John D. Pilgrim

Global Biodiversity Conservation Priorities

The location of and threats to biodiversity are distributed unevenly, so prioritization is essential to minimize biodiversity loss. To address this need, biodiversity conservation organizations have proposed nine templates of global priorities over the past decade. Here, we review the concepts, methods, results, impacts, and challenges of these prioritizations of conservation practice within the theoretical irreplaceability/vulnerability framework of systematic conservation planning. Most of the templates prioritize highly irreplaceable regions; some are reactive (prioritizing high vulnerability), and others are proactive (prioritizing low vulnerability). We hope this synthesis improves understanding of these prioritization approaches and that it results in more efficient allocation of geographically flexible conservation funding.

Effectiveness of the global protected area network in representing species diversity

The Fifth World Parks Congress in Durban, South Africa, announced in September 2003 that the global network of protected areas now covers 11.5% of the planets land surface. This surpasses the 10% target proposed a decade earlier, at the Caracas Congress, for 9 out of 14 major terrestrial biomes. Such uniform targets based on percentage of area have become deeply embedded into national and international conservation planning. Although politically expedient, the scientific basis and conservation value of these targets have been questioned. In practice, however, little is known of how to set appropriate targets, or of the extent to which the current global protected area network fulfils its goal of protecting biodiversity. Here, we combine five global data sets on the distribution of species and protected areas to provide the first global gap analysis assessing the effectiveness of protected areas in representing species diversity. We show that the global network is far from complete, and demonstrate the inadequacy of uniform—that is, ‘one size fits all’—conservation targets.

Wilderness and biodiversity conservation.

Human pressure threatens many species and ecosystems, so conservation efforts necessarily prioritize saving them. However, conservation should clearly be proactive wherever possible. In this article, we assess the biodiversity conservation value, and specifically the irreplaceability in terms of species endemism, of those of the planets ecosystems that remain intact. We find that 24 wilderness areas, all > 1 million hectares, are > 70% intact and have human densities of less than or equal to five people per km2. This wilderness covers 44% of all land but is inhabited by only 3% of people. Given this sparse population, wilderness conservation is cost-effective, especially if ecosystem service value is incorporated. Soberingly, however, most wilderness is not speciose: only 18% of plants and 10% of terrestrial vertebrates are endemic to individual wildernesses, the majority restricted to Amazonia, Congo, New Guinea, the Miombo-Mopane woodlands, and the North American deserts. Global conservation strategy must target these five wildernesses while continuing to prioritize threatened biodiversity hotspots.

Global gap analysis: Priority regions for expanding the global protected-area network

Abstract Protected areas are the single most important conservation tool. The global protected-area network has grown substantially in recent decades, now occupying 11.5% of Earths land surface, but such growth has not been strategically aimed at maximizing the coverage of global biodiversity. In a previous study, we demonstrated that the global network is far from complete, even for the representation of terrestrial vertebrate species. Here we present a first attempt to provide a global framework for the next step of strategically expanding the network to cover mammals, amphibians, freshwater turtles and tortoises, and globally threatened birds. We identify unprotected areas of the world that have remarkably high conservation value (irreplaceability) and are under serious threat. These areas concentrate overwhelmingly in tropical and subtropical moist forests, particularly on tropical mountains and islands. The expansion of the global protected-area network in these regions is urgently needed to prevent the loss of unique biodiversity.

Warfare in biodiversity hotspots

Conservation efforts are only as sustainable as the social and political context within which they take place. The weakening or collapse of sociopolitical frameworks during wartime can lead to habitat destruction and the erosion of conservation policies, but in some cases, may also confer ecological benefits through altered settlement patterns and reduced resource exploitation. Over 90% of the major armed conflicts between 1950 and 2000 occurred within countries containing biodiversity hotspots, and more than 80% took place directly within hotspot areas. Less than one-third of the 34 recognized hotspots escaped significant conflict during this period, and most suffered repeated episodes of violence. This pattern was remarkably consistent over these 5 decades. Evidence from the war-torn Eastern Afromontane hotspot suggests that biodiversity conservation is improved when international nongovernmental organizations support local protected area staff and remain engaged throughout the conflict. With biodiversity hotspots concentrated in politically volatile regions, the conservation community must maintain continuous involvement during periods of war, and biodiversity conservation should be incorporated into military, reconstruction, and humanitarian programs in the worlds conflict zones.

Biodiversity Offsets and the Challenge of Achieving No Net Loss

Businesses, governments, and financial institutions are increasingly adopting a policy of no net loss of biodiversity for development activities. The goal of no net loss is intended to help relieve tension between conservation and development by enabling economic gains to be achieved without concomitant biodiversity losses. biodiversity offsets represent a necessary component of a much broader mitigation strategy for achieving no net loss following prior application of avoidance, minimization, and remediation measures. However, doubts have been raised about the appropriate use of biodiversity offsets. We examined what no net loss means as a desirable conservation outcome and reviewed the conditions that determine whether, and under what circumstances, biodiversity offsets can help achieve such a goal. We propose a conceptual framework to substitute the often ad hoc approaches evident in many biodiversity offset initiatives. The relevance of biodiversity offsets to no net loss rests on 2 fundamental premises. First, offsets are rarely adequate for achieving no net loss of biodiversity alone. Second, some development effects may be too difficult or risky, or even impossible, to offset. To help to deliver no net loss through biodiversity offsets, biodiversity gains must be comparable to losses, be in addition to conservation gains that may have occurred in absence of the offset, and be lasting and protected from risk of failure. Adherence to these conditions requires consideration of the wider landscape context of development and offset activities, timing of offset delivery, measurement of biodiversity, accounting procedures and rule sets used to calculate biodiversity losses and gains and guide offset design, and approaches to managing risk. Adoption of this framework will strengthen the potential for offsets to provide an ecologically defensible mechanism that can help reconcile conservation and development. Balances de Biodiversidad y el Reto de No Obtener Pérdida Neta.

Historical and current status of vultures in Myanmar

Summary Concerns for the long-term survival of vulture populations on the Indian Subcontinent, owing to widespread poisoning by the veterinary drug diclofenac, have led to increased conservation focus on South-East Asian countries where diclofenac is not used and relict populations of vultures occur. We document here how White-rumped, Slender-billed and Red-headed Vultures have declined substantially in abundance and contracted in range in Myanmar over the last 50 years. Using a vulture restaurant method we determined that the population of vultures in Myanmar is at least 136 individuals, made up of at least: 62 White-rumped Vultures, 21 Slender-billed Vultures, 51 Himalayan Vultures and two Red-headed Vultures. The decline in the resident Gyps species is most likely due to declines in wild ungulate populations. Our population estimates are provisional and the survey covered only a proportion of the possible vulture range within Myanmar. Himalayan Vultures were not recorded in Myanmar in historical times, and possible reasons for the recent upsurge in records are discussed. Myanmar presents an opportunity of global signi! cance for vulture conservation, due to the persistence of three Critically Endangered vulture species in a country where diclofenac is not used.

Phylogeny and Conservation: Conservation status and geographic distribution of avian evolutionary history

Phylogeny affects conservation at multiple levels. At the level of the vision of conservation – of the long-term persistence of the processes that maintain biodiversity – phylogeny informs how we should represent these evolutionary processes (see, for example, Chapter 11). At the level of the goal of conservation – of representing the planet’s biodiversity in a comprehensive conservation system – phylogeny reveals the units requiring representation (see, for example, Chapter 2). Finally, at the level of conservation strategies, phylogeny gives an extra dimension of biodiversity value that can be incorporated into conservation prioritisation (see, for example, Chapter 5). Here, we explore this third level. Efficient biodiversity conservation requires systematic prioritisation of efforts; ad hoc planning has significant economic and societal costs (Pressey 1994). In a major review of systematic conservation planning, Margules & Pressey (2000) conceptualised the framework for conservation strategy as requiring two variables: ‘irreplaceability’ and ‘vulnerability’. Irreplaceability refers to uniqueness, or the extent to which a given biodiversity feature will be needed to contribute to a set of conservation values; vulnerability refers to threat, or probability of loss of biodiversity value (Pressey & Taffs 2001). This framework was originally conceived as operating across geographic space (i.e. applied to the prioritisation of sites, whether specific protected sites or broad biogeographic regions). Here, we extend the concept to application across phylogenetic space: prioritisation between species.

Status, abundance and habitat use of Blue-eyed Cockatoo Cacatua ophthalmica on New Britain, Papua New Guinea

Summary Most research on cockatoos Cacatua outside Australia has focused on species that figure significantly in the pet trade. Here, we examine the status of Blue-eyed Cockatoo Cacatua ophthalmica, an extremely poorly known species endemic to the island of New Britain, in three lowland forest types: primary forest, forest that had been commercially logged of selected large trees in the previous eight years, and forest gardens (small-scale mixed agroforests or ‘‘homegardens’’ tended by indigenous people). During fieldwork at two lowland study sites on New Britain between December 1998 and April 1999, groups of C. ophthalmica were recorded in all forest types (maximum group size = 40), but the species was largely absent from non-forested areas. Estimated cockatoo density in selectively logged forest (64 individuals per km 2 ) was similar to that in primary forest but densities in forest gardens at both sites (6 and 28 per km

A review of lessons learned from a Local Conservation Group approach in Indochina

Building local civil society constituencies for conservation is a particularly high priority in Indochina given the regional prevalence of weak and highly-centralized government institutions with an inability or lack of will to enforce protection on the ground. BirdLife International has developed and piloted a small-scale, community-based Local Conservation Group approach to site-based conservation globally. In Indochina a number of important lessons have been learned, particularly related to the need for participatory project and activity planning, increased attention to provision of tangible benefits that clearly meet both conservation and development objectives and are tailored to heterogeneous communities, increased support for awareness-raising activities, clear monitoring of activities and impacts, and truly committed partner support for implementation.