Which species & habitats should we save?

What criteria do we use for selecting species for conservation?

 What criteria do we use for selecting areas for conservation?

What are conservation trade-offs?

how do we identify these three things? 

• Instrumental use

• Intrinsic value

• Ecological value

• Uniqueness

• Level of threat

International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List

What is the likelihood of a species becoming extinct in the near future, given current knowledge about population trends, range, and recent, current or projected threats?

Extinct (EX)

Extinct in the Wild (EW)

trying to evaluate every species on earth to tell us its conservation status 

different categories first two this species is not conservation concern because it no longer exists 

This animal is not viable in the wild mainly ex-situ in botanical gardens, zoos

When it is known only to survive in captivity or as a naturalised population well outside the past range.

• Scimitar-Horned Oryx
• Hawaiian Crow

  Then the IUCN has threatened species:
  Extinction threat species 
  - Critically Endangered (CR)
  - Endangered (EN)
  - Vulnerable (VU)

• This is where most conservation work is  

Mountain gorilla
Gorilla beringei beringei

Franklin's bumblebee
Bombus franklini

There is a huge amount of alarm about these species and we are trying to hold onto them.

Tasmanian Devil

Giant Panda

African Elephant

This is a charasmatic species where lots of resources and time is put into conserving it, because of amount of societal attention and resources we put on conservation of elephants you would think they are critically endangered- but not the rarest

Rosalia longicorn beetle

vast majority of species fall into least concerned category

certain groups sturgeons and marine turtles- quite a large proportion of entire genera and families are threatened- this is a group that is under threat 

yellow- how do we conserve these species? what sort of decisions do we make, only priortise those that are under threat?

for most taxa we dont have historical assessments but we can look at trends, what are the groups of aggregate declining? if we think about where we allocate conservation efforts- it's mainly going towards mammals and birds not coral 

Taxa means (1) Groups or ranks  in a biological classification into which related organisms are classified.

(2) A taxonomic unit in the biological system of classification of organisms, for example: a phylum, order, family, genus, or species

Criterion 

Different spatial scales

• Observed/expected/historical decline in numbers

• Geographical area occupied

• Number of populations

• Number of living & breeding individuals

• Known threats and their trajectory

Different temporal scales and rates of change (Red List 5-year rule) we make conservation decisions at local/global level- are things improving? worsening?

Different data sources:

• Observed

• Estimated

• Projected

• Inferred

• Suspected 

DOD PIES 

not everything has to be peer reviewed

anecdotes- increase in this species in the market place, <- treated with less certainty- yet the idea is that just because we do not have perfect data- we should evaluate in the best way  we can

It seems like the red squirrel is an endangered species

Need to consider assessments at different scales. 

England:
Endangered

Britain
Vulnerable - not endangered here

Worldwide
Least concern

it's actually  a eurasian red squirrel- not a conservation priority for the world- thinking about scale really matters

For most of the species on Earth we haven't got these evaluations.

Data deficient (DD) 

dont have enough data to say what is the conservation status of these species, reality of the situation is that only those actually working in the field can create IUCN evaluations- but laziness, need a course to do it 

• Species more discrete entities than ecosystems

ecosystems more difficult to measure - species discrete- easier to find&measure

• Convenient for monitoring

• Public interest in species

• Little known about most

• Causes taxonomic bias (vertebrates & higher plants)

know little about most taxa-

causes taxonomic bias- a lot of focus on mammals, relatively small number of groups

• Size of the area

• Disturbance and fragmentation of the area

• Site condition

• Level of threat it is facing

• Rarity relative to other areas/habitats

• Fragility / vulnerability to future change    • Biodiversity relative to other areas

is the site in a good or bad condition?level of threat- are we protecting areas that are endangered or okay what habitats we should or shouldnt protecthow big is it?

how fragmented is it? issues with dispersal- light maybe that is not as good as a system that is more cohesive, intact site condition - mainly protect healthy forest over unhealthy forest 

size matters- larger land plots have more species

Number of reptile & amphibian species on W. Indian islands increases with island size

(Primack 2008)

intactness (i.e. fragmentation) some of the largest carbon stocks that are left- we know that contactness ifs important for species- why roads bad

Costa Rica has suffered disproportionate loss of tropical dry forest

humans love tropical dry forest- good for holiday-making, love timber- rare in wild- this habitat not common in the wild because we have degraded most of it

Level of threat

Global threat hotspots 

areas under greatest threat from humans - leads us to SE

The Gran Sabana ecosystem is highly vulnerable to distrubance (e.g., soil compaction)

tropical forest environment- UNSECO world heritage site- but  it has thin soil, and the SUVS promoted by tourists- causes disturbance really upsets the ecosystem- flora in the soil affected- slow to recover

coral reefs- fragile cant adapt 

what species exist there?

• Complementarity areas

• Richness hotspots

• Endemicity hotspots

• Threat hotspots

Earth’s 25 terrestrial hotspots of biodiversity

 Areas that have exceptional concentrations of species richness

areas greatest richness of biodiversity on the planet- idea here is that we need to target our efforts

is a concept that has become quite mainstream, idea been popularised by NGOs- 

British biodiversity hotspots

Top 5% of UK 10-km squares with the higher number of species

not all biodiversity created equal- uniqueness is something we're interested in- species that have limited ranges

Number of endemic species in selected hot spots

Cape region (S Africa) higher plants 6000

Atlantic Coastal Brazil   mphibians 168

Madagascar  reptiles  234  

Phillipines mammals 98 

you may be more interested in reptiles, in this case head to Madagascar

Species richness

If interested in species richness in Africa, head to Serengeti huge number of mammals grazing and migrating. 

Endemic species richness 

but if we're thinking about endemic species are spatial coverage will change Congo, looking at West Africa

This is where the imperfect idea of complementarity comes in 
multiple criteria trying to meet as many as possible then geo reference them  

we can't protect everything don't have the resources  people would not tolerate it, have to move out of houses - trying to find as much overlap as possible.

Represent as much biodiversity as possible in a limited area of land available for conservation

areas with diff species in them- pick three areas- trying to find as much overlap as possible- cant protect everything

Hotspots for African mammals based on species richness, endemicity & complementarity

if we do this for Africa - we can find key areas - dark colours- where you may want conservation- also shows uss we have to focus on a lot of broad areas- a lot of countries to engage- diff stakeholders-what are we putting the conservation area over- complementarity is hard- this paper shows that unfortunately our efforts dont overlap 

different spatial areas for all species, endemics and complementarity- try to target an area.

it is hard and not convenient things don't line up 

unfortunately our priorities don't always overlap there are some areas that overlap between threat and endemicity but if we're thinking about richness it is not good.

but we use these different factors and we make decisions about where to put our protection areas, roads, and trade policies and we have  done this in th eUK.  established for political projects, lobbyist groups, historical legacies.

but what we do is we use these different type of factors to determine protected areas, yet this sophisticated way was not always used for most of UK's protected areas yet they are established for all sorts of reasons- lobbying- historical interest - political projects. 

There are 15 National

parks in the Britain:

• England: 10 National Parks cover 9.3% of the land area

• Wales: 3 National Parks cover 19.9.% of the land area

• Scotland: 2 National Parks cover 7.2% of the land area

There are 4,000 SSSIs in England, covering 7% of the country's land area.

actually we are protecting a lot of our area in UK. A lot more than in a lot of other countries.

but the question is, is it working? 

we're not always protecting enough of the right areas.

Lake district is beautiful and protected for a long time wide range of reasons- not always reflected by our understandings of complementary - Lake district does not have endemic species or high species richness. 

UK

• protected areas (SSSIs) exclude 31 species of birds.

• 20 new cells (10x10km) are need to represent all species.

• 16 cells needed to represent all red data species

And the UK is relatively good 

we're not always protecting the right areas- we protect a lot of these areas for a wide range of reasons- not always reflective of our understanding of complimentary - lake district not threatened yet protected

New Caledonia

• 83% of the 447 threatened species do not occur in a protected area.

• 5 to 9 times the current protected area is needed.

over 80% of threatened species do not occur in protected areas

this is a concern in Costa Rice 235 of their conservation projects are a success yet there are so many endangered species that are not protected.

where do we place and how do we design protected areas 

a trade-off is compromises- cant have everything- make the choice between them richness vs endemicity  often trade-offs involve society - none of the maps consider human residences

A balance achieved between two desirable but incompatible features; a compromise.

Examples: 

• Do we establish critical protected areas in places where people live?

• Do we allow tourism into an ecologically sensitive area that needs conservation dollars?

• Do we protect wildlife that lives near, and face direct conflict with humans?

• Do we protect a species no matter the economic cost?

Do we protect widlife that lives near, and face direct conflict with humans?

elephants are horrible to live with, destroy crops, violent- elephant conservation causes a huge cost to the communities that live with them.

Do we establish critical protected areas in places where people live?

does it matter if those people have been living there for 100 years- long ancestral links- Brazil indigenous communities -people moved there to get land- who makes the decision to displace people?

recognise that all these questions are social issues 

Example: Road development considering agricultural vs environmental values

where are we going to put roads? can we do these type of analyses to help - this sort of analysis can be reconciled- Nigeria- alternative route using this analysis- 50% cheaper- economic benefit too- we know u want a road

Roads people want to develop roads going to, but where do we put them, how do we balance areas with high agricultural values. Bill Lawrence created a road for Nigeria, they had a very bad route. They designed an alternative route for Nigeria, the alterntive route is 50% cheaper so the Nigerian governemtn were okay.

There is a way that you can reconcile two ideas.

deemed to be in okay environment, last year critical condition- change happened in 15 yrs- mining and unsustainable tourism- the government built a road there because they needed tourists there- needed conservation dollars to protect conservation - unfortunately tourists enjoy SUV trips on the soil- now what was meant to protect the Venezuela gran Sabana is destroying it- all policies involve trade-offs- gains for human development and environmental cost or vise versa- now peeps rely on tourism - do we destroy road? 

Conservation triage:

Approaches that abandon some species or subpopulations to extinction, in order to focus resources on others with higher chances of survival

• How do you chose?
• What kinds of values (last lecture)?
Who gets to decide?

a lot of these species are hard to protect- expensive. in vitro stuff because not mating - likelihood of these two species becoming extinct v high. proportion of being saved low- yet we're spending a lot of resources on it- should we give up on these two species and instead focus our resources on species that have a greater chance? A lot of people say this is conservation pessimism - giving up. others say this is good decision-making , reality is that it is a hard decision- in many areas success stories come from individuals- down to personalities 

e.g. Sumatran rhino

Evaluating different type of actions - protect these species in this range? e.g. protect red squirrels in europe but let it go in England 

what are the different impacts that thesedecisions would make

evaluating probability of success- huge investment in something risky is that good decision-making probably not 

onservation- complex decision-making if we accept that then our evaluation of how and what we protect is about evaluating diff types of actions- trade-offs

evaluating what is the probability of success- we need to start to think about conservation decisions in a holistic way that helps us evaluate these things- complicated decisions that are based on socioeconomics, conservation and personal decisions. 

conservation is a hollistic decision 

• Bottrill, Madeleine C., et al. 2008. Is conservation triage just smart

decision making?. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 23:649-654.URL:

https://iwjv.org/sites/default/files/bottrill_et_al_2008.pdf.

• Sodhi, N.S., Erlich, P.R. (Eds.). 2008. Conservation Biology for All.

Oxford University Press, Oxford. See pages 199-214URL:

https://conbio.org/images/content_publications/

ConservationBiologyforAll_reducedsize.pdf.

This paper shows that...