience
Thomas N. Kaye1,51Institute for Applied Ecology

PO Box 2855
Corvallis, OR 97339-2855

Kelli Bush2
Chad Naugle3
Carri J. LeRoy4
2Sustainability in Prisons Project

2700 Evergreen Parkway NW
Olympia, WA 98505
3Oregon Department of Corrections

3601 State St.
Salem, OR 97301
4The Evergreen State College

2700 Evergreen Parkway NW
Olympia, WA 98505•
5 Corresponding author:

tom@appliedeco.org; 541-753-3099

Natural Areas Journal 35:90–97

90Natural Areas Journal

ABSTRACT: The pace of habitat destruction and loss of biological diversity globally exceeds the current capacity of societies to restore functioning ecosystems. Working with prison systems to engage
inmates in habitat conservation and ecological science is an innovative approach to increase our ability
to reestablish habitat and at-risk species, while simultaneously providing people in custody with opportunities for reciprocal restoration, education, therapeutic activities, safer conditions, and lower costs ofimprisonment. We present the beneﬁts of working with prisons to conduct habitat conservation throughnursery production of plants and captive rearing of animals, combined with educational experiences,and provide an overview of the Sustainability in Prisons Project Network. Examples of projects withprisons in Washington and Oregon include nursery production of Wyoming big sagebrush (Artemisia
tridentata Nutt. ssp. wyomingensis) for restoring habitat of the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus), nursery production of early blue violet (Viola adunca) to support conservation of threatened
Oregon silverspot butterﬂies (Speyeria zerene hippolyta), captive rearing programs for Oregon spotted
frogs (Rana pretiosa) and endangered Taylor’s checkerspot butterﬂies (Euphydryas editha taylori), andnursery production of over 60 plant species for restoration of native prairies. Including incarcerated
people in conservation and science could tap into the positive potential of over 2 million inmates at over
4000 prisons and jails in the United States and create new partnerships to support large-scale habitat
restoration and ecological research.
Index terms: captive rearing, sagebrush, sage-grouse, sustainability in prisons project, Taylor’s checkerspot

INTRODUCTION
Habitat loss is a major driver of declines
in biodiversity (Ehrlich 1988). Many
ecosystems in the United States havedeclined by 70% or more, especially forests, grasslands and savannas (Noss et al.
1995), and over 1500 species are listedby the US Fish and Wildlife Service asthreatened or endangered (US Fish andWildlife Service 2013d). Habitat restoration (e.g., Hobbs and Harris 2001) andactive reintroduction of declining species(Seddon et al. 2007; Seddon 2010) are,therefore, important tools for conservation. However, the sheer magnitude of thework needed to address habitat and species
losses is so high that conservationists faceﬁnancial and capacity restraints on what
they can accomplish (Miller and Hobbs
2007). Add to these problems the stressof global climate change on habitats andspecies, and the need for a rise in our social capability to intervene becomes evenmore urgent (McClanahan et al. 2008).
Innovative methods for implementing actions like habitat restoration and species
reintroductions may improve the ability ofland managers to reach their conservation
targets. One method may be to reach out
to new groups of people to help achieve
larger goals.
Over 2.2 million adults are incarcerated
in prisons and jails in the United States(Glaze and Herberman 2013). Somestates mandate that prisoners contribute inpositive ways as part of their rehabilitation
treatment; for example, Oregon’s Inmate
Work Act requires correctional institutions
to engage inmates in full-time work or
on-the-job training. Over 96% of incarcerated men and women will be releasedback to their communities (Nellis 2013).
Engaging this large and severely underserved population in conservation practiceand science education creates a win-win
situation with high potential for positive
impacts on the environment, inmates,and social communities. In this paper wereport that collaborations between naturalarea managers, scientists, and correctional
facilities can contribute to conservation,
as well as beneﬁt researchers and prison
inmates. To illustrate this potential, we describe the Sustainability in Prisons Project(SPP) model. We provide case studies of
how this innovative collaboration beneﬁts
a variety of species and habitats throughnursery production of native plants andcaptive rearing of rare animals, explain how
these partnerships result in transformativeeducational opportunities, and argue thatsuch collaborations can enhance conservation science.
THE CASE FOR CONDUCTINGCONSERVATION PROGRAMS WITH
CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
Inmate participation in habitat conservaVolume 35 (1), 2015

tion results in a substantial increase in thecapacity of land managers and scientists
to restore landscapes, conduct research,
and work toward recovery of threatened
and endangered species. For example,
restoration ecologists partnering with
SPP-Washington have worked with local
correctional facilities to raise endangered
species and native plants for release into,and restoration of, natural areas (LeRoy etal. 2012). SPP-Washington’s ﬁrst conservation program was initiated by researchersat The Evergreen State College partneringwith Washington Department of Corrections to involve inmates in a study of how
to sustainably cultivate moss for use in thehorticulture trade, while also broadening
the social effects of their research (Nadkarni 2006). This work in turn beneﬁted
the incarcerated and nearby social communities.
Caring for living organisms provides
signiﬁcant therapeutic value to inmates,
whether they are caring for animals(Strimple 2003; Ormerod 2008) or plants(Relf and Dorn 1995; Relf 2006; Clarke
2011; Lindemuth 2014), which can resultin calmer, safer prison settings. Providing
inmates with an opportunity to give backto their communities through conservation projects strengthens their sense ofaccountability and pro-social behavior,
resulting in improved attitudes about theenvironment (Gallagher 2013), as well as
creating a form of reciprocal restoration inwhich inmates make tangible contributions
to the natural world and develop a positive
sense of connection to the environment.
Similarly, the Great Plains Restoration
Council’s Restoration Not Incarceration
model, an environmentally based program for formerly incarcerated youth, has
yielded positive outcomes for participants,
Gulf Coast habitats, and local communities (Norton and Holguin 2011; Norton
et al. 2013).
Adults in custody are hungry for intellectual stimulation and participation inscientiﬁc research. Receiving scientiﬁc
lectures and presentations by professionals
helps meet this need while providing exposure to positive role models (Ulrich andNadkarni 2009; Weber 2012). Work andvocational training programs reduce rates
Volume 35 (1), 2015of recidivism after inmates are released
into their communities (Bouffard et al.
2000; Wilson et al. 2000), and educational
opportunities improve postrelease employment rates and earnings (Tyler and Kling
2006; Cho and Tyler 2013). Incorporating
concepts of natural resource conservation
into correctional facilities is part of the“greening of corrections” (Thigpen et al.
2011) movement, which promotes sustainability in prisons with beneﬁts to theenvironment, inmates, and communities(LeRoy et al. 2012).
THE SUSTAINABILITY IN PRISONSPROJECT NETWORKThe Sustainability in Prisons Project (SPP)
model was cofounded by the Washington
State Department of Corrections and The
Evergreen State College in 2003 (LeRoyet al. 2012). Pilot activities were initiatedat Cedar Creek Corrections Center, aminimum-security prison for men in Little
Rock, Washington (Nadkarni and Pacholke2013). The outcomes of the ﬁrst programs
were overwhelmingly positive and resulted
in inmate participation in conservation research and science, sustainability education
for both staff and inmates, and reduced
prison operating costs. The SPP partnershipgrew to include natural resource agencies,
conservation and community organizations, and land management agencies
such as the US Department of Defense.
With increased partners, resources, andcorrections’ staff interest, science andsustainability programs have expanded to
all prisons across Washington State. These
successful programs drew the attentionof the media and word spread throughout
the world. The SPP model has generated
interest from countries such as France,
Moldova, and Australia. Over 20 states in
the United States have expressed an interest in developing SPP programs in theirprisons or jails. In 2011, the Institute forApplied Ecology partnered with the Oregon
Department of Corrections to initiate an
SPP program in Oregon. In response to theoverwhelming interest in the SPP model,
the SPP Network was founded in 2012.
Currently there are nine SPP programs
operating in prisons or jails in Washington,
Oregon, Utah, California, Maryland, Ohio,and New York. The SPP Network allows

participants to share successes and seek
support for challenges; collaborate on
funding opportunities; standardize program
evaluation, data tracking, and analysis; andshare resources such as curricula, protocols,and outreach documents.
CASE STUDIESThe SPP Network has developed several
successful projects. The following examples illustrate some of the projects inOregon and Washington that are based onplant production in prison-based nurseries
or captive rearing of animals. These collaborations among conservationists, scientists, students, and correctional facilities aremaking tangible contributions to naturalarea and rare species management.
Sage Brush and Greater Sage-grouse
The greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus (Bonaparte)) is a candidate forlisting by the US Fish and Wildlife Service
as a threatened or endangered species thatis found in Washington, Oregon, Idaho,Montana, North Dakota, eastern California,
Nevada, Utah, western Colorado, South
Dakota and Wyoming and the Canadianprovinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan (USFish and Wildlife Service 2013b; Figure1). Habitat fragmentation and destruction
across much of the species’ range have contributed to signiﬁcant population declines
over the past century. Loss of sagebrush(Artemisia spp.) habitat, primarily due towildﬁre, is the main driver of the declineof this species in the western UnitedStates (Connelly and Braun 1997; Miller
and Eddleman 2001) because sagebrushprovides crucial food and cover for thesebirds at multiple stages of their lifecycle.
Greater sage-grouse require large areas ofcontiguous sagebrush, which is typicallykilled by wildﬁre and regenerates slowly
from seed in the wild. Planting containergrown sagebrush is an ecologically andeconomically sound technique of reestablishing these shrubs (Dettweiler-Robinson
et al. 2013), even on depleted sites (McAdoo et al. 2013). Production of sagebrushplants for habitat restoration within state
prison systems (Figure 2A) represents anopportunity to provide urgently needed
Natural Areas Journal 91

plant materials for greater sage-grouseconservation projects.
Biologists from the Institute for Applied
Ecology (IAE) have partnered with the
Oregon Department of Corrections as
SPP-Oregon and have been working with
the Snake River Correctional Institution,
a medium- and minimum-security men’s
facility in Ontario, Oregon, and the Bureau of Land Management to produce
genetically appropriate Wyoming big
sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata Nutt.
ssp. wyomingensis Beetle and Young) for
planting at nearby restoration sites. Since
2013, IAE staff have visited the facility
regularly to interact with prison staff andinmates, provide training in horticultural
practices, and review propagation procedures. The facility is currently producing
at least 10,000 container plants annually,

with capacity of up to 80,000. A lecture
series on sagebrush ecosystems and greater
sage-grouse conservation is included inthis program. Because sagebrush appears
to be locally adapted to environmental
factors like day length and temperature,
we carefully match the seed source of
propagated material to speciﬁc restorationsites. This program is being developed asa model with protocols that can be used atmany correctional facilities in and near theremaining range of the greater sage-grouse(Figure 1) to contribute local-source plantmaterials for the species’ recovery.
Violets for Oregon Silverspot
Butterflies
Oregon silverspot butterﬂies (Speyeria
zerene hippolyta (W.H. Edwards)) wereonce common in coastal grasslands from

northern California to southern Washington, but have declined to a handful ofremaining populations. The species is now
listed as threatened (US Fish and Wildlife
Service 2001). Habitat management is a key
need for the species, including enhancement of its native larval food source, earlyblue violet (Viola adunca Sm.) (New et al.
1995). The Oregon Zoo manages a captive
rearing program for these silverspots thatinvolves releasing them into sites with appropriate habitat in Oregon (Schultz et al.
2011), but few sites possess the numbers
or densities of early blue violets necessary
to support new populations. Therefore,
management to increase violet populations, including planting large numbersof container grown plants, is underway atmultiple restoration sites.
Early blue violets are in production at the

Figure 1. Current (2013) and historical distribution of greater sage-grouse, with locations of state and federal correctional facilities as dark circles. Greater
sage-grouse distribution from US Geological Survey (http://sagemap.wr.usgs.gov/).

92

Natural Areas Journal

Volume 35 (1), 2015

Figure 2. Prison inmate technicians participating in conservation projects. (A) Adults in custody cultivating sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) at Snake River
Correctional Institution near Ontario, Oregon. Plants produced at this facility are planted by inmate work crews at restoration sites to improve habitat for
greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) (photo by Stacy Moore). (B) Production of early blue violet (Viola adunca) at the Coffee Creek Correctional
Facility to support habitat restoration and feeding of captively reared Oregon silverspot butterﬂies (Speyeria zerene hippolyta) (photo by Thomas Kaye). (C) An
inmate with SPP-Washington Taylor’s Checkerspot Captive Rearing Program at Mission Creek Corrections Center for Women holds an endangered Taylor’s
checkerspot butterﬂy (Euphydryas editha taylori) next to golden paintbrush (Castilleja levisecta) during a study of the butterﬂy’s oviposition preferences (photoby Benj Drummond). (D) An inmate technician labels native prairie plants for the SPP-Washington Conservation Nursery Program at Washington Corrections Center for Women (photo by Benj Drummond).

Coffee Creek Correctional Facility for
women, a medium- and minimum-security
prison in Wilsonville, Oregon (Figure 2B).
Violet plants are also grown at the Oak
Creek Correctional Facility for young
women in Oregon, a facility managed by
the Oregon Youth Authority. This project isa partnership between the Oregon Department of Corrections, Institute for Applied
Ecology, Oregon Youth Authority, and theOregon Zoo. A lecture series on habitat
and animal conservation is provided toinmates in the women’s prison and young
women receiving high school scienceclasses at the youth facility. Biologists
from the Institute for Applied Ecology
work closely with the staff and offenders
at both correctional facilities to ensure
proper cultivation practices for the violet
Volume 35 (1), 2015

and provide training in horticultural techniques. The plants produced—up to 60,000
per year—are planted at restoration sites in
Oregon, aided by inmate work crews, andused as a food source for captively reared
larvae at the Oregon Zoo.
Oregon Spotted Frogs
The Oregon spotted frog (Rana pretiosa(Baird and Girard)) is a Washington statelisted endangered species and has been
proposed for federal listing as threatened.
The frog has vanished from at least 78%
of its historic range (US Fish and Wildlife
Service 2013c). Decline of this warmwater marsh species can be attributed tohabitat loss, nonnative plant invasions, andpredation by exotic bull frogs (Lithobates
catesbeianus (Shaw)).
In 2009, SPP-Washington began a ﬁve
year pilot program rearing Oregon spotted
frogs at Cedar Creek Corrections Center
for men. This novel approach was the ﬁrst
conservation program in a corrections center working with threatened or endangered
species. The success of the frog program
demonstrated multidimensional beneﬁts
and the potential for replication of similarconservation programs in new locations.
While the concept of captive-rearing in a
prison was new, programs rearing Oregon
spotted frogs were already well-establishedin four area zoos. The zoos and scientists
with the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife provide technical assistanceNatural Areas Journal 93

and help with research design, funding
proposals, and monitoring.
From 2009–2012, SPP-Washington released over 550 captive-reared frogs andachieved egg-to-adult survivorship rates
that averaged over 77%. The program won
the North American Conservation Award
for Best Rearing Facility from the Association of Zoos and Aquariums three years
in a row. All frog rearing operations were
temporarily ceased during the 2013 season
at the conclusion of the initial ﬁve year
pilot program. The Oregon Spotted FrogWorking Group utilized the time without
active rearing programs to draft a recovery
plan, analyze data, and consider next steps.
While there are still many unansweredquestions surrounding the recovery of thisspecies, inmates began raising frogs again
in 2014. Inmate technicians have received
over four years of herpetological training
as participants in the program. In addition,
inmates have worked with scientists on
several research projects, including studies
on predator evasion, chytrid fungus (Conlon et al. 2013), and growth comparisons
between two populations.
Taylor’s Checkerspot Butterflies
Taylor’s checkerspot butterﬂy (Euphydryaseditha taylori (W.H. Edwards)) is a federally listed endangered species (US Fish andWildlife Service 2013a). This butterﬂy once
thrived from southern British Columbia towestern Oregon in prairies maintained byﬁre. Currently there are only a few small,isolated populations remaining, the largestof which is on the Artillery Impact Area
at Joint Base Lewis-McChord. In advanceof listing, recovery team partners identiﬁed
the need to establish a second butterﬂy rearing facility to add capacity and resiliency
to the well-established rearing operation
at the Oregon Zoo.
In 2011, SPP-Washington and faculty,
staff, and students at The Evergreen State
College collaborated with Washington
Department of Corrections, Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife, and theOregon Zoo to design and construct a new
Taylor’s checkerspot butterﬂy rearing facility at Mission Creek Corrections Center
for Women, a minimum-security prison in
94

Natural Areas Journal

Belfair, Washington. The program includes
three to ﬁve inmate technicians, a graduate student coordinator, corrections staff,
scientists, zoo partners, and SPP staff. Overthe 2012 and 2013 seasons, more than 4000
Taylor’s checkerspot butterﬂies were reared
and released, with survivorship rates during
rearing of over 95%. Through this program,inmates receive training, education, andthey assist with critical research (Figure2C). Inmates helped a graduate student
at The Evergreen State College with an
oviposition preference study to examine
which host plants the butterﬂies select for
egg laying (Aubrey 2013). The researchﬁndings have improved understanding of
habitat needs and informed future restoration actions. Inmate technicians will receive
credit as co-authors when the research is
published.
Washington Conservation Nurseries
The prairie-oak landscapes in the Puget
lowlands are one of the rarest ecosystems in
the Paciﬁc Northwest region (Floberg et al.
2004). Development and ﬁre suppression
have resulted in a dramatic decline in theacreage of prairie and associated plants andanimals (Schultz et al. 2011). In 2009, SPPWashington began a native plant nursery,
cultivating 16 different species at Stafford
Creek Corrections Center, a minimum-,medium-, and maximum-security prison
for men in Aberdeen, Washington. Plant
plugs generated by the program and its six
to ten inmate technicians are installed onsites across the Puget Sound ecoregion forecosystem restoration projects and for seedproduction. The success of the ﬁrst nursery
led to the development of inmate-assisted
operations at a second prison, Washington
Corrections Center for Women, a minimum-, medium-, and maximum-security
prison in Gig Harbor, Washington, wherefour to six inmate technicians are engaged
in nursery operations full-time (Figure 2D).
Also, SPP-Washington began managing
plug production at the Center for NaturalLands Management’s Shotwell’s Landing
conservation nursery with the assistanceof a ten-person prairie restoration crewfrom Cedar Creek Corrections Center
for men.
Inmate technicians at all conservation

nurseries are responsible for various tasks
including seed-sowing, watering, pest andweed control, and data collection. Inmates
receive training in native plant cultivation, integrated pest management, seedecology, and ﬁre ecology. As with other
SPP-Washington programs, the conservation nurseries rely on a collaborative effort
for success. Each nursery site relies on
inmates, corrections staff, students, conservation partners, and SPP staff. Major
conservation partners include restoration
ecologists at the Center for Natural Lands
Management, Department of Defense biologists at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, andscientists at the Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife.
From 2009 to 2013, SPP-Washington nurseries produced nearly one million nativeplant plugs and production included 63
different species. The assistance provided
by inmate technicians more than tripled
the number of plant plugs available annually for restoration sites on Puget lowland
prairies. Inmates were also involved inimportant research, including the development of propagation protocols for rare
plants and a study examining the effects ofsmoke-infused water on seed germinationin various species.
OPPORTUNITIES FORCONSERVATION RESEARCH
Conservation and science education activities in prisons represent a signiﬁcant
opportunity for small- and large-scale
research on some of the signiﬁcant challenges faced by natural area managers. For
example, in the past 20 years, conservation
biologists have realized the importance ofgenetics in both the rearing and restorationof species (Avise 1989; Reed and Frankham
2003) and in understanding their response
to climate change, but also communityand ecosystem ecologists have recognized
the importance of genetic diversity forthe structure and function of ecosystems(Whitham et al. 2006, 2010; Hughes etal. 2008; Bailey et al. 2009). For the mostpart, land managers realize that the geneticsof organisms is important, but the ability
to restore landscapes of known genetic
makeup is beyond the scope of possibility
for some conservation agencies. Just getVolume 35 (1), 2015

ting native and at-risk organisms back into
habitats is the main goal, but the ability to
track genotypes or monitor the selective
survival of certain genotypes is hampered
by lack of time and resources. We suggestthat large-scale genetic experiments could
be installed and maintained by incarcerated
technicians as common garden studies orrestoration projects across a geographically distributed network of correctional
facilities to answer cutting-edge genes-toecosystems questions.
CONCLUSION
Repeatedly, incarcerated people have
proven to be adept, meticulous, responsible,
and innovative as conservation biology
technicians. When properly supported byexperts and engaged college students, andcarefully monitored by corrections staff,
inmates can manage complicated protocols,
perform meticulous tasks, and keep detailed
records. We partner with inmate technicians
not only in the rearing and care of rareand endangered plants and animals, butalso in the design and implementation ofscientiﬁc research that beneﬁts the conservation community. Research projects thatinvolve extensive monitoring, many hoursof hands-on care, or large-scale replication
are ideal for in-prison environments.
The SPP model of conservation biology,
scientiﬁc education, and research has been
replicated in other states beyond its founding location in Washington State. As of2013, SPP conservation biology programs
exist in Oregon, Maryland, and Ohio, and
SPP programs are being initiated in California and Utah, with more conservation
projects coming online each year. In addition, many other countries have contacted
us about our innovative methods and wehope to begin adding international SPP
sites to our Network in the near future.
To support this expansion, we wrote a
handbook of protocols (LeRoy et al. 2013)
and we provide consultations and tours ofexisting facilities. Bringing conservation
projects into prisons reduces the demandon conservation organizations for space,resources, human-power, and funding.
We envision an expansion of this model
to further reduce the costs of restorationfor environments across the United States
Volume 35 (1), 2015

and beyond.
Imagine the environmental good that could
be done if each of the 186 federal and military prisons, 1200 state prisons, and 2800
county jails (Minton 2013) in the UnitedStates partnered with state, federal or nonproﬁt conservation organizations to rearand reintroduce just one species. Endangered species experts and zoo technicians
could develop protocols to be implemented
by incarcerated technicians, which would
free time and resources for those same
experts to create new protocols instead of
spending valuable time on the daily careand feeding of these organisms. Working
with just over 100 inmate participants infour prisons in Washington State, we haveraised and released over 550 frogs, morethan 4000 butterﬂies, and almost 1 million
rare and endangered plants in only 5 years.
Consider the good that could be done by
the over 2.4 million incarcerated Americans
in all 50 states in the United States.
We see no better use for time behind bars
than the restoration of landscapes and thepotential rehabilitation of incarcerated
citizens. Although our evidence is mainly
anecdotal to date, we have heard from manyof our incarcerated technicians that theirtime on conservation projects is meaningful work and that they are proud of theircontributions to restoration efforts and thepersistence of these endangered organisms
in the wild (http://sustainabilityinprisons.
org/stories/). The SPP Network provides
inmates an opportunity to contribute tosomething larger than themselves and to
the world beyond the bars. If therapeutic
work with living things while incarcerated
can be transformative, bringing conservation projects into prisons may have theadditional beneﬁt of reducing recidivism
and making all of our communities safer
in the long run. Our collective mantra is“doing good while doing time.”
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the Washington and Oregon
Departments of Corrections and the entire SPP Network (with support from the
National Science Foundation through NSF#1204448) for their contributions andcommitment to providing inmates with

opportunities to engage in conservationand science. Funding and expert guidance
for SPP-Washington conservation biology
projects has been provided by the Washington Department of Corrections, theDepartment of Defense through the Army
Compatible Use Buffer program, the US
Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Center
for Natural Lands Management, Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Oregon Zoo,
Northwest Trek, Woodland Park Zoo and
The Evergreen State College. SPP-Oregon
projects have been supported by the Oregon
Department of Corrections, US Bureau ofLand Management, Toyota TogetherGreenand National Audubon Society, US Fish
and Wildlife Service, Native Plant Societyof Oregon, and the Institute for Applied
Ecology. We thank Chris Swan, Stacy
Moore, and Larkin Guenther for helpful
discussions and comments that improved
this manuscript.
Thomas Kaye is Executive Director at theInstitute for Applied Ecology as well as
courtesy Associate Professor in the Department of Botany and Plant Pathology
at Oregon State University. He focuses on
habitat restoration techniques for prairie
ecosystems, reintroduction methods forthreatened and endangered species, modeling responses of plants to climate change,
and bringing science and habitat conservation to underserved communities.
Kelli Bush is the Program Manager of the
Sustainability in Prisons Project (SPP),
a partnership founded by The Evergreen
State College and the WA Department ofCorrections. She manages SPP’s Taylor’s
Checkerspot Butterﬂy, Oregon Spotted
Frog, and Western Pond Turtle programs,
and oversees all SPP program operations.
She has degrees in horticulture and agriculture ecology, and two decades experience inpolicy and practice of restoration ecology,
conservation biology, and horticulture.
Chad Naugle is the Sustainability Coordinator for the Oregon Department ofCorrections. His interests are safe andsustainable operations and providing
meaningful vocational training programs
for adults in custody that deal with science,nature and ecosystem restoration.
Natural Areas Journal 95

Carri LeRoy is a member of the facultyat The Evergreen State College. She has
a PhD in Biological Sciences, a Masters
in Liberal Studies (focus in environmental
education) and degrees in Environmental
Science and International Studies. She is
the Co-Director of the Sustainability in
Prisons Project (SPP), a program thatbrings science and nature into prisonsand hopes to reduce the environmental,
economic, and human costs of prisons. SPP
was founded as a partnership between The
Evergreen State College and the WA Dept.
of Corrections, and is now an international
network of scientists, educators and prison
administrators.
LITERATURE CITED
Aubrey, D. 2013. Oviposition preference in
Taylor’s checkerspot butterﬂies (Euphydryaseditha taylori): Collaborative research andconservation with incarcerated women.
Master’s thesis, The Evergreen State College, Seattle WA.
Avise, J.C. 1989. A role for molecular genetics in the recognition and conservation ofendangered species. Trends in Ecology and
Evolution 4:279-281.
Bailey, J.K., J.A. Schweitzer, F. Ubeda, J.
Koricheva, C.J. LeRoy, M.D. Madritch,
B.J. Rehill, R.K. Bangert, D.G. Fischer,
G.J. Allan, and T.G. Whitham. 2009. From
genes to ecosystems: Synthesizing the effects of plant genetic factors across systems.
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society of London B: Biological Sciences
364:1607-1616.
Bouffard, J.A., D.L. MacKenzie, and L.J.
Hickman. 2000. Effectiveness of vocational
education and employment programs for
adult offenders: A methodology-based
analysis of the literature. Journal of Offender
Rehabilitation 31:1-41.
Cho, R.M., and J.H. Tyler. 2013. Does prisonbased adult basic education improve postrelease outcomes for male prisoners in Florida?
Crime and Delinquency 59:975-1005.
Clarke, S.E. 2011. Assessing the rehabilitative
potential of science and sustainability education in prisons: a study of the Sustainable
Prisons Project. Master’s thesis, The Evergreen State College, Seattle, WA.
Conlon, J.M., L.K. Reinert, M. Mechkarska,
M. Prajeep, M.A. Meetani, L. Coquet, T.
Jouenne, M.P. Hayes, G. Padgett-Flohr,
and L.A. Rollins-Smith. 2013. Evaluationof the skin peptide defenses of the Oregon
spotted frog Rana pretiosa against infection

96

Natural Areas Journal

by the chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium
dendrobatidis. Journal of Chemical Ecology 39:797-805.
Connelly, J.W., and C.E. Braun. 1997. Longterm changes in sage grouse Centrocercus
urophasianus populations in western North
America. Wildlife Biology 3:229-234.
Dettweiler-Robinson, E., J.D. Bakker, J.R. Evans, H. Newsome, G.M. Davies, T.A. Wirth,
D.A. Pyke, R.T. Easterly, D. Salstrom, andP.W. Dunwiddie. 2013. Outplanting Wyoming big sagebrush following wildﬁre: stock
performance and economics. Rangeland
Ecology and Management 66:657-666.
Erlich, P.R. 1988. The loss of diversity: causes
and consequences. Pp. 21-28 in E.O. Wilson,ed., Biodiversity. National Academy Press,
Washington, DC.
Floberg, J., M. Goering, G. Wilhere, C. MacDonald, C. Chappell, C. Rumsey, Z. Ferdana, A. Holt, P. Skidmore, T. Horsman, E.
Alverson, C. Tanner, M. Bryer, P. Lachetti,
A. Harcombe, B. McDonald, T. Cook, M.
Summers, D. Rolph. 2004. WillametteValley-Puget Trough-Georgia Basin Ecoregional Assessment, Vol. 1. Report, Preparedby The Nature Conservancy with support
from the Nature Conservancy of Canada,
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Natural
Resources (Natural Heritage and Nearshore
Habitat programs), Oregon State Natural
Heritage Information Center and the British
Columbia Conservation Data Centre.
Gallagher, B.E. 2013. Science and sustainability
programs in prisons: Assessing the effectsof participation on inmates. Master’s thesis,
The Evergreen State College, Seattle, WA.
Glaze, L.E., and E.J. Herberman. 2013. Correctional Populations in the United States,
2012. Bulletin NCJ 243936, Bureau of
Justice Statistics, Washington, DC.
Hobbs, R.J., and J.A. Harris. 2001. Restoration
ecology: Repairing the earth’s ecosystems
in the new millennium. Restoration Ecology
9:239-246.
Hughes, A.R., B.D. Inouye, M.T.J. Johnson, N.
Underwood, M. Velland. 2008. Ecologicalconsequences of genetic diversity. Ecology
Letters 11:609-623.
LeRoy, C.J., K. Bush, J.R. Trivett, and B. Gallagher. 2012. The Sustainability in Prisons
Project, An Overview (2004-12). Gorham
Publishing, Olympia, WA.
LeRoy, C.J., J.R. Trivett, K. Bush, J. Vanneste,
and D. Pacholke. 2013. The Sustainability in
Prisons Project Handbook. Protocols for the
SPP Network, 1st ed. Gorham Publishing,
Olympia, WA.
Lindemuth, A.L. 2014. Beyond the bars:
Landscapes for health and healing in corrections. Pp. 361-374 in K.G. Tidball and

M.E. Krasney, eds., Greening in the Red
Zone: Disaster, Resilience, and Community
Greening. Springer, Netherlands.
McAdoo, J.K., C.S. Boyd, and R.L. Sheley.
2013. Site, competition, and plant stockinﬂuence transplant success of Wyoming
big sagebrush. Rangeland Ecology andManagement 66:305-312.
McClanahan, T.R., J.E. Cinner, J. Maina, N.A.J.
Graham, T.M. Daw, S.M. Stead, A. Wamukota, K. Brown, M. Ateweberhan, V. Venus,
and N.V.C Polunin. 2008. Conservation
action in a changing climate. Conservation
Letters 1:53-59.
Miller, R.F., and L.L. Eddleman. 2001. Spatial
and temporal changes of sage-grouse habitatin the sagebrush biome. Technical Bulletin
151, Oregon State University Agricultural
Experiment Station, Corvallis, OR.
Miller, J.R., and R.J. Hobbs. 2007. Habitat
restoration—Do we know what we’re doing?
Restoration Ecology 15:382-390.
Minton, T.D. 2013. Jail inmates at midyear 2012
– Statistical tables. Bulletin NCJ 241264,
Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington,
DC. <http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/
jim12st.pdf>.
Nadkarni, N.M. 2006. The moss-in-prison
project: Disseminating science beyond
academia. Frontiers in Ecology and theEnvironment 4:442-443.
Nadkarni, N.M., and D. Pacholke. 2013.
Bringing sustainability and science to theincarcerated. Pp. 235-243 in J. Appleton,ed., Values in Sustainable Development.
Routledge, New York.
Nellis, A., and J. Chung. September 2013.
The Sentencing Project, Life Goes On:
The Historic Rise in Life Sentences in
America. Accessed 16 June 2014 <http://
sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/
inc_Life%20Goes%20On%202013.pdf>.
New, T.R., R.M. Pyle, J.A. Thomas, C.D.
Thomas, and P.C. Hammond. 1995. Butterﬂy
conservation management. Annual Review
of Entomology 40:57-83.
Norton, C.L., and B. Holguin. 2011. Promoting
ecological health: An exploratory study of anenvironmentally based program for formerly
incarcerated young adults. Ecopsychology
3:205-212.
Norton, C.L., B. Holguin, and J. Manos. 2013.
Restoration not incarceration. Pp. 172-187
in M. Gray, J. Coates, and T. Hetherington,eds., Environmental Social Work. Routledge,
New York.
Noss, R.F., E.T. LaRoe, and J.M. Scott. 1995.
Endangered ecosystems of the UnitedStates: A preliminary assessment of loss
and degradation (Vol. 28). US Departmentof the Interior, USGS Biological Resources

Volume 35 (1), 2015

Division (formerly: The National Biological
Service), Washington, DC.
Ormerod, E. 2008. Companion animals andoffender rehabilitation–experiences from aprison therapeutic community in Scotland.
Therapeutic Communities 29:285-296.
Reed, D.H., and R. Frankham. 2003. Correlation between ﬁtness and genetic diversity.
Conservation Biology 17:230-237.
Relf, P. 2006. Agriculture and health care: The
care of plants and animals for therapy and rehabilitation in the United States. Pp. 309-343
in J. Hassink and M. van Dijk, eds., Farmingfor Health. Springer, Netherlands.
Relf, D., and S. Dorn. 1995. Horticulture:
Meeting the needs of special populations.
HortTechnology 5:94-103.
Schultz, C.B., E. Henry, A. Carleton, T. Hicks,
R. Thomas, A.M. Potter, M. Collins, M.
Linders, C. Fimbrel, S. Black, H.E. Anderson, G. Diehl, S. Hamman, R. Gilbert, J.
Foster, D. Hays, D. Wilderman, R. Davenport, E. Steel, N. Page, P.L. Lilley, J. Heron,N. Kroeker, C. Webb, and B. Reader. 2011.
Conservation of prairie-oak butterﬂies in
Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia.
Northwest Science 85:361-388.
Seddon, P.J. 2010. From reintroduction toassisted colonization: moving along theconservation translocation spectrum. Restoration Ecology 18:796-802.
Seddon, P.J., D.P. Armstrong, and R.F. Maloney. 2007. Developing the science of reintroduction biology. Conservation Biology
21:303-312.
Strimple, E.O. 2003. A history of prison inmate-animal interaction programs. American
Behavioral Scientist 47:70-78.

Volume 35 (1), 2015

Thigpen, M., T. Beauclair, and S. Carroll.
2011. The greening of corrections: Creating a sustainable system. US Departmentof Justice, National Institute of Corrections,
Washington, DC.
Tyler, J.H., and J.R. Kling. 2007. Prison-based
education and re-entry into the mainstream
labor market. Pp. 227-256 in S. Bushway,
M. Stoll, and D. Weiman, eds., Barriers toReentry? The Labor Market for Released
Prisoners in Post-Industrial America. Russell
Sage Foundation Press, New York.
Ulrich, C., and N.M. Nadkarni. 2009. Sustainability research and practices in enforced
residential institutions: Collaborations of
ecologists and prisoners. Environment, Development and Sustainability 11:815-832.
[USFWS] US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2001.
Oregon Silverspot Butterﬂy (Speyeria zerene
hippolyta) Revised Recovery Plan. US Fish
and Wildlife Service, Portland, OR.
[USFWS] US Fish and Wildlife Service. 2013a.
Endangered and Threatened Species: Taylors
Checkerspot Butterﬂy; Streaked Horned
Lark; Endangered Status. Federal Register
78:61452-61503. <http://www.regulations.
gov/#!documentDetail;D=FWS-R1-ES2012-0080-0091>.
[USFWS] US Fish and Wildlife Service.
2013b. Greater Sage-grouse (Centrocercus
urophasianus) Conservation Objectives:
Final Report. US Fish and Wildlife Service,
Denver, CO.
[USFWS] US Fish and Wildlife Service.
2013c. Species Fact Sheet, Oregon Spotted
Frog (Rana pretiosa). <http://www.fws.
gov/oregonfwo/Species/Data/OregonSpottedFrog/>.

[USFWS] US Fish and Wildlife Service.
2013d. Summary of Listed Species, Listed
Populations, and Recovery Plans. Accessed
26 December 2013 <http://ecos.fws.gov/
tess_public/pub/Boxscore.do>.
Weber, S.R. 2012. Environmental education inprison: a comparison of teaching methods
and their inﬂuence on inmate attitudes
and knowledge of environmental topics.
Master’s thesis, The Evergreen State College, Seattle, WA.
Whitham, T.G., J.K. Bailey, J.A. Schweitzer,
S.M. Shuster, R.K. Bangert, C.J. LeRoy,
E.V. Lonsdorf, G.J. Allan, S.P. DiFazio,
B.M. Potts, D.G. Fischer, C.A. Gehring,
R.L. Lindroth, J.C. Marks, S.C. Hart, G.M.
Wimp, and S.C. Wooley. 2006. A framework
for community and ecosystem genetics:
From genes to ecosystems. Nature Reviews
Genetics 7:510-523.
Whitham, T.G., C.A. Gehring, L.M. Evans,
C.J. LeRoy, R.K. Bangert, J.A. Schweitzer,
G.J. Allan, R.C. Barbour, D.G. Fischer,
B.M. Potts, and J.K. Bailey. 2010. A community and ecosystem genetics approach toconservation biology and management. Pp.
50-62 in J.A. DeWoody, J.W. Bickham, C.H.
Michler, K.M. Nichols, O.E. Rhodes, andK.E. Woeste, eds., Molecular Approaches
to Natural Resource Conservation andManagement. Cambridge University Press,
New York.
Wilson, D.B., C.A. Gallagher, and D.L.
MacKenzie. 2000. A meta-analysis of corrections-based education, vocation, andwork programs for adult offenders. Journalof Research in Crime and Delinquency
37:347-368.

Natural Areas Journal 97