A decision framework for prioritizing multiple management actions for threatened marine megafauna.

Resources for conserving biodiversity are invariably insufficient. This situation creates the need for transparent, systematic frameworks to help stakeholders prioritize the allocation of resources across multiple management actions. We developed a novel framework that explicitly prioritizes actions to minimize the impacts of several threats across a species' range. The framework uses a budget constraint and maximizes conservation outcomes from a set of management actions, accounting for the likelihood of the action being successfully applied and accepted by local and Indigenous communities. This approach is novel in that it integrates local knowledge and expert opinion with optimization software, thereby minimizing assumptions about likelihood of success of actions and their effectiveness. To test the framework, we used the eastern Gulf of Carpentaria and Torres Strait population of the flatback turtle, Natator depressus, as a case study. This approach allowed the framework to be applied in a data-poor context, a situation common in conservation planning. The framework identified the best set of actions to maximize the conservation of flatback eggs for scenarios with different budgets and management parameters and allowed comparisons between optimized and preselected scenarios. Optimized scenarios considered all implementable actions to explore how to best allocate resources with a specified budget and focus. Preselected scenarios were used to evaluate current allocations of funds and/or potential budget allocations suggested by different stakeholders. Scenarios that used a combination of aerial and ground strategies to reduce predation of eggs performed better than scenarios that focused only on reducing harvest of eggs. The performances of optimized and preselected scenarios were generally similar among scenarios that targeted similar threats. However, the cost-effectiveness of optimized scenarios was usually higher than that of preselected scenarios, demonstrating the value of conducting a systematic optimization approach. Our method provides a foundation for more effective conservation investments and guidance to prioritize actions within recovery plans while considering the sociopolitical and cultural context of decisions. The framework can be adapted easily to a wide range of species, geographical scales, and life stages.

Guiding principles for the improved governance of port and shipping impacts in the Great Barrier Reef.

The Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region of Queensland, Australia, encompasses a complex and diverse array of tropical marine ecosystems of global significance. The region is also a World Heritage Area and largely within one of the world's best managed marine protected areas. However, a recent World Heritage Committee report drew attention to serious governance problems associated with the management of ports and shipping. We review the impacts of ports and shipping on biodiversity in the GBR, and propose a series of guiding principles to improve the current governance arrangements. Implementing these principles will increase the capacity of decision makers to minimize the impacts of ports and shipping on biodiversity, and will provide certainty and clarity to port operators and developers. A 'business as usual' approach could lead to the GBR's inclusion on the List of World Heritage in Danger in 2014.

Effects of errors and gaps in spatial data sets on assessment of conservation progress.

Data on the location and extent of protected areas, ecosystems, and species' distributions are essential for determining gaps in biodiversity protection and identifying future conservation priorities. However, these data sets always come with errors in the maps and associated metadata. Errors are often overlooked in conservation studies, despite their potential negative effects on the reported extent of protection of species and ecosystems. We used 3 case studies to illustrate the implications of 3 sources of errors in reporting progress toward conservation objectives: protected areas with unknown boundaries that are replaced by buffered centroids, propagation of multiple errors in spatial data, and incomplete protected-area data sets. As of 2010, the frequency of protected areas with unknown boundaries in the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) caused the estimated extent of protection of 37.1% of the terrestrial Neotropical mammals to be overestimated by an average 402.8% and of 62.6% of species to be underestimated by an average 10.9%. Estimated level of protection of the world's coral reefs was 25% higher when using recent finer-resolution data on coral reefs as opposed to globally available coarse-resolution data. Accounting for additional data sets not yet incorporated into WDPA contributed up to 6.7% of additional protection to marine ecosystems in the Philippines. We suggest ways for data providers to reduce the errors in spatial and ancillary data and ways for data users to mitigate the effects of these errors on biodiversity assessments.

Effects of human population density and proximity to markets on coral reef fishes vulnerable to extinction by fishing.

Coral reef fisheries are crucial to the livelihoods of tens of millions of people; yet, widespread habitat degradation and unsustainable fishing are causing severe depletion of stocks of reef fish. Understanding how social and economic factors, such as human population density, access to external markets, and modernization interact with fishing and habitat degradation to affect fish stocks is vital to sustainable management of coral reef fisheries. We used fish survey data, national social and economic data, and path analyses to assess whether these factors explain variation in biomass of coral reef fishes among 25 sites in Solomon Islands. We categorized fishes into 3 groups on the basis of life-history characteristics associated with vulnerability to extinction by fishing (high, medium, and low vulnerability). The biomass of fish with low vulnerability was positively related to habitat condition. The biomass of fishes with high vulnerability was negatively related to fishing conducted with efficient gear. Use of efficient gear, in turn, was strongly and positively related to both population density and market proximity. This result suggests local population pressure and external markets have additive negative effects on vulnerable reef fish. Biomass of the fish of medium vulnerability was not explained by fishing intensity or habitat condition, which suggests these species may be relatively resilient to both habitat degradation and fishing.

Critical research needs for managing coral reef marine protected areas: perspectives of academics and managers.

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a primary policy instrument for managing and protecting coral reefs. Successful MPAs ultimately depend on knowledge-based decision making, where scientific research is integrated into management actions. Fourteen coral reef MPA managers and sixteen academics from eleven research, state and federal government institutions each outlined at least five pertinent research needs for improving the management of MPAs situated in Australian coral reefs. From this list of 173 key questions, we asked members of each group to rank questions in order of urgency, redundancy and importance, which allowed us to explore the extent of perceptional mismatch and overlap among the two groups. Our results suggest the mismatch among MPA managers and academics is small, with no significant difference among the groups in terms of their respective research interests, or the type of questions they pose. However, managers prioritised spatial management and monitoring as research themes, whilst academics identified climate change, resilience, spatial management, fishing and connectivity as the most important topics. Ranking of the posed questions by the two groups was also similar, although managers were less confident about the achievability of the posed research questions and whether questions represented a knowledge gap. We conclude that improved collaboration and knowledge transfer among management and academic groups can be used to achieve similar objectives and enhance the knowledge-based management of MPAs.

Conservation planning in forest landscapes of Fennoscandia and an approach to the challenge of countdown 2010.

Effective management of biodiversity in production landscapes requires a conservation approach that acknowledges the complexity of ecological and cultural systems in time and space. Fennoscandia has experienced major loss of forest biodiversity caused by intensive forestry. Therefore, the Countdown 2010 initiative to halt the loss of biodiversity in Europe is highly relevant to forest management in this part of the continent. As a contribution to meeting the challenge posed by Countdown 2010, we developed a spatially explicit conservation-planning exercise that used regional knowledge on forest biodiversity to provide support for managers attempting to halt further loss of biological diversity in the region. We used current data on the distribution of 169 species (including 68 red-listed species) representing different forest habitats and ecologies along with forest data within the frame of modern conservation software to devise a map of priority areas for conservation. The top 10% of priority areas contained over 75% of red-listed species locations and 41% of existing protected forest areas, but only 58% of these top priorities overlapped with core areas identified previously in a regional strategy that used more qualitative methods. We argue for aggregating present and future habitat value of single management units to landscape and regional scales to identify potential bottlenecks in habitat availability linked to landscape dynamics. To address the challenge of Countdown 2010, a general framework for forest conservation planning in Fennoscandia needs to cover different conservation issues, tools, and data needs.

Representing biodiversity: data and procedures for identifying priority areas for conservation.

Biodiversity priority areas together should represent the biodiversity of the region they are situated in. To achieve this, biodiversity has to be measured, biodiversity goals have to be set and methods for implementing those goals have to be applied. Each of these steps is discussed. Because it is impossible to measure all of biodiversity, biodiversity surrogates have to be used. Examples are taxa sub-sets, species assemblages and environmental domains. Each of these has different strengths and weaknesses, which are described and evaluated. In real-world priority setting, some combination of these is usually employed. While a desirable goal might be to sample all of biodiversity from genotypes to ecosystems, an achievable goal is to represent, at some agreed level, each of the biodiversity features chosen as surrogates. Explicit systematic procedures for implementing such a goal are described. These procedures use complementarity, a measure of the contribution each area in a region makes to the conservation goal, to estimate irreplaceability and flexibility, measures of the extent to which areas can be substituted for one another in order to take competing land uses into account. Persistence and vulnerability, which also play an important role in the priority setting process, are discussed briefly.

Persistence and vulnerability: retaining biodiversity in the landscape and in protected areas.

An objective of biodiversity conservation activities is to minimize the exposure of biodiversity features to threatening processes and to ensure, as far as possible, that biodiversity persists in the landscape. We discuss how issues of vulnerability and persistence can and should be addressed at all stages of the conservation planning and implementation process. Procedures for estimating the likelihood of persistence and for measuring degrees of vulnerability at different spatial and temporal scales using subjective assessments, rules of thumb and analytical and simulation models are reviewed. The application of information on vulnerability and persistence to conservation planning and management is discussed under the headings of natural dynamics, replication of protection, levels of representation, source and sink population structures, refuges and critical resources, reserve design, habitat fragmentation and levels of management.

Integrating biosystematic data into conservation planning: perspectives from southern Africa's Succulent Karoo.

In this paper we explore the role that biosystematists can play in conservation planning. Conservation planning concerns the location and design of reserves that both represent the biodiversity of a region and enable the persistence of that biodiversity by maintaining key ecological and evolutionary processes. For conservation planning to be effective, quantitative targets are needed for the spatial components of a region that reflect evolutionary processes. Using examples from southern Africa's Succulent Karoo, we demonstrate how spatially explicit data on morphological variation within taxa provide essential information for conservation planning in that such variation represents an important surrogate for the spatial component of lineage diversification. We also provide an example of how the spatial components of evolutionary processes can be identified and targeted for conservation action. Key to this understanding are the recognition and description of taxonomic units at all spatial scales. Without the recognition of subspecific variation, it is difficult to formulate evolutionary hypotheses, let alone set quantitative targets for the conservation of this variation. Given the escalating threats to biodiversity, and the importance of planning for persistence by incorporating ecological and evolutionary processes into conservation plans, it is essential that systematists develop hypotheses on the spatial surrogates for these processes for a wide range of lineages. The important questions for systematists to be asking are (1) how is variation distributed in the landscape, and (2) how did it come about? Conservation planners too need to highlight these spatial components for conservation action.

Rapid plant diversification: planning for an evolutionary future.

Systematic conservation planning is a branch of conservation biology that seeks to identify spatially explicit options for the preservation of biodiversity. Alternative systems of conservation areas are predictions about effective ways of promoting the persistence of biodiversity; therefore, they should consider not only biodiversity pattern but also the ecological and evolutionary processes that maintain and generate species. Most research and application, however, has focused on pattern representation only. This paper outlines the development of a conservation system designed to preserve biodiversity pattern and process in the context of a rapidly changing environment. The study area is the Cape Floristic Region (CFR), a biodiversity hotspot of global significance, located in southwestern Africa. This region has experienced rapid (post-Pliocene) ecological diversification of many plant lineages; there are numerous genera with large clusters of closely related species (flocks) that have subdivided habitats at a very fine scale. The challenge is to design conservation systems that will preserve both the pattern of large numbers of species and various natural processes, including the potential for lineage turnover. We outline an approach for designing a system of conservation areas to incorporate the spatial components of the evolutionary processes that maintain and generate biodiversity in the CFR. We discuss the difficulty of assessing the requirements for pattern versus process representation in the face of ongoing threats to biodiversity, the difficulty of testing the predictions of alternative conservation systems, and the widespread need in conservation planning to incorporate and set targets for the spatial components (or surrogates) of processes.

Systematic conservation planning.

The realization of conservation goals requires strategies for managing whole landscapes including areas allocated to both production and protection. Reserves alone are not adequate for nature conservation but they are the cornerstone on which regional strategies are built. Reserves have two main roles. They should sample or represent the biodiversity of each region and they should separate this biodiversity from processes that threaten its persistence. Existing reserve systems throughout the world contain a biased sample of biodiversity, usually that of remote places and other areas that are unsuitable for commercial activities. A more systematic approach to locating and designing reserves has been evolving and this approach will need to be implemented if a large proportion of today's biodiversity is to exist in a future of increasing numbers of people and their demands on natural resources.

Beyond opportunism: Key principles for systematic reserve selection.

The intention and practice of conservation reserve selection are different. A major reason for systems of reserves is to sustain biological diversity. This involves protecting examples of as many natural features, e.g. species, communities or environments, as possible. In reality, however, new reserves have rarely been dedicated for their representation of features. Furthermore, the opportunism that has characterized the development of reserve systems can actually jeopardize the representation of all features in reserves through the inefficient allocation of limited resources. More systematic approaches are essential if reserves are to play their role in protecting biodiversity. Some basic principles for conservation planning are emerging from recent systematic procedures for reserve selection. These principles will help to link intention and practice.