A Comparison of Global Conservation Prioritization Models with Spatial Spending Patterns of Conservation Nongovernmental Organizations

Abstract: In recent decades, various conservation organizations have developed models to prioritize locations for conservation. Through a survey of the spending patterns of 281 conservation nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), we examined the relation between 2 such models and spatial patterns of spending by conservation NGOs in 44 countries in sub‐Saharan Africa. We tested whether, at the country level, the proportion of a country designated as a conservation priority was correlated with where NGOs spent money. For one model (the combination of Conservation International's hotspots and High Biodiversity Wilderness Areas, which are areas of high endemism with high or low levels of vegetation loss respectively), there was no relation between the proportion of a country designated as a priority and levels of NGO spending, including by the NGO associated with the model. In the second model (Global 200), the proportion of a country designated as a priority and the amount of money spent by NGOs were significantly and positively related. Less money was spent in countries in northern and western sub‐Saharan Africa than countries in southern and eastern Africa, relative to the proportion of the country designated as a conservation priority. We suggest that on the basis of our results some NGOs consider increasing their spending on the areas designated as of conservation priority which are currently relatively underfunded, although there are economic, political, cultural, historical, biological, and practical reasons why current spending patterns may not align with priority sites.     

Sharing conservation burdens fairly

We examined how, from the point of view of justice, the burdens of paying for conservation should be shared. I resisted simple answers to the question of who should pay for conservation that lean on a single moral principle. I identified 3 relevant principles that relate to who causes conservation challenges, who has greater capacity to carry burdens, and who stands to benefit from conservation. I argue for a distinctive pluralist framework for allocating conservation burdens that grants a proper role to all 3 principles. A multistep process can be used to put the framework into practice. First, identify cases in which conservation is necessary. Second, consider whether people knew or could have been expected to anticipate the consequences of their activities and whether they had reasonable alternatives to acting the way they did. Third, turn to facts about benefits; when no culprit for conservation challenges can be found, ask who benefits from acts of conservation. In the second and third stages, consideration must also be given to ability to pay.     

Use of Fully Biodegradable Panels to Reduce Derelict Pot Threats to Marine Fauna

Fishing pots (i.e., traps) are designed to catch fish or crustaceans and are used globally. Lost pots are a concern for a variety of fisheries, and there are reports that 10 – 70% of deployed pots are lost annually. Derelict fishing pots can be a source of mortality for target and bycatch species for several years. Because continual removal of derelict gear can be impractical over large spatial extents, modifications are needed to disarm gear once it is lost. We tested a fully biodegradable panel with a cull or escape ring designed for placement on the sides of a crab pot that completely degrades into environmentally neutral constituents after approximately 1 year. This panel is relatively inexpensive, easy to install, and can be used in multiple fisheries. We used the blue crab (Callinectes sapidus) fishery as a test case because it is a large pot fishery and blue crab pots are similar to traps used in other pot fisheries. We had commercial fishers deploy pots with panels alongside standard pots in Chesapeake Bay (U.S.A.) to assess potential effects of our experimental pots on blue crab catch. We compared the number, biomass, and size of crabs captured between standard and experimental pots and evaluated differences in catch over a crabbing season (March–November) at five locations. There was no evidence that biodegradable panels adversely affected catch. In all locations and time periods, legal catches were comparable in abundance, biomass, and size between experimental and standard pots. Properly designed biodegradable panels appear to be a viable solution to mitigate adverse effects of derelict pots. Uso de Paneles Completamente Biodegradables para Reducir las Amenazas de Vasijas Abandonadas para la Fauna Marina     

Effects of anthropogenic disturbance on primate density at the landscape scale

Accurate estimations of the abundance of threatened animal populations are required for assessment of species’ status and vulnerability and conservation planning. However, density estimation is usually difficult and resource demanding, so researchers often collect data at local scales. However, anthropogenic pressures most often have landscape-level effects, for example, through habitat loss and fragmentation. We applied hierarchical distance sampling (HDS) to transect count data to determine the effect of habitat and anthropogenic factors on the density of 3 arboreal primate species inhabiting 5 distinct tropical forests across a landscape of 19,000 km² in the Udzungwa Mountains of Tanzania. We developed a novel, multiregion extension of HDS that allowed us to model density and detectability jointly across forests without losing site-specific information. For all species, the effect of anthropogenic disturbance on density was overwhelmingly negative among metapopulations: −0.63 Angolan colobus (Colobus angolensis palliatus) (95% Bayesian CI −1.03 to −0.27), −0.54 Udzungwa red colobus (Procolobus gordonorum) (−0.89 to −0.22), and −0.33 Sykes' monkey (Cercopithecus mitis monoides) (−0.63 to −0.07). Some responses to habitat factors were shared, notably the negative effect of elevation and the positive effect of climber coverage. These results are important for conservation science and practice because: the among-populations negative responses to anthropogenic disturbance provides a foundation for development of conservation plans that hold at the landscape scale, which is a comprehensive and cost-efficient approach; the among-species consistency in responses suggests conservation measures may be generalized at the guild level, which is especially relevant given the functional importance of primates in tropical rainforests; and the greater primate densities in areas at low elevation, which are closer to human settlements, point to specific management recommendations, such as the creation of buffer zones and prioritization of areas for protection.     

Effects of seascape connectivity on reserve performance along exposed coastlines

Seascape connectivity (landscape connectivity in the sea) can modify reserve performance in low-energy marine ecosystems (e.g., coral reefs, mangroves, and seagrass), but it is not clear whether similar spatial linkages also shape reserve effectiveness on high-energy, exposed coastlines. We used the surf zones of ocean beaches in eastern Australia as a model system to test how seascape connectivity and reserve attributes combine to shape conservation outcomes. Spatial patterns in fish assemblages were measured using baited remote underwater video stations in 12 marine reserves and 15 fished beaches across 2000 km of exposed coastline. Reserve performance was shaped by both the characteristics of reserves and the spatial properties of the coastal seascapes in which reserves were embedded. Number of fish species and abundance of harvested fishes were highest in surf-zone reserves that encompassed >1.5 km of the surf zone; were located < 100 m to rocky headlands; and included pocket beaches in a heterogeneous seascape. Conservation outcomes for exposed coastlines may, therefore, be enhanced by prioritizing sufficiently large areas of seascapes that are strongly linked to abutting complementary habitats. Our findings have broader implications for coastal conservation planning. Empirical data to describe how the ecological features of high-energy shorelines influence conservation outcomes are lacking, and we suggest that seascape connectivity may have similar ecological effects on reserve performance on both sheltered and exposed coastlines.     

Assumption‐versus data‐based approaches to summarizing species’ ranges

For conservation decision making, species’ geographic distributions are mapped using various approaches. Some such efforts have downscaled versions of coarse‐resolution extent‐of‐occurrence maps to fine resolutions for conservation planning. We examined the quality of the extent‐of‐occurrence maps as range summaries and the utility of refining those maps into fine‐resolution distributional hypotheses. Extent‐of‐occurrence maps tend to be overly simple, omit many known and well‐documented populations, and likely frequently include many areas not holding populations. Refinement steps involve typological assumptions about habitat preferences and elevational ranges of species, which can introduce substantial error in estimates of species’ true areas of distribution. However, no model‐evaluation steps are taken to assess the predictive ability of these models, so model inaccuracies are not noticed. Whereas range summaries derived by these methods may be useful in coarse‐grained, global‐extent studies, their continued use in on‐the‐ground conservation applications at fine spatial resolutions is not advisable in light of reliance on assumptions, lack of real spatial resolution, and lack of testing. In contrast, data‐driven techniques that integrate primary data on biodiversity occurrence with remotely sensed data that summarize environmental dimensions (i.e., ecological niche modeling or species distribution modeling) offer data‐driven solutions based on a minimum of assumptions that can be evaluated and validated quantitatively to offer a well‐founded, widely accepted method for summarizing species’ distributional patterns for conservation applications.     

A condition metric for Eucalyptus woodland derived from expert evaluations

The evaluation of ecosystem quality is important for land‐management and land‐use planning. Evaluation is unavoidably subjective, and robust metrics must be based on consensus and the structured use of observations. We devised a transparent and repeatable process for building and testing ecosystem metrics based on expert data. We gathered quantitative evaluation data on the quality of hypothetical grassy woodland sites from experts. We used these data to train a model (an ensemble of 30 bagged regression trees) capable of predicting the perceived quality of similar hypothetical woodlands based on a set of 13 site variables as inputs (e.g., cover of shrubs, richness of native forbs). These variables can be measured at any site and the model implemented in a spreadsheet as a metric of woodland quality. We also investigated the number of experts required to produce an opinion data set sufficient for the construction of a metric. The model produced evaluations similar to those provided by experts, as shown by assessing the model's quality scores of expert‐evaluated test sites not used to train the model. We applied the metric to 13 woodland conservation reserves and asked managers of these sites to independently evaluate their quality. To assess metric performance, we compared the model's evaluation of site quality with the managers’ evaluations through multidimensional scaling. The metric performed relatively well, plotting close to the center of the space defined by the evaluators. Given the method provides data‐driven consensus and repeatability, which no single human evaluator can provide, we suggest it is a valuable tool for evaluating ecosystem quality in real‐world contexts. We believe our approach is applicable to any ecosystem.     

Participatory monitoring to connect local and global priorities for forest restoration

New global initiatives to restore forest landscapes present an unparalleled opportunity to reverse deforestation and forest degradation. Participatory monitoring could play a crucial role in providing accountability, generating local buy in, and catalyzing learning in monitoring systems that need scalability and adaptability to a range of local sites. We synthesized current knowledge from literature searches and interviews to provide lessons for the development of a scalable, multisite participatory monitoring system. Studies show that local people can collect accurate data on forest change, drivers of change, threats to reforestation, and biophysical and socioeconomic impacts that remote sensing cannot. They can do this at one‐third the cost of professionals. Successful participatory monitoring systems collect information on a few simple indicators, respond to local priorities, provide appropriate incentives for participation, and catalyze learning and decision making based on frequent analyses and multilevel interactions with other stakeholders. Participatory monitoring could provide a framework for linking global, national, and local needs, aspirations, and capacities for forest restoration.     

Land‐use history as a guide for forest conservation and management

Conservation efforts to protect forested landscapes are challenged by climate projections that suggest substantial restructuring of vegetation and disturbance regimes in the future. In this regard, paleoecological records that describe ecosystem responses to past variations in climate, fire, and human activity offer critical information for assessing present landscape conditions and future landscape vulnerability. We illustrate this point drawing on 8 sites in the northwestern United States, New Zealand, Patagonia, and central and southern Europe that have undergone different levels of climate and land‐use change. These sites fall along a gradient of landscape conditions that range from nearly pristine (i.e., vegetation and disturbance shaped primarily by past climate and biophysical constraints) to highly altered (i.e., landscapes that have been intensely modified by past human activity). Position on this gradient has implications for understanding the role of natural and anthropogenic disturbance in shaping ecosystem dynamics and assessments of present biodiversity, including recognizing missing or overrepresented species. Dramatic vegetation reorganization occurred at all study sites as a result of postglacial climate variations. In nearly pristine landscapes, such as those in Yellowstone National Park, climate has remained the primary driver of ecosystem change up to the present day. In Europe, natural vegetation–climate–fire linkages were broken 6000–8000 years ago with the onset of Neolithic farming, and in New Zealand, natural linkages were first lost about 700 years ago with arrival of the Maori people. In the U.S. Northwest and Patagonia, the greatest landscape alteration occurred in the last 150 years with Euro‐American settlement. Paleoecology is sometimes the best and only tool for evaluating the degree of landscape alteration and the extent to which landscapes retain natural components. Information on landscape‐level history thus helps assess current ecological change, clarify management objectives, and define conservation strategies that seek to protect both natural and cultural elements.     

Social comfort zones for transformative conservation decisions in a changing climate

Novel management interventions intended to mitigate the impacts of climate change on biodiversity are increasingly being considered by scientists and practitioners. However, resistance to more transformative interventions remains common across both specialist and lay communities and is generally assumed to be strongly entrenched. We used a decision-pathways survey of the public in Canada and the United States (n = 1490) to test two propositions relating to climate-motivated interventions for conservation: most public groups are uncomfortable with interventionist options for conserving biodiversity and given the strong values basis for preferences regarding biodiversity and natural systems more broadly, people are unlikely to change their minds. Our pathways design tested and retested levels of comfort with interventions for forest ecosystems at three different points in the survey. Comfort was reexamined given different nudges (including new information from trusted experts) and in reference to a particular species (bristlecone pine [Pinus longaeva]). In contrast with expectations of public unease, baseline levels of public comfort with climate interventions in forests was moderately high (46% comfortable) and increased further when respondents were given new information and the opportunity to change their choice after consideration of a particular species. People who were initially comfortable with interventions tended to remain so (79%), whereas 42% of those who were initially uncomfortable and 40% of those who were uncertain shifted to comfortable by the end of the survey. In short and across questions, comfort levels with interventions were high, and where discomfort or uncertainty existed, such positions did not appear to be strongly held. We argue that a new decision logic, one based on anthropogenic responsibility, is beginning to replace a default reluctance to intervene with nature.