Representativeness and Efficiency of Bird and Insect Conservation in Norwegian Boreal Forest Reserves

I quantified local species richness of birds in different forest types and of beetles in spruce forests at different altitudes. In both cases I quantified timber production as a measure of land acquisition cost and used the ratio between the species richness and timber production as a measure of conservation cost-efficiency. I found a positive correlation between timber production and local species richness of birds as well as beetles, indicating that the forests most valuable for forestry are also the ones most valuable for biodiversity conservation. I used different selection procedures for combining sites in a reserve network to find the minimum set of sites that included all vulnerable species. The minimum set of sites for birds was 30% spruce forest, 30% pine forest, and 40% broad-leaved forest (the three main forest types). The minimum set of sites for the beetles was uniformly distributed along the altitudinal gradient. Both minimum sets were most cost-efficient for species conservation. I suggest that equal coverage of different productivity classes is more efficient for optimizing biodiversity conservation than over-representing low productivity sites. Less than 1% of Norwegian boreal forests have been protected as nature reserves. The reserve network is fairly representative with respect to altitude, but it is seriously skewed toward low productivity sites. The current network is suboptimal with respect to forest type representativeness, species protection, and cost-efficiency. This is a result of an inefficient strategy of selecting reserve sites and an unfortunate combination of selection criteria.     

Assessing the Ecological and Social Benefits of Private Land Conservation in Colorado

Abstract: Conservation of private land through conservation easements, development agreements, and clustered housing has increased greatly as have criticisms of the laws, public programs, and incentives that motivate landowners to use them. Rapid land‐use change at the urban–rural interface in Larimer County, Colorado, has given rise to programs that provide a variety of land‐conservation options for landowners. As of January 2005, roughly 60% of Larimer County was publicly owned, and 3% or 16,200 ha was privately owned with some form of protection. We used document analysis, a landowner survey, targeted interviews, and a landscape‐level spatial analysis to analyze the patterns, quantities, and qualities of private land conservation. We created a jurisdiction‐specific typology of desired benefits from local government‐planning documents to help evaluate conservation parcels. Most easements and other conservation documents used general terms and did not describe the site‐specific values of the land being conserved. Landowners were able to describe some benefits not included in parcel‐specific documents, and our spatial analysis revealed parcel‐specific and cumulative conservation benefits such as the amount of buffering, infill, connectivity, protected agricultural land, riparian protection, and other benefits not referenced by either documents or landowners. Conservation benefits provided by a parcel varied depending on its geographic location, the specific institution such as a land trust or open space program that a landowner worked with, and the conservation mechanism used, such as voluntary easement or residential clustering requirements. The methods we used provide a template for jurisdictions wishing to undertake a similar analysis. Our findings may assist other jurisdictions and institutions interested in improving how land‐conservation benefits are described; justify and inform future investments in private land conservation; assist local governments and other institutions with the assessment of program effectiveness; and be useful for conservation planners who wish to become more involved in on‐the‐ground implementation of conservation actions.     

Bolder science needed now for protected areas

Recognizing that protected areas (PAs) are essential for effective biodiversity conservation action, the Convention on Biological Diversity established ambitious PA targets as part of the 2020 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity. Under the strategic goal to “improve the status of biodiversity by safeguarding ecosystems, species, and genetic diversity,” Target 11 aims to put 17% of terrestrial and 10% of marine regions under PA status by 2020. Additionally and crucially, these areas are required to be of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative, and well‐connected and to include “other effective area‐based conservation measures” (OECMs). Whereas the area‐based targets are explicit and measurable, the lack of guidance for what constitutes important and representative; effective; and OECMs is affecting how nations are implementing the target. There is a real risk that Target 11 may be achieved in terms of area while failing the overall strategic goal for which it is established because the areas are poorly located, inadequately managed, or based on unjustifiable inclusion of OECMs. We argue that the conservation science community can help establish ecologically sensible PA targets to help prioritize important biodiversity areas and achieve ecological representation; identify clear, comparable performance metrics of ecological effectiveness so progress toward these targets can be assessed; and identify metrics and report on the contribution OECMs make toward the target. By providing ecologically sensible targets and new performance metrics for measuring the effectiveness of both PAs and OECMs, the science community can actively ensure that the achievement of the required area in Target 11 is not simply an end in itself but generates genuine benefits for biodiversity.     

Conserving Connectivity: Some Lessons from Mountain Lions in Southern California

Abstract: Habitat corridors can be essential for persistence of wildlife populations in fragmented landscapes. Although much research has focused on identifying species and places critical for conservation action, the conservation literature contains surprisingly few examples of corridors that actually have been protected and so provides little guidance for moving from planning through implementation. We examined a case study from southern California that combines monitoring of radio‐collared mountain lions (Puma concolor) with an assessment of land‐protection efforts to illustrate lessons learned while attempting to maintain ecological connectivity in a rapidly urbanizing landscape. As in many places, conservation scientists have provided science‐based maps of where conservation efforts should focus. But implementing corridors is a business decision based not solely on ecological information but also on cost, opportunity cost, investment risk, and other feasibility considerations. Here, the type and pattern of development is such that key connections will be lost unless they are explicitly protected. Keeping pace with conversion, however, has been difficult, especially because conservation efforts have been limited to traditional parcel‐by‐parcel land‐protection techniques. The challenges of and trade‐offs in implementation make it clear that in southern California, connectivity cannot be bought one parcel at a time. Effective land‐use plans and policies that incorporate conservation principles, such as California's Natural Communities Conservation Planning program, are needed to support the retention of landscape permeability. Lessons from this study have broad application, especially as a precautionary tale for places where such extensive and intensive development has not yet occurred. Given how limiting resources are for biodiversity conservation, conservationists must be disciplined about where and how they attempt corridor protection: in rapidly fragmenting landscapes, the opportunity for success can be surprisingly fleeting.     

A Landholder‐Based Approach to the Design of Private‐Land Conservation Programs

Abstract: Many ecosystems exist primarily, or solely, on privately owned (freehold) or managed (leasehold) land. In rural and semirural areas, local and regional government agencies are commonly responsible for encouraging landholders to conserve native vegetation and species on these private properties. Yet these agencies often lack the capacity to design and implement conservation programs tailored to rural and semirural landholdings and instead offer one program to all landholders. Landholders may elect not to participate because the program is irrelevant to their property or personal needs; consequently, vegetation–retention objectives may not be achieved. We differentiated landholders in Queensland, Australia, according to whether they derived income from the land (production landholders) or not (nonproduction landholders). We compared these two groups to identify similarities and differences that may inform the use of policy instruments (e.g., voluntary, economic, and regulatory) in conservation program design. We interviewed 45 landholders participating in three different conservation agreement programs (price‐based rate [property tax] rebate; market‐based tender; and voluntary, permanent covenant). Production landholders were more likely to participate in short‐term programs that offered large financial incentives that applied to <25% of their property. Nonproduction landholders were more likely to participate in long‐term programs that were voluntary or offered small financial incentives that applied to >75% of their property. These results may be explained by significant differences in the personal circumstances of production and nonproduction landholders (income, education, health) and differences in their norms (beliefs about how an individual is expected to act) and attitudes. Knowledge of these differences may allow for development of conservation programs that better meet the needs of landholders and thus increase participation in conservation programs and retention of native vegetation.     

Changes in Forest Use Value through Ecological Succession and Their Implications for Land Management in the Peruvian Amazon

Abstract:  Research on local use values of forests across an ecological succession informs land-use decisions and conservation planning. I evaluated use values of three age classes of secondary forest: fallow fields (<5 years old, $8.20/ha/year), young secondary forest (5–20 years old, $20.60/ha/year), and old secondary forest (>20 years old, $6.80/ha/year). I quantified daily forest product use and calculated use values in dollars per hectare per year for three communities in the northern Peruvian Amazon. I made three comparisons between forest types: number of useful species, value based on different use categories, and overall use values. Old secondary forest had the greatest number of total species present and species collected. Wood, food, and medicine were the three most valuable use categories. The value different families extracted from local forests varied enormously, but median forest values were lower for all forest types than potential gains from agricultural land use (e.g., coffee $167/ha/year). Values of different-aged stands on privately owned lands in two communities did not differ significantly, whereas in the third community, young secondary forest had a significantly greater value than other forest types. Old secondary forests were the most valuable source of wood products, and wood was the only use category in which there was any difference in the value of products extracted from different-aged forest stands. The value of all three forest types on open-access (nonprivate) lands was minimal (mean in each forest type, $0/ha/year). Local people can utilize the valuation results to develop land-use strategies that balance forest product use, agricultural productivity, and biodiversity conservation.     

Effects of national forest‐management regimes on unprotected forests of the Himalaya

Globally, deforestation continues, and although protected areas effectively protect forests, the majority of forests are not in protected areas. Thus, how effective are different management regimes to avoid deforestation in non‐protected forests? We sought to assess the effectiveness of different national forest‐management regimes to safeguard forests outside protected areas. We compared 2000–2014 deforestation rates across the temperate forests of 5 countries in the Himalaya (Bhutan, Nepal, China, India, and Myanmar) of which 13% are protected. We reviewed the literature to characterize forest management regimes in each country and conducted a quasi‐experimental analysis to measure differences in deforestation of unprotected forests among countries and states in India. Countries varied in both overarching forest‐management goals and specific tenure arrangements and policies for unprotected forests, from policies emphasizing economic development to those focused on forest conservation. Deforestation rates differed up to 1.4% between countries, even after accounting for local determinants of deforestation, such as human population density, market access, and topography. The highest deforestation rates were associated with forest policies aimed at maximizing profits and unstable tenure regimes. Deforestation in national forest‐management regimes that emphasized conservation and community management were relatively low. In India results were consistent with the national‐level results. We interpreted our results in the context of the broader literature on decentralized, community‐based natural resource management, and our findings emphasize that the type and quality of community‐based forestry programs and the degree to which they are oriented toward sustainable use rather than economic development are important for forest protection. Our cross‐national results are consistent with results from site‐ and regional‐scale studies that show forest‐management regimes that ensure stable land tenure and integrate local‐livelihood benefits with forest conservation result in the best forest outcomes.     

Protecting biodiversity and economic returns in resource-rich tropical forests

In pursuit of socioeconomic development, many countries are expanding oil and mineral extraction into tropical forests. These activities seed access to remote, biologically rich areas, thereby endangering global biodiversity. We examined how protection of biodiversity and economic revenues can be balanced in biologically valuable regions. Using spatial data on oil profits and predicted species and ecosystem extents, we optimized the protection of 741 terrestrial species and 20 ecosystems of the Ecuadorian Amazon across a range of opportunity costs (i.e., sacrifices of extractive profit). We also applied spatial statistics to remotely sensed, historic deforestation data to focus the optimization on areas most threatened by imminent forest loss. Giving up 5% of a year's oil profits (US$221 million) allowed for a protected area network that retained an average of 65% of the extent of each species and ecosystem. This performance far exceeded that of the network produced by simple optimization for land area (which required a sacrifice of approximately 40% of annual oil profits [US$1.7 billion]) and used only marginally less land to achieve equivalent levels of ecological protection. We identified what we call emergency conservation targets: regions that are essential components of a cost-effective conservation reserve network but at imminent risk of destruction, thus requiring urgent and effective protection. Governments can use our methods when evaluating extractive-led development options to responsibly manage the associated ecological and economic trade-offs and protect natural capital.     

Mainstreaming biodiversity conservation: a Peninsular Malaysian case

SUMMARY

The contention is examined that forests can contribute to biodiversity conservation either as protected areas or as production forests, especially where the latter are managed for timber extraction. This notion is explored for the Peninsular Malaysian forests, and it is shown that biodiversity conservation would be optimized if the system of protected areas is located within a broader matrix of carefully managed production forests. A model is developed to illustrate how the biodiversity value of protected areas would be enhanced through interaction with production forests. In no way is the suggestion being made here that production forests could serve as critical centres for the conservation of biotic diversity, but then neither should they be dismissed as areas completely devoid of any contribution to the biodiversity cause. These findings are especially significant in Peninsular Malaysia where two-thirds of the forests legally set aside as Permanent Forest Estate is to be managed as production forests. If the incremental biodiversity value of these forests can be captured through improved management practices, then the overall biodiversity status of the country, and the globe, could be greatly increased. The extent to which any country is willing to set aside forests as protected areas, strictly for biodiversity conservation, is limited, hence the integrated approach to the management of protected and production forests advocated here could prove an attractive and feasible strategy. Where funding is limited, as in the case of the Global Environment Facility, it may be worthwhile to provide incentives for improved management of production forests as a means of conserving biodiversity.     

Ants as a Measure of Effectiveness of Habitat Conservation Planning in Southern California

Abstract: In the United States multispecies habitat conservation plans were meant to be the solution to conflicts between economic development and protection of biological diversity. Although now widely applied, questions exist concerning the scientific credibility of the conservation planning process and effectiveness of the plans. We used ants to assess performance of one of the first regional conservation plans developed in the United States, the Orange County Central‐Coastal Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP), in meeting its broader conservation objectives of biodiversity and ecosystem‐level protection. We collected pitfall data on ants for over 3 years on 172 sites established across a network of conservation lands in coastal southern California. Although recovered native ant diversity for the study area was high, site‐occupancy models indicated the invasive and ecologically disruptive Argentine ant (Linepithema humile) was present at 29% of sites, and sites located within 200 m of urban and agricultural areas were more likely to have been invaded. Within invaded sites, native ants were largely displaced, and their median species richness declined by more than 60% compared with uninvaded sites. At the time of planning, 24% of the 15,133‐ha reserve system established by Orange County NCCP fell within 200 m of an urban or agricultural edge. With complete build out of lands surrounding the reserve, the proportion of the reserve system vulnerable to invasion will grow to 44%. Our data indicate that simply protecting designated areas from development is not enough. If habitat conservation plans are to fulfill their conservation promise of ecosystem‐level protection, a more‐integrated and systematic approach to the process of habitat conservation planning is needed.     

Estimating the Effect of Protected Lands on the Development and Conservation of Their Surroundings

Abstract:  The fate of private lands is widely seen as key to the fate of biodiversity in much of the world. Organizations that work to protect biodiversity on private lands often hope that conservation actions on one piece of land will leverage the actions of surrounding landowners. Few researchers have, however, examined whether protected lands do in fact encourage land conservation nearby or how protected lands affect development in the surrounding landscape. Using spatiotemporal data sets on land cover and land protection for three sites (western North Carolina, central Massachusetts, and central Arizona), we examined whether the existence of a protected area correlates with an increased rate of nearby land conservation or a decreased rate of nearby land development. At all sites, newly protected conservation areas tended to cluster close to preexisting protected areas. This may imply that the geography of contemporary conservation actions is influenced by past decisions on land protection, often made for reasons far removed from concerns about biodiversity. On the other hand, we found no evidence that proximity to protected areas correlates with a reduced rate of nearby land development. Indeed, on two of our three sites the development rate was significantly greater in regions with more protected land. This suggests that each conservation action should be justified and valued largely for what is protected on the targeted land, without much hope of broader conservation leverage effects.     

Why We Need Megareserves in Amazonia

Abstract:  Brazilian Amazonia faces one of the greatest threats and opportunities for tropical biodiversity conservation of our times. I consider several large-scale issues in biodiversity conservation planning (e.g., resource extraction, large areas needed for top predators, species migration, fire, and carbon sequestration) in light of our severely deficient understanding of basinwide patterns of species distribution and little-known Amazonian biota. The long-term persistence of this biota is best served by strictly protected and sustainable development forest reserves that are both embedded in a benign forest matrix and sufficiently large to support a full complement of species and landscape-scale ecological processes. Given rapidly accelerating trends in agricultural frontier expansion into previously unclaimed public lands, protection and controlled development of forests is urgent.     

Progress in the ecology and conservation of giant pandas

Giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) conservation is a possible success story in the making. If extinction of this iconic endangered species can be avoided, the species will become a showcase program for the Chinese government and its collaborators. We reviewed the major advancements in ecological science for the giant panda, examining how these advancements have contributed to panda conservation. Pandas’ morphological and behavioral adaptations to a diet of bamboo, which bear strong influence on movement ecology, have been well studied, providing knowledge to guide management actions ranging from reserve design to climate change mitigation. Foraging ecology has also provided essential information used in the creation of landscape models of panda habitat. Because habitat loss and fragmentation are major drivers of the panda population decline, efforts have been made to help identify core habitat areas, establish where habitat corridors are needed, and prioritize areas for protection and restoration. Thus, habitat models have provided guidance for the Chinese governments’ creation of 67 protected areas. Behavioral research has revealed a complex and efficient communication system and documented the need for protection of habitat that serves as a communication platform for bringing the sexes together for mating. Further research shows that den sites in old‐growth forests may be a limiting resource, indicating potential value in providing alternative den sites for rearing offspring. Advancements in molecular ecology have been revolutionary and have been applied to population census, determining population structure and genetic diversity, evaluating connectivity following habitat fragmentation, and understanding dispersal patterns. These advancements form a foundation for increasing the application of adaptive management approaches to move panda conservation forward more rapidly. Although the Chinese government has made great progress in setting aside protected areas, future emphasis will be improved management of pandas and their habitat.     

Case studies of conservation plans that incorporate geodiversity

Geodiversity has been used as a surrogate for biodiversity when species locations are unknown, and this utility can be extended to situations where species locations are in flux. Recently, scientists have designed conservation networks that aim to explicitly represent the range of geophysical environments, identifying a network of physical stages that could sustain biodiversity while allowing for change in species composition in response to climate change. Because there is no standard approach to designing such networks, we compiled 8 case studies illustrating a variety of ways scientists have approached the challenge. These studies show how geodiversity has been partitioned and used to develop site portfolios and connectivity designs; how geodiversity‐based portfolios compare with those derived from species and communities; and how the selection and combination of variables influences the results. Collectively, they suggest 4 key steps when using geodiversity to augment traditional biodiversity‐based conservation planning: create land units from species‐relevant variables combined in an ecologically meaningful way; represent land units in a logical spatial configuration and integrate with species locations when possible; apply selection criteria to individual sites to ensure they are appropriate for conservation; and develop connectivity among sites to maintain movements and processes. With these considerations, conservationists can design more effective site portfolios to ensure the lasting conservation of biodiversity under a changing climate.     

Protection of Mammal Diversity in Central America

Abstract:  Central America is exceptionally rich in biodiversity, but varies widely in the attention its countries devote to conservation. Protected areas, widely considered the cornerstone of conservation, were not always created with the intent of conserving that biodiversity. We assessed how well the protected-area system of Central America includes the region's mammal diversity. This first required a refinement of existing range maps to reduce their extensive errors of commission (i.e., predicted presences in places where species do not occur). For this refinement, we used the ecological limits of each species to identify and remove unsuitable areas from the range. We then compared these maps with the locations of protected areas to measure the habitat protected for each of the region's 250 endemic mammals. The species most vulnerable to extinction—those with small ranges—were largely outside protected areas. Nevertheless, the most strictly protected areas tended toward areas with many small-ranged species. To improve the protection coverage of mammal diversity in the region, we identified a set of priority sites that would best complement the existing protected areas. Protecting these new sites would require a relatively small increase in the total area protected, but could greatly enhance mammal conservation.     

Synergies and trade-offs among integrated conservation approaches in Mexico

Integrated conservation approaches (ICAs) are employed by governments, communities, and nongovernmental organizations worldwide seeking to achieve outcomes with dual benefits for biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation. Although ICAs are frequently implemented concurrently, interactions among ICAs and the synergies or trade-offs that result are rarely considered during program design, implementation, and evaluation. In support of more deliberate and effective use of ICAs, we examined interactions among four well-known strategies: biosphere reserves (BRs), voluntary protected areas (VPAs), payments for ecosystem services (PES), and community forest management (CFM). Through a comparative case study, we analyzed interactions among spatially or temporally clustered ICAs implemented on communally held and managed lands in three ecologically and socioeconomically distinct regions of Mexico. Our research methods combined policy analysis with data gathered through participant observation and semistructured interviews (n = 78) and focus groups (n = 5) with government officials, implementers, and participants involved in ICAs in 28 communities. Despite the significant differences among the regions in which they were implemented, we found that key actors at each level of involvement generally perceived interactions among ICAs as synergistic. The PES programs were perceived to strengthen protected areas by reducing forest cover loss in and around BRs, fostering proconservation attitudes, and incentivizing the establishment of VPAs. Communities that invested PES income in CFM were motivated to conserve forests beyond the duration of PES programs, and CFM in buffer zones was perceived to strengthen BRs by maintaining forest cover and generating income for communities. We also identified key social and environmental factors that can influence these interaction effects among ICAs. Based on these findings, we recommend further study of ICA interactions and intentionally complementary policy design to maximize positive environmental and social outcomes.     

Impact of payments for environmental services and protected areas on local livelihoods and forest conservation in northern Cambodia

The potential impacts of payments for environmental services (PES) and protected areas (PAs) on environmental outcomes and local livelihoods in developing countries are contentious and have been widely debated. The available evidence is sparse, with few rigorous evaluations of the environmental and social impacts of PAs and particularly of PES. We measured the impacts on forests and human well‐being of three different PES programs instituted within two PAs in northern Cambodia, using a panel of intervention villages and matched controls. Both PES and PAs delivered additional environmental outcomes relative to the counterfactual: reducing deforestation rates significantly relative to controls. PAs increased security of access to land and forest resources for local households, benefiting forest resource users but restricting households’ ability to expand and diversify their agriculture. The impacts of PES on household well‐being were related to the magnitude of the payments provided. The two higher paying market‐linked PES programs had significant positive impacts, whereas a lower paying program that targeted biodiversity protection had no detectable effect on livelihoods, despite its positive environmental outcomes. Households that signed up for the higher paying PES programs, however, typically needed more capital assets; hence, they were less poor and more food secure than other villagers. Therefore, whereas the impacts of PAs on household well‐being were limited overall and varied between livelihood strategies, the PES programs had significant positive impacts on livelihoods for those that could afford to participate. Our results are consistent with theories that PES, when designed appropriately, can be a powerful new tool for delivering conservation goals whilst benefiting local people.     

Conservation Development Practices,Extent, and Land‐Use Effects in the United States

Abstract: Conservation development projects combine real‐estate development with conservation of land and other natural resources. Thousands of such projects have been conducted in the United States and other countries through the involvement of private developers, landowners, land trusts, and government agencies. Previous research has demonstrated the potential value of conservation development for conserving species, ecological functions, and other resource values on private lands, especially when traditional sources of conservation funding are not available. Nevertheless, the aggregate extent and effects of conservation development were previously unknown. To address this gap, we estimated the extent and trends of conservation development in the United States and characterized its key attributes to understand its aggregate contribution to land‐conservation and growth‐management objectives. We interviewed representatives from land trusts, planning agencies, and development companies, searched the Internet for conservation development projects and programs, and compiled existing databases of conservation development projects. We collected data on 3884 projects encompassing 1.38 million ha. About 43% of the projects targeted the conservation of specific plant or animal species or ecological communities of conservation concern; 84% targeted the protection of native ecosystems representative of the project area; and 42% provided buffers to existing protected areas. The percentage of protected land in conservation development projects ranged from <40% to >99%, and the effects of these projects on natural resources differed widely. We estimate that conservation development projects have protected roughly 4 million ha of land in the United States and account for about 25% of private‐land conservation activity nationwide.