Robert L. Pressey

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 todays biodiversity is to exist in a future of increasing numbers of people and their demands on natural resources.

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.

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.

Selecting networks of reserves to maximise biological diversity

Abstract A prerequisite for preserving maximum biological diversity in a given biological domain is to identify a reserve network which includes every possible species. Two algorithms are presented which define the smallest number of wetlands on the Macleay Valley floodplain, Australia, which include all of the wetland plant species. One of these algorithms maximises species richness. The other is constrained to ensure each of nine wetland types is represented, as well as all species. To represent every plant species at least once, only 4·6% of the total number of wetlands is required, but they constitute 44·9% of the total wetland area. In order to represent all types of wetlands, as well as all plant species, 75·3% of the total wetland area is required. The results can be constrained to achieve other conservation goals such as preserving naturalness, rarity, population size, etc., by imposing conditions on rules within the algorithms. In this way a reserve network chosen to maximise diversity can be manipulated to optimise other conservation values.

A COMPARISON OF RESERVE SELECTION ALGORITHMS USING DATA ON TERRESTRIAL VERTEBRATES IN OREGON

We compare the number of species represented and the spatial pattern of reserve networks derived using five types of reserve selection algorithms on a set of vertebrate distribution data for the State of Oregon (USA). The algorithms compared are: richness-based heuristic algorithms (four variations), weighted rarity-based heuristic algorithms (two variations), progressive rarity-based heuristic algorithms (11 variations), simulated annealing, and a linear programming-based branch-and-bound algorithm. The linear programming algorithm provided optimal solutions to the reserve selection problem, finding either the maximum number of species for a given number of sites or the minimum number of sites needed to represent all species. Where practical, we recommend the use of linear programming algorithms for reserve network selection. However, several simple heuristic algorithms provided near-optimal solutions for these data. The near-optimality, speed and simplicity of heuristic algorithms suggests that they are acceptable alternatives for many reserve selection problems, especially when dealing with large data sets or complicated analyses.

Is conservation triage just smart decision making

Conservation efforts and emergency medicine face comparable problems: how to use scarce resources wisely to conserve valuable assets. In both fields, the process of prioritising actions is known as triage. Although often used implicitly by conservation managers, scientists and policymakers, triage has been misinterpreted as the process of simply deciding which assets (e.g. species, habitats) will not receive investment. As a consequence, triage is sometimes associated with a defeatist conservation ethic. However, triage is no more than the efficient allocation of conservation resources and we risk wasting scarce resources if we do not follow its basic principles.

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.

A conservation plan for a global biodiversity hotspot: the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa

We produced a conservation plan that achieved conservation targets for biodiversity pattern and process in the species- and endemic-rich Cape Floristic Region of South Africa. Features given quantitative conservation targets were land classes, localities of Proteaceae and selected vertebrate (freshwater fish, amphibians and reptiles) species, population sizes for medium- and large-sized mammals, and six types of spatial surrogates for ecological and evolutionary processes. The plan was developed in several stages using C-Plan, a decision support system linked to a geographic information system. Accepting the existing reserve system as part of the plan, we first selected spatially fixed surrogates for biodiversity processes; then we included those planning units that were essential for achieving targets for land classes, Proteaceae and vertebrate species; next we included areas required to accommodate population and design targets for large and medium-sized mammals; we then selected planning units required to conserve entire upland–lowland and macroclimatic gradients; and finally we resolved the options for achieving remaining targets while also consolidating the design of conservation areas. The result was a system of conservation areas, requiring, in addition to the existing reserve system, 52% of the remaining extant habitat in the planning domain, as well as restorable habitat, that will promote the persistence and continued diversification of much of the region’s biota in the face of ongoing habitat loss and climate change. After describing the planning process, we discuss implementation priorities in relation to conservation value and vulnerability to habitat loss, as well as socio-economic, political and institutional constraints and opportunities. # 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Conserving biodiversity efficiently: What to Do, Where, and When

Conservation priority-setting schemes have not yet combined geographic priorities with a framework that can guide the allocation of funds among alternate conservation actions that address specific threats. We develop such a framework, and apply it to 17 of the worlds 39 Mediterranean ecoregions. This framework offers an improvement over approaches that only focus on land purchase or species richness and do not account for threats. We discover that one could protect many more plant and vertebrate species by investing in a sequence of conservation actions targeted towards specific threats, such as invasive species control, land acquisition, and off-reserve management, than by relying solely on acquiring land for protected areas. Applying this new framework will ensure investment in actions that provide the most cost-effective outcomes for biodiversity conservation. This will help to minimise the misallocation of scarce conservation resources.

Adaptive management of the Great Barrier Reef: A globally significant demonstration of the benefits of networks of marine reserves

The Great Barrier Reef (GBR) provides a globally significant demonstration of the effectiveness of large-scale networks of marine reserves in contributing to integrated, adaptive management. Comprehensive review of available evidence shows major, rapid benefits of no-take areas for targeted fish and sharks, in both reef and nonreef habitats, with potential benefits for fisheries as well as biodiversity conservation. Large, mobile species like sharks benefit less than smaller, site-attached fish. Critically, reserves also appear to benefit overall ecosystem health and resilience: outbreaks of coral-eating, crown-of-thorns starfish appear less frequent on no-take reefs, which consequently have higher abundance of coral, the very foundation of reef ecosystems. Effective marine reserves require regular review of compliance: fish abundances in no-entry zones suggest that even no-take zones may be significantly depleted due to poaching. Spatial analyses comparing zoning with seabed biodiversity or dugong distributions illustrate significant benefits from application of best-practice conservation principles in data-poor situations. Increases in the marine reserve network in 2004 affected fishers, but preliminary economic analysis suggests considerable net benefits, in terms of protecting environmental and tourism values. Relative to the revenue generated by reef tourism, current expenditure on protection is minor. Recent implementation of an Outlook Report provides regular, formal review of environmental condition and management and links to policy responses, key aspects of adaptive management. Given the major threat posed by climate change, the expanded network of marine reserves provides a critical and cost-effective contribution to enhancing the resilience of the Great Barrier Reef.