John Morrison

Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World: A New Map of Life on Earth

T tapestry of life on Earth is unraveling as humans increasingly dominate and transform natural ecosystems. Scarce resources and dwindling time force conservationists to target their actions to stem the loss of biodiversity— a pragmatic approach, given the highly uneven distribution of species and threats (Soulé and Kohm 1989, Olson and Dinerstein 1998, Mace et al. 2000, Myers et al. 2000). Unfortunately, the ability to focus strategically is hindered by the absence of a global biodiversity map with sufficient biogeographic resolution to accurately reflect the complex distribution of the Earth’s natural communities. Without such a map, many distinctive biotas remain unrecognized. In this article, we address the disparity in resolution between maps currently available for global conservation planning and the reality of the Earth’s intricate patterns of life. We have developed a detailed map of the terrestrial ecoregions of the world that is better suited to identify areas of outstanding biodiversity and representative communities (Noss 1992). We define ecoregions as relatively large units of land containing a distinct assemblage of natural communities and species, with boundaries that approximate the original extent of natural communities prior to major land-use change. Our ecoregion map offers features that enhance its utility for conservation planning at global and regional scales: comprehensive coverage, a classification framework that builds on existing biogeographic knowledge, and a detailed level of biogeographic resolution. Ecoregions reflect the distributions of a broad range of fauna and flora across the entire planet, from the vast Sahara Desert to the diminutive Clipperton Island (eastern Pacific Ocean). They are classified within a system familiar to all biologists—biogeographic realms and biomes. Ecoregions, representing distinct biotas (Dasmann 1973, 1974, Udvardy 1975), are nested within the biomes and realms and, together, these provide a framework for comparisons among units and the identification of representative habitats and species assemblages. Although our ecoregions are intended primarily as units for conservation action, they are built on the foundations of classical biogeography and reflect extensive collaboration with over 1000 biogeographers, taxonomists, conservation biologists, and ecologists from around the world. Consequently, ecoregions are likely to reflect the distribution of species and communities more accurately than do units based on global and regional models derived from gross biophysical features, such as rainfall and temperature (Holdridge 1967, Walter and Box 1976, Schulz 1995, Bailey 1998), vegetation structure (UNESCO 1969, deLaubenfels 1975, Schmidthüsen 1976), or

Global tests of biodiversity concordance and the importance of endemism

Understanding patterns of biodiversity distribution is essential to conservation strategies, but severe data constraints make surrogate measures necessary. For this reason, many studies have tested the performance of terrestrial vertebrates as surrogates for overall species diversity, but these tests have typically been limited to a single taxon or region. Here we show that global patterns of richness are highly correlated among amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals, as are endemism patterns. Furthermore, we demonstrate that although the correlation between global richness and endemism is low, aggregate regions selected for high levels of endemism capture significantly more species than expected by chance. Although areas high in endemism have long been targeted for the protection of narrow-ranging species, our findings provide evidence that endemism is also a useful surrogate for the conservation of all terrestrial vertebrates.

Persistence of Large Mammal Faunas as Indicators of Global Human Impacts

Abstract Large mammals often play critical roles within ecosystems by affecting either prey populations or the structure and species composition of surrounding vegetation. However, large mammals are highly vulnerable to extirpation by humans and consequently, severe contractions of species ranges result in intact large mammal faunas becoming increasingly rare. We compared historical (AD 1500) range maps of large mammals with their current distributions to determine which areas today retain complete assemblages of large mammals. We estimate that less than 21% of the earths terrestrial surface still contains all of the large (>20 kg) mammals it once held, with the proportion varying between 68% in Australasia to only 1% in Indomalaya. Although the presence of large mammals offers no guarantee of the presence of all smaller animals, their absence represents an ecologically based measurement of human impacts on biodiversity. Given the ecological importance of large mammals and their vulnerability to extinction, better protection and extension of sites containing complete assemblages of large mammals is urgently needed.

Saving the World's Terrestrial Megafauna

From the late Pleistocene to the Holocene, and now the so called Anthropocene, humans have been driving an ongoing series of species declines and extinctions (Dirzo et al. 2014). Large-bodied mammals are typically at a higher risk of extinction than smaller ones (Cardillo et al. 2005). However, in some circumstances terrestrial megafauna populations have been able to recover some of their lost numbers due to strong conservation and political commitment, and human cultural changes (Chapron et al. 2014). Indeed many would be in considerably worse predicaments in the absence of conservation action (Hoffmann et al. 2015). Nevertheless, most mammalian megafauna face dramatic range contractions and population declines. In fact, 59% of the world’s largest carnivores (≥ 15 kg, n = 27) and 60% of the world’s largest herbivores (≥ 100 kg, n = 74) are classified as threatened with extinction on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List (supplemental table S1 and S2). This situation is particularly dire in sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia, home to the greatest diversity of extant megafauna (figure 1). Species at risk of extinction include some of the world’s most iconic animals—such as gorillas, rhinos, and big cats (figure 2 top row)—and, unfortunately, they are vanishing just as science is discovering their essential ecological roles (Estes et al. 2011). Here, our objectives are to raise awareness of how these megafauna are imperiled (species in supplemental table S1 and S2) and to stimulate broad interest in developing specific recommendations and concerted action to conserve them.

Landscape-scale spatial planning at WWF: a variety of approaches

WWFs spatial landscape planning methods are diverse, reflecting WWFs global, decentralized organizational structure. Over the past decade WWFs spatial planning methods have varied from expert-only workshops to systematic conservation planning using decision support software, and combinations of both. We provide four case studies from the Asia-Pacific region to illustrate the variety of approaches that have been used, emphasizing assessment directed at implementation. The method appropriate to each situation was chosen based on data availability, timing, costs, available range of stakeholders, and the technical facility and interest of the stakeholders themselves. In all cases, methods were chosen to balance staff technical capacity, technical rigour, and political buy-in, hoping to ensure that the resulting plan would actually be implemented.

Restoration as a Strategy to Contribute to Ecoregion Visions

Most people are aware of the global reduction in forest cover as a result of ever-increasing human domination of the planet. The impacts are felt on biodiversity and on people as shown in the previous chapters of this book. A natural reaction to this forest loss is to engage in forest restoration activities. Across the planet, conservationists are working to increase overall forest coverage using a variety of strategies. In some cases this includes attempting to intensify agriculture so that it requires less land, focussing on value over volume in wood products, and concentrating production in (native) plantation forests. Another strategy is to de-intensify agricultural uses and promote a mosaic of natural and anthropogenic elements, allowing native species and communities to fill in around our use of the landscape, and provide necessary ecosystem services to operate more freely. In any case, the competition for land among a range of interests and stakeholders necessitates that all forest conservation activities, including forest restoration, be strategic and for a specific purpose(s), be it conservation or otherwise. This strategic focus should ideally be identified through a participatory process that leads to a long-term “vision” for the desired future state of the area. Increasing the quality and quantity of forest cover is an important general goal for conservation, both for ecosystem services (watershed protection, climate regulation, etc.) and for the needs of those species that depend on forests. However, due to the intense competition for land between the forces of development and conservation, efficiency in how and where forest restoration occurs is critical. In other words, while increased tree cover will nearly always be beneficial from a conservation perspective, if possible, restoration efforts should be focussed in such a way that multiple conservation and social goals are reached (also see sections “Restoring Ecological Functions” and “Restoring Socioeconomic Values”). Meeting both 6 Restoration as a Strategy to Contribute to Ecoregion Visions

Using the Open Standards-Based Framework for Planning and Implementing Ecosystem-Based Adaptation Projects in the High Mountainous Regions of Central Asia

The ecosystems of the high mountain regions of Central Asia are rich in biodiversity and provide essential services, such as the regulation and provision of water for the population of the entire region. However, inappropriate land management of these fragile ecosystems combined with their vulnerability to climate change threats (e.g. melting glaciers, changes in water flow regime, droughts) decrease their resilience and thus, the ability to provide continued services to people. A BMUB (German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety) IKI (International Climate Initiative) funded and GIZ-led (Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit GmbH) consortium explores the use of an Ecosystem-based Adaptation approach to help people adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change. It aims to strengthen the provision of ecosystem services and thereby enhance the livelihoods of the population depending on them. Although the application of potential ecosystem-based measures in Central Asia is not new, typically relevant climate risk information on people and ecosystems is not considered and thus, has a higher risk of introducing maladaptive interventions. This project used a modified form of the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation to systematically develop and test an integrated planning framework that used climate risk information to identify key vulnerabilities of people and ecosystem services under several plausible climate change scenarios and developed potential adaptation options. The framework’s guidance can contribute to a paradigm shift: moving away from business as usual approaches to climate informed adaptation processes. In addition, it constitutes a cornerstone for building a bridge between international climate finance mechanisms and climate-informed adaptation of local communities.