The Crowded Sea: Incorporating Multiple Marine Activities in Conservation Plans Can Significantly Alter Spatial Priorities

Successful implementation of marine conservation plans is largely inhibited by inadequate consideration of the broader social and economic context within which conservation operates. Marine waters and their biodiversity are shared by a host of stakeholders, such as commercial fishers, recreational users and offshore developers. Hence, to improve implementation success of conservation plans, we must incorporate other marine activities while explicitly examining trade-offs that may be required. In this study, we test how the inclusion of multiple marine activities can shape conservation plans. We used the entire Mediterranean territorial waters of Israel as a case study to compare four planning scenarios with increasing levels of complexity, where additional zones, threats and activities were added (e.g., commercial fisheries, hydrocarbon exploration interests, aquaculture, and shipping lanes). We applied the marine zoning decision support tool Marxan to each planning scenario and tested a) the ability of each scenario to reach biodiversity targets, b) the change in opportunity cost and c) the alteration of spatial conservation priorities. We found that by including increasing numbers of marine activities and zones in the planning process, greater compromises are required to reach conservation objectives. Complex plans with more activities incurred greater opportunity cost and did not reach biodiversity targets as easily as simplified plans with less marine activities. We discovered that including hydrocarbon data in the planning process significantly alters spatial priorities. For the territorial waters of Israel we found that in order to protect at least 10% of the range of 166 marine biodiversity features there would be a loss of ∼15% of annual commercial fishery revenue and ∼5% of prospective hydrocarbon revenue. This case study follows an illustrated framework for adopting a transparent systematic process to balance biodiversity goals and economic considerations within a country''s territorial waters.     

Restricted-Range Fishes and the Conservation of Brazilian Freshwaters

Background

Freshwaters are the most threatened ecosystems on earth. Although recent assessments provide data on global priority regions for freshwater conservation, local scale priorities remain unknown. Refining the scale of global biodiversity assessments (both at terrestrial and freshwater realms) and translating these into conservation priorities on the ground remains a major challenge to biodiversity science, and depends directly on species occurrence data of high taxonomic and geographic resolution. Brazil harbors the richest freshwater ichthyofauna in the world, but knowledge on endemic areas and conservation in Brazilian rivers is still scarce.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Using data on environmental threats and revised species distribution data we detect and delineate 540 small watershed areas harboring 819 restricted-range fishes in Brazil. Many of these areas are already highly threatened, as 159 (29%) watersheds have lost more than 70% of their original vegetation cover, and only 141 (26%) show significant overlap with formally protected areas or indigenous lands. We detected 220 (40%) critical watersheds overlapping hydroelectric dams or showing both poor formal protection and widespread habitat loss; these sites harbor 344 endemic fish species that may face extinction if no conservation action is in place in the near future.

Conclusions/Significance

We provide the first analysis of site-scale conservation priorities in the richest freshwater ecosystems of the globe. Our results corroborate the hypothesis that freshwater biodiversity has been neglected in former conservation assessments. The study provides a simple and straightforward method for detecting freshwater priority areas based on endemism and threat, and represents a starting point for integrating freshwater and terrestrial conservation in representative and biogeographically consistent site-scale conservation strategies, that may be scaled-up following naturally linked drainage systems. Proper management (e. g. forestry code enforcement, landscape planning) and conservation (e. g. formal protection) of the 540 watersheds detected herein will be decisive in avoiding species extinction in the richest aquatic ecosystems on the planet.     

Identifying Corridors among Large Protected Areas in the United States

Conservation scientists emphasize the importance of maintaining a connected network of protected areas to prevent ecosystems and populations from becoming isolated, reduce the risk of extinction, and ultimately sustain biodiversity. Keeping protected areas connected in a network is increasingly recognized as a conservation priority in the current era of rapid climate change. Models that identify suitable linkages between core areas have been used to prioritize potentially important corridors for maintaining functional connectivity. Here, we identify the most “natural” (i.e., least human-modified) corridors between large protected areas in the contiguous Unites States. We aggregated results from multiple connectivity models to develop a composite map of corridors reflecting agreement of models run under different assumptions about how human modification of land may influence connectivity. To identify which land units are most important for sustaining structural connectivity, we used the composite map of corridors to evaluate connectivity priorities in two ways: (1) among land units outside of our pool of large core protected areas and (2) among units administratively protected as Inventoried Roadless (IRAs) or Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs). Corridor values varied substantially among classes of “unprotected” non-core land units, and land units of high connectivity value and priority represent diverse ownerships and existing levels of protections. We provide a ranking of IRAs and WSAs that should be prioritized for additional protection to maintain minimal human modification. Our results provide a coarse-scale assessment of connectivity priorities for maintaining a connected network of protected areas.     

Incorporating Conservation Zone Effectiveness for Protecting Biodiversity in Marine Planning

Establishing different types of conservation zones is becoming commonplace. However, spatial prioritization methods that can accommodate multiple zones are poorly understood in theory and application. It is typically assumed that management regulations across zones have differential levels of effectiveness (“zone effectiveness”) for biodiversity protection, but the influence of zone effectiveness on achieving conservation targets has not yet been explored. Here, we consider the zone effectiveness of three zones: permanent closure, partial protection, and open, for planning for the protection of five different marine habitats in the Vatu-i-Ra Seascape, Fiji. We explore the impact of differential zone effectiveness on the location and costs of conservation priorities. We assume that permanent closure zones are fully effective at protecting all habitats, open zones do not contribute towards the conservation targets and partial protection zones lie between these two extremes. We use four different estimates for zone effectiveness and three different estimates for zone cost of the partial protection zone. To enhance the practical utility of the approach, we also explore how much of each traditional fishing ground can remain open for fishing while still achieving conservation targets. Our results show that all of the high priority areas for permanent closure zones would not be a high priority when the zone effectiveness of the partial protection zone is equal to that of permanent closure zones. When differential zone effectiveness and costs are considered, the resulting marine protected area network consequently increases in size, with more area allocated to permanent closure zones to meet conservation targets. By distributing the loss of fishing opportunity equitably among local communities, we find that 84–88% of each traditional fishing ground can be left open while still meeting conservation targets. Finally, we summarize the steps for developing marine zoning that accounts for zone effectiveness.     

Crop Expansion and Conservation Priorities in Tropical Countries

Expansion of cropland in tropical countries is one of the principal causes of biodiversity loss, and threatens to undermine progress towards meeting the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. To understand this threat better, we analysed data on crop distribution and expansion in 128 tropical countries, assessed changes in area of the main crops and mapped overlaps between conservation priorities and cultivation potential. Rice was the single crop grown over the largest area, especially in tropical forest biomes. Cropland in tropical countries expanded by c. 48,000 km² per year from 1999–2008. The countries which added the greatest area of new cropland were Nigeria, Indonesia, Ethiopia, Sudan and Brazil. Soybeans and maize are the crops which expanded most in absolute area. Other crops with large increases included rice, sorghum, oil palm, beans, sugar cane, cow peas, wheat and cassava. Areas of high cultivation potential—while bearing in mind that political and socio-economic conditions can be as influential as biophysical ones—may be vulnerable to conversion in the future. These include some priority areas for biodiversity conservation in tropical countries (e.g., Frontier Forests and High Biodiversity Wilderness Areas), which have previously been identified as having ‘low vulnerability’, in particular in central Africa and northern Australia. There are also many other smaller areas which are important for biodiversity and which have high cultivation potential (e.g., in the fringes of the Amazon basin, in the Paraguayan Chaco, and in the savanna woodlands of the Sahel and East Africa). We highlight the urgent need for more effective sustainability standards and policies addressing both production and consumption of tropical commodities, including robust land-use planning in agricultural frontiers, establishment of new protected areas or REDD+ projects in places agriculture has not yet reached, and reduction or elimination of incentives for land-demanding bioenergy feedstocks.     

尤溪县生物多样性保护优先地区分析

选择人类活动频繁的常绿阔叶林林区具有代表性的福建尤溪县进行了生物多样性保护的优先性分析。在多次实地调查基础上,利用野生动物野外实地样带调查数据,已有的珍稀淑危鸟,兽和植物物种的分布资料,同时结合利用地理信息系统软件ARC/INFO数字化1：10万林相图和1：5万地形图,建立了基于GIS的尤溪县生物多样性信息系统,然后根据物种多样性,珍稀濒危物种保护和生态系统保护目标,确立了保护优先性分析原则,即珍稀濒危物种尽可能包含在保护区和保护小区内,同时在优先保护区尽可能包含更多的其它物种,用最新的森林分布图及调查物种分布与生境关系,生态系统在保护物种与生态系统功能等方面的作用等,提出了生态系统的保护优先地区,将提出保护优先地区与已建保护小区和保护点分布图进行叠加分析表明,保护小区和保护点的方法是保护珍稀濒危物种的有效方法,但是需要考虑保护小区之间的联系,在对大型哺乳动物保护时需要建立面积较大的自然保护区,最后,提出了建立自然保护区规划。     

基于生物多样性和生态系统服务的青藏高原保护优先区和保护空缺识别

协同生物多样性保护和生态系统服务功能维持对制定系统性保护规划具有重要意义。研究以青藏高原为研究区,应用Maxent模型模拟了重点植物的空间分布,结合世界保护联盟(IUCN)重点动物空间分布数据和生态系统服务空间分布,利用Zonation模型依次识别了基于单一因素的保护优先区以及集成生物多样性和生态系统服务的保护优先区,评估了青藏高原现有自然保护地对保护优先区、重要物种及生态系统服务的保护状况和保护空缺。结果表明:(1)青藏高原保护优先区保护价值呈现由东南向西北递减趋势,优先区主要分布在青藏高原东南缘喜马拉雅山地、雅鲁藏布江中游河谷及横断山区等区域,生物多样性保护优先区和生态系统服务保护优先区分布略有差异,存在43.2%的空间重叠;(2)在重要物种保护上,自然保护地对两栖动物的保护率最高,平均保护了38.2%,哺乳动物次之(24%),爬行动物的保护率较低,仅为10.2%。对生态系统服务功能覆盖率分别是44.1%(防风固沙)、27.1%(水源涵养)、22.3%(土壤保持)、17.1%(碳固定)和16.6%(洪水调蓄);(3)自然保护地对研究识别的保护优先区存在保护空缺,仅覆盖了26.8%的集成保护优先区,Ⅰ级、Ⅱ级和Ⅲ级优先区保护空缺面积占青藏高原面积的7.2%、6.9%和7.7%。研究结果可为青藏高原以国家公园为主体的自然保护地体系优化提供科学依据与理论支撑。     

Global versus Local Conservation Focus of U.S. State Agency Endangered Bird Species Lists

The development of species priorities for conservation at local or regional scales (for example, within a state or province) poses an interesting paradox. One the one hand, locally or regionally-derived species priorities may lead to greater interest in and resources directed to biodiversity conservation by local or regional institutions. On the other hand, locally or regionally-derived species priorities could overlook national or global priorities. We assessed U.S. state government agency endangered-threatened bird lists to determine the comparative representation of species of global versus local conservation significance on them. State lists tended to be represented primarily by species of low global risk-low global responsibility (range: 15–100%; mean 51%) and high global risk-high global responsibility (range: 0–73%; mean 35%). In 25 states, more than half of the species on the state lists were in the low global risk-low global responsibility category. Most U.S. state agency lists represent a combined strategy of highlighting species of both local and global conservation significance. Even with this combined local-global strategy, most state lists were predominated by species that represent local but not global conservation significance. Such a strategy could have profound negative consequences for many species that are not formally recognized under national endangered species protections but that are also left off of state-level endangered species lists.     

Conservation planning for ecosystem services

Despite increasing attention to the human dimension of conservation projects, a rigorous, systematic methodology for planning for ecosystem services has not been developed. This is in part because flows of ecosystem services remain poorly characterized at local-to-regional scales, and their protection has not generally been made a priority. We used a spatially explicit conservation planning framework to explore the trade-offs and opportunities for aligning conservation goals for biodiversity with six ecosystem services (carbon storage, flood control, forage production, outdoor recreation, crop pollination, and water provision) in the Central Coast ecoregion of California, United States. We found weak positive and some weak negative associations between the priority areas for biodiversity conservation and the flows of the six ecosystem services across the ecoregion. Excluding the two agriculture-focused services—crop pollination and forage production—eliminates all negative correlations. We compared the degree to which four contrasting conservation network designs protect biodiversity and the flow of the six services. We found that biodiversity conservation protects substantial collateral flows of services. Targeting ecosystem services directly can meet the multiple ecosystem services and biodiversity goals more efficiently but cannot substitute for targeted biodiversity protection (biodiversity losses of 44% relative to targeting biodiversity alone). Strategically targeting only biodiversity plus the four positively associated services offers much promise (relative biodiversity losses of 7%). Here we present an initial analytical framework for integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services in conservation planning and illustrate its application. We found that although there are important potential trade-offs between conservation for biodiversity and for ecosystem services, a systematic planning framework offers scope for identifying valuable synergies.     

Overlooked Mountain Rock Pools in Deserts Are Critical Local Hotspots of Biodiversity

BackgroundThe world is undergoing exceptional biodiversity loss. Most conservation efforts target biodiversity hotspots at large scales. Such approach overlooks small-sized local hotspots, which may be rich in endemic and highly threatened species. We explore the importance of mountain rock pools (gueltas) as local biodiversity hotspots in the Sahara-Sahel. Specifically, we considered how many vertebrates (total and endemics) use gueltas, what factors predict species richness, and which gueltas are of most priority for conservation. We expected to provide management recommendations, improve local biodiversity conservation, and simultaneously contribute with a framework for future enhancement of local communities’ economy. The identification of local hotspots of biodiversity is important for revaluating global conservation priorities.Conclusion/SignificanceGueltas are crucial for local biodiversity conservation and human activities. They require urgent management plans in Mauritania’s mountains. They could provide refugia under climate change being important for long-term conservation of Sahara-Sahel biodiversity. Given their disproportional importance in relation to their size, they are local hotspots of biodiversity deserving global attention.