Assessing ecological function in the context of species recovery.

Species interactions matter to conservation. Setting an ambitious recovery target for a species requires considering the size, density, and demographic structure of its populations such that they fulfill the interactions, roles, and functions of the species in the ecosystems in which they are embedded. A recently proposed framework for an International Union for Conservation of Nature Green List of Species formalizes this requirement by defining a fully recovered species in terms of representation, viability, and functionality. Defining and quantifying ecological function from the viewpoint of species recovery is challenging in concept and application, but also an opportunity to insert ecological theory into conservation practice. We propose 2 complementary approaches to assessing a species' ecological functions: confirmation (listing interactions of the species, identifying ecological processes and other species involved in these interactions, and quantifying the extent to which the species contributes to the identified ecological process) and elimination (inferring functionality by ruling out symptoms of reduced functionality, analogous to the red-list approach that focuses on symptoms of reduced viability). Despite the challenges, incorporation of functionality into species recovery planning is possible in most cases and it is essential to a conservation vision that goes beyond preventing extinctions and aims to restore a species to levels beyond what is required for its viability. This vision focuses on conservation and recovery at the species level and sees species as embedded in ecosystems, influencing and being influenced by the processes in those ecosystems. Thus, it connects and integrates conservation at the species and ecosystem levels.

Evaluación de la Función Ecológica en el Contexto de Recuperación de Especies Resumen Las interacciones entre especies son de importancia para la conservación. La definición de una meta ambiciosa de recuperación para una especie requiere considerar el tamaño, la densidad y la estructura demográfica de sus poblaciones de tal manera que lleven a cabo las interacciones, papeles y funciones de las especies en los ecosistemas donde viven. Un marco de referencia propuesto recientemente para una Lista Verde de Especies de la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN)formaliza este requerimiento mediante la definición de una especie completamente recuperada en términos de su representación, viabilidad y funcionalidad. La definición y cuantificación de la función ecológica desde la perspectiva de la recuperación de especies es un reto conceptual y de aplicación, pero también es un oportunidad para insertar la teoría ecológica en la práctica de la conservación. Proponemos 2 métodos complementarios para evaluar las funciones ecológicas de una especie: confirmación (listado de interacciones de la especie, identificación de procesos ecológicos y otras especies involucradas en estas interacciones) y eliminación (inferencia de la funcionalidad descartando los síntomas de reducción en la funcionalidad, análogo al método de la lista roja que enfoca los síntomas de reducción en la viabilidad). A pesar de los retos, la incorporación de la funcionalidad en la planificación de la recuperación de especies es posible en la mayoría de los casos y es esencial para una visión de la conservación que vaya más allá de la prevención de extinciones y que tenga como objetivo restaurar a una especie a niveles más allá de lo que se requiere para su viabilidad. Su visión se centra en la conservación y recuperación a nivel de especies y ve a las especies como componentes de los ecosistemas, influyendo y siendo influenciadas por los procesos en esos ecosistemas. Así, conecta e integra la conservación a nivel de especies y ecosistemas.

From Bottleneck to Breakthrough: Urbanization and the Future of Biodiversity Conservation.

For the first time in the Anthropocene, the global demographic and economic trends that have resulted in unprecedented destruction of the environment are now creating the necessary conditions for a possible renaissance of nature. Drawing reasonable inferences from current patterns, we can predict that 100 years from now, the Earth could be inhabited by between 6 and 8 billion people, with very few remaining in extreme poverty, most living in towns and cities, and nearly all participating in a technologically driven, interconnected market economy. Building on the scholarship of others in demography, economics, sociology, and conservation biology, here, we articulate a theory of social-environmental change that describes the simultaneous and interacting effects of urban lifestyles on fertility, poverty alleviation, and ideation. By recognizing the shifting dynamics of these macrodrivers, conservation practice has the potential to transform itself from a discipline managing declines ("bottleneck") to a transformative movement of recovery ("breakthrough").

Catastrophic Declines in Wilderness Areas Undermine Global Environment Targets.

Humans have altered terrestrial ecosystems for millennia [1], yet wilderness areas still remain as vital refugia where natural ecological and evolutionary processes operate with minimal human disturbance [2-4], underpinning key regional- and planetary-scale functions [5, 6]. Despite the myriad values of wilderness areas-as critical strongholds for endangered biodiversity [7], for carbon storage and sequestration [8], for buffering and regulating local climates [9], and for supporting many of the world's most politically and economically marginalized communities [10]-they are almost entirely ignored in multilateral environmental agreements. This is because they are assumed to be relatively free from threatening processes and therefore are not a priority for conservation efforts [11, 12]. Here we challenge this assertion using new comparable maps of global wilderness following methods established in the original "last of the wild" analysis [13] to examine the change in extent since the early 1990s. We demonstrate alarming losses comprising one-tenth (3.3 million km2) of global wilderness areas over the last two decades, particularly in the Amazon (30%) and central Africa (14%). We assess increases in the protection of wilderness over the same time frame and show that these efforts are failing to keep pace with the rate of wilderness loss, which is nearly double the rate of protection. Our findings underscore an immediate need for international policies to recognize the vital values of wilderness and the unprecedented threats they face and to underscore urgent large-scale, multifaceted actions needed to maintain them.

Sixteen years of change in the global terrestrial human footprint and implications for biodiversity conservation.

Human pressures on the environment are changing spatially and temporally, with profound implications for the planet's biodiversity and human economies. Here we use recently available data on infrastructure, land cover and human access into natural areas to construct a globally standardized measure of the cumulative human footprint on the terrestrial environment at 1 km(2) resolution from 1993 to 2009. We note that while the human population has increased by 23% and the world economy has grown 153%, the human footprint has increased by just 9%. Still, 75% the planet's land surface is experiencing measurable human pressures. Moreover, pressures are perversely intense, widespread and rapidly intensifying in places with high biodiversity. Encouragingly, we discover decreases in environmental pressures in the wealthiest countries and those with strong control of corruption. Clearly the human footprint on Earth is changing, yet there are still opportunities for conservation gains.

Global terrestrial Human Footprint maps for 1993 and 2009.

Remotely-sensed and bottom-up survey information were compiled on eight variables measuring the direct and indirect human pressures on the environment globally in 1993 and 2009. This represents not only the most current information of its type, but also the first temporally-consistent set of Human Footprint maps. Data on human pressures were acquired or developed for: 1) built environments, 2) population density, 3) electric infrastructure, 4) crop lands, 5) pasture lands, 6) roads, 7) railways, and 8) navigable waterways. Pressures were then overlaid to create the standardized Human Footprint maps for all non-Antarctic land areas. A validation analysis using scored pressures from 3114×1 km(2) random sample plots revealed strong agreement with the Human Footprint maps. We anticipate that the Human Footprint maps will find a range of uses as proxies for human disturbance of natural systems. The updated maps should provide an increased understanding of the human pressures that drive macro-ecological patterns, as well as for tracking environmental change and informing conservation science and application.

Global status of and prospects for protection of terrestrial geophysical diversity.

Conservation of representative facets of geophysical diversity may help conserve biological diversity as the climate changes. We conducted a global classification of terrestrial geophysical diversity and analyzed how land protection varies across geophysical diversity types. Geophysical diversity was classified in terms of soil type, elevation, and biogeographic realm and then compared to the global distribution of protected areas in 2012. We found that 300 (45%) of 672 broad geophysical diversity types currently meet the Convention on Biological Diversity's Aichi Target 11 of 17% terrestrial areal protection, which suggested that efforts to implement geophysical diversity conservation have a substantive basis on which to build. However, current protected areas were heavily biased toward high elevation and low fertility soils. We assessed 3 scenarios of protected area expansion and found that protection focused on threatened species, if fully implemented, would also protect an additional 29% of geophysical diversity types, ecoregional-focused protection would protect an additional 24%, and a combined scenario would protect an additional 42%. Future efforts need to specifically target low-elevation sites with productive soils for protection and manage for connectivity among geophysical diversity types. These efforts may be hampered by the sheer number of geophysical diversity facets that the world contains, which makes clear target setting and prioritization an important next step.

The theory behind, and the challenges of, conserving nature's stage in a time of rapid change.

Most conservation planning to date has focused on protecting today's biodiversity with the assumption that it will be tomorrow's biodiversity. However, modern climate change has already resulted in distributional shifts of some species and is projected to result in many more shifts in the coming decades. As species redistribute and biotic communities reorganize, conservation plans based on current patterns of biodiversity may fail to adequately protect species in the future. One approach for addressing this issue is to focus on conserving a range of abiotic conditions in the conservation-planning process. By doing so, it may be possible to conserve an abiotically diverse "stage" upon which evolution will play out and support many actors (biodiversity). We reviewed the fundamental underpinnings of the concept of conserving the abiotic stage, starting with the early observations of von Humboldt, who mapped the concordance of abiotic conditions and vegetation, and progressing to the concept of the ecological niche. We discuss challenges posed by issues of spatial and temporal scale, the role of biotic drivers of species distributions, and latitudinal and topographic variation in relationships between climate and landform. For example, abiotic conditions are not static, but change through time-albeit at different and often relatively slow rates. In some places, biotic interactions play a substantial role in structuring patterns of biodiversity, meaning that patterns of biodiversity may be less tightly linked to the abiotic stage. Furthermore, abiotic drivers of biodiversity can change with latitude and topographic position, meaning that the abiotic stage may need to be defined differently in different places. We conclude that protecting a diversity of abiotic conditions will likely best conserve biodiversity into the future in places where abiotic drivers of species distributions are strong relative to biotic drivers, where the diversity of abiotic settings will be conserved through time, and where connectivity allows for movement among areas providing different abiotic conditions.

Anthropogenic and environmental drivers of modern range loss in large mammals.

The extinction of a species is inevitably preceded by the extirpation of a series of local populations. Ecological theory predicts that vulnerability to extirpation varies between populations and is ultimately linked to environmental heterogeneity. If populations of a species are present in multiple regions separated by abrupt changes in environmental conditions (e.g., biomes), spatial variation in vulnerability to extirpation may be closely linked to the distribution of these regions. In the absence of abrupt shifts in environmental conditions, populations at the edge of a species' range should have low growth rates and be more vulnerable to extirpation, whereas populations located in the core of the species' range should be exposed to more favorable environmental conditions, have higher growth rates, and be less vulnerable. Here, we ask whether the distribution of biomes or range position better reflects spatial variation in vulnerability for 43 mammal species distributed through four continents. We control for the distribution of human threats and quantify the importance of protected areas in population persistence. We conclude that the distribution of biomes is a better predictor of vulnerability than position in the geographic range. We also find that core populations are less vulnerable than edge populations (after controlling for threats levels and protected areas). Protected areas are important for the persistence of most species we studied. By providing a measure of vulnerability linked directly to the distribution of threats, our results offer insights for scaling up from species vulnerability to extinction risk.

Historic distribution and recent loss of tigers in China.

Historical records can provide important evidence of changes in distributions of wildlife species. Here we discuss the distribution of the tiger (Panthera tigris Linnaeus, 1758) over the past 2000 years in China based on 2635 historical records. We also compare tiger distributions outlined in these records with ecosystem type maps. Throughout this time period, tigers maintained a broad distribution across 7 biomes (from forests to deserts). However, in recent decades the range has been significantly condensed. Today, only 2 populations remain, neither of which is independently viable. Tigers have completely disappeared from the temperate broadleaf and mixed forests of central China, a region that was traditionally their most important biome in China. The continued presence of wild tigers in China is highly dependent on significant conservation measures.

The ecological future of the North American bison: conceiving long-term, large-scale conservation of wildlife.

Many wide-ranging mammal species have experienced significant declines over the last 200 years; restoring these species will require long-term, large-scale recovery efforts. We highlight 5 attributes of a recent range-wide vision-setting exercise for ecological recovery of the North American bison (Bison bison) that are broadly applicable to other species and restoration targets. The result of the exercise, the "Vermejo Statement" on bison restoration, is explicitly (1) large scale, (2) long term, (3) inclusive, (4) fulfilling of different values, and (5) ambitious. It reads, in part, "Over the next century, the ecological recovery of the North American bison will occur when multiple large herds move freely across extensive landscapes within all major habitats of their historic range, interacting in ecologically significant ways with the fullest possible set of other native species, and inspiring, sustaining and connecting human cultures." We refined the vision into a scorecard that illustrates how individual bison herds can contribute to the vision. We also developed a set of maps and analyzed the current and potential future distributions of bison on the basis of expert assessment. Although more than 500,000 bison exist in North America today, we estimated they occupy <1% of their historical range and in no place express the full range of ecological and social values of previous times. By formulating an inclusive, affirmative, and specific vision through consultation with a wide range of stakeholders, we hope to provide a foundation for conservation of bison, and other wide-ranging species, over the next 100 years.

Planning to Save a Species: the Jaguar as a Model.

International conservation planning at the end of the twentieth century is dominated by coarse-filter, supra-organismal approaches to conservation that may be insufficient to conserve certain species such as the jaguar ( Panthera onca). If we are to retain broadly distributed species into the next century, we need to plan explicitly for their survival across their entire geographic range and through political boundaries while recognizing the variety of ecological roles the species plays in different habitats. In March 1999 the Wildlife Conservation Society sponsored a priority-setting and planning exercise for the jaguar across its range, from northern Mexico to northern Argentina. Field scientists from 18 countries reached consensus on four types of information: (1) the spatial extent of their jaguar knowledge, (2) the known, currently occupied range of jaguars, (3) areas with substantial jaguar populations, adequate habitat, and a stable and diverse prey base, and (4) point localities where jaguars have been observed during the last 10 years. During the exercise, these experts also conducted a range-wide assessment of the long-term survival prospects of the jaguar and developed an algorithm for prioritizing jaguar conservation units occurring in major habitat types. From this work, we learned that the known, occupied range of the jaguar has contracted to approximately 46% of estimates of its 1900 range. Jaguar status and distribution is unknown in another 12% of the jaguar's former range, including large areas in Mexico, Colombia, and Brazil. But over 70% of the area where jaguars are thought to still occur was rated as having a high probability of supporting their long-term survival. Fifty-one jaguar conservation units representing 30 different jaguar geographic regions were prioritized as the basis for a comprehensive jaguar conservation program.

RESUMEN: La planeación de la conservación internacional al final del siglo veinte esta dominada por enfoques de grano grueso, supra-organísmicas que pueden ser insuficientes para conservar ciertas especies como el jaguar ( Panthera onca). Si hemos de mantener especies ampliamente distribuidas en el próximo siglo, necesitamos planificar su supervivencia explícitamente en todo su rango geográfico a través de límites políticos al mismo tiempo que se reconozca la variedad de funciones ecológicas de las especies en diferentes hábitats. En marzo de 1999 la Sociedad de Conservación de Vida Silvestre promovió un ejercicio de definición de prioridades y de planeación para el jaguar en todo su rango de distribución, desde el norte de México hasta el norte de Argentina. Científicos de 18 países llegaron a consensos en cuatro tipos de información: (1) la extensión espacial de su conocimiento del jaguar, (2) el rango conocido, actualmente ocupado por el jaguar, (3) áreas con poblaciones importantes, hábitat adecuado y una base de presas estable y diversa y (4) localidades en las que se han observado jaguares durante los últimos 10 años. Durante el ejercicio, estos expertos también hicieron una evaluación de la supervivencia a largo plazo del jaguar en todo su rango y desarrollaron un algoritmo para priorizar unidades de conservación del jaguar en los tipos de hábitat más importantes. De este trabajo, aprendimos que el rango del jaguar conocido y ocupado se ha contraído aproximadamente al 46% de su rango estimado circa de 1900. El estatus del jaguar y su distribución en otro 12% del rango anterior, incluyendo extensas áreas en México, Colombia y Brasil. Sin embargo, más del 70% del área donde se piensa que todavía ocurre el jaguar fue considerada con una alta probabilidad de soportar la supervivencia a largo plazo. Se priorizaron 51 unidades de conservación representando 30 regiones diferentes como la base para un sólido programa de conservación del jaguar.