Are forested buffers an effective conservation strategy for riparian fauna? An assessment using meta-analysis.

Historically, forested riparian buffers have been created to provide protection for aquatic organisms and aquatic ecosystem functions. Increasingly, new and existing riparian buffers are being used also to meet terrestrial conservation requirements. To test the effectiveness of riparian buffers for conserving terrestrial fauna, we conducted a meta-analysis using published data from 397 comparisons of species abundance in riparian buffers and unharvested (reference) riparian sites. The response of terrestrial species to riparian buffers was not consistent between taxonomic groups; bird and arthropod abundances were significantly greater in buffers relative to unharvested areas, whereas amphibian abundance decreased. Edge-preferring species were more abundant in buffer sites than reference sites, whereas species associated with interior habitat were not significantly different in abundance. The degree of buffer effect on animal abundance was unrelated to buffer width; wider buffers did not result in greater similarity between reference and buffer sites. However, responses to buffer treatment were more variable in buffers <50 m wide, a commonly prescribed width in many management plans. Our results indicate that current buffer prescriptions do not maintain most terrestrial organisms in buffer strips at levels comparable to undisturbed sites.

Protected areas and prospects for endangered species conservation in Canada.

Reserve networks figure prominently in conservation strategies that aim to reduce extinction rates. We tested the effectiveness of the current reserve network at protecting species at risk in Canada, where relatively extensive wilderness areas remain. We compared numbers of terrestrial species at risk included in existing reserves to randomly generated networks with the same total area and number of reserves. Existing reserve networks rarely performed better than randomly selected areas and several included fewer endangered species than expected by chance, particularly in the most biologically imperiled regions. The extent of protected area and density of species at risk were unrelated at either broad (countrywide) or finer spatial scales (50 x 50 km grids), although there was a tendency for the most threatened regions of the country to have few or no protected areas (1.5% of areas with >30 endangered species were in reserves). Although reserves will play a useful role in conserving endangered species that occur within them, reducing extinction rates in a region with much of the world's remaining wilderness will require integrating conservation strategies with agricultural and urban land-use plans outside formally protected areas.