scholarly journals Protected areas and freshwater biodiversity: a novel systematic review distils eight lessons for effective conservation

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Acreman ◽  
Kathy A. Hughes ◽  
Angela H. Arthington ◽  
David Tickner ◽  
Manuel‐Angel Dueñas
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Freshwater Biodiversity ◽  
Effective Conservation

scholarly journals Identifying priority core habitats and corridors for effective conservation of brown bears in Iran

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Mohammadi ◽  
K. Almasieh ◽  
D. Nayeri ◽  
F. Ataei ◽  
A. Khani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Brown Bear ◽  
Population Connectivity ◽  
Habitat Associations ◽  
Area Network ◽  
Zagros Mountains ◽  
Range Limit ◽  
Brown Bears ◽  
Core Areas ◽  
Effective Conservation

AbstractIran lies at the southernmost range limit of brown bears globally. Therefore, understanding the habitat associations and patterns of population connectivity for brown bears in Iran is relevant for the species’ conservation. We applied species distribution modeling to predict habitat suitability and connectivity modeling to identify population core areas and corridors. Our results showed that forest density, topographical roughness, NDVI and human footprint were the most influential variables in predicting brown bear distribution. The most crucial core areas and corridor networks for brown bear are concentrated in the Alborz and Zagros Mountains. These two core areas were predicted to be fragmented into a total of fifteen isolated patches if dispersal of brown bear across the landscape is limited to 50,000 cost units, and aggregates into two isolated habitat patches if the species is capable of dispersing 400,000 cost units. We found low overlap between corridors, and core habitats with protected areas, suggesting that the existing protected area network may not be adequate for the conservation of brown bear in Iran. Our results suggest that effective conservation of brown bears in Iran requires protection of both core habitats and the corridors between them, especially outside Iran’s network of protected areas.

scholarly journals Protected areas: A focus on Brazilian freshwater biodiversity

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 442-448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valter M. Azevedo-Santos ◽  
Renata G. Frederico ◽  
Camila K. Fagundes ◽  
Paulo S. Pompeu ◽  
Fernando M. Pelicice ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Freshwater Biodiversity

Urgent need for a systematic expansion of freshwater protected areas in Australia

2006 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard T. Kingsford ◽  
Jon Nevill
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Conservation Status ◽  
Direct Consequence ◽  
Freshwater Ecosystems ◽  
Hydrologic Connectivity ◽  
National Assessment ◽  
Protective Mechanisms ◽  
Management Tools ◽  
Systematic Expansion ◽  
Effective Conservation

Freshwater ecosystems (including inland saline wetlands and mound springs) are among the more imperilled ecosystems in the world. Australia is no exception, but their protection has lagged behind programmes of terrestrial protection. Freshwater protected areas are an essential component of biodiversity conservation programmes, but a systematic approach to their development in Australia has been slow, and hindered by incomplete ecosystem inventories at State and national levels. We examine this problem and suggest avenues for action. Further, while there is no shortage of relevant legislation and policy for protecting freshwater aquatic systems in Australia, some protective mechanisms have not yet been used, many years after their development. In some places "protection" has been only partially applied without regard to important issues of hydrologic connectivity ? with species extinction as a direct consequence. The most urgent priority is to identify those aquatic ecosystems most at risk. A comprehensive national assessment of the conservation status of freshwater ecosystems should be undertaken immediately. Such an assessment would provide both a platform and an impetus for the systematic expansion of the nation's freshwater protected areas. Political will is then essential for effective conservation, utilizing the plethora of conservation and management tools available.

scholarly journals The potential for voluntary instruments to achieve conservation planning goals: the case of conservancies in South Africa

Oryx ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Downsborough ◽  
Charlie M. Shackleton ◽  
Andrew T. Knight
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
South African ◽  
Conservation Planning ◽  
Nationwide Survey ◽  
Land Conservation ◽  
Private Land ◽  
Eastern Cape ◽  
Private Land Conservation ◽  
Effective Conservation

AbstractSpatial prioritizations and gap analyses are increasingly undertaken to allocate conservation resources. Most spatial prioritizations are conducted without specifying the conservation instruments to be implemented and gap analyses typically assess formally protected areas but increasingly include private land conservation instruments. We examine conservancies to see if these voluntary instruments contribute towards achieving goals of South African conservation planning initiatives. We conducted a nationwide survey and interviews with conservancy members in Gauteng and the Eastern Cape. Conservancies have potential for assisting South Africa to achieve conservation planning goals at national and local scales but their inclusion in spatial prioritizations and gap analyses predicates improved protection for nature, operational refinement and increased support. We sound a warning to conservation planning initiatives that incorporate voluntary instruments on private land, and present recommendations for strengthening such instruments to make them more effective. Our findings may assist conservation planners elsewhere to design more effective conservation planning initiatives focused on private land.

Mapping ecological vulnerability to fire for effective conservation management of natural protected areas

2015 ◽  
Vol 295 ◽  
pp. 163-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberta Aretano ◽  
Teodoro Semeraro ◽  
Irene Petrosillo ◽  
Antonella De Marco ◽  
Maria Rita Pasimeni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Conservation Management ◽  
Natural Protected Areas ◽  
Ecological Vulnerability ◽  
Effective Conservation

Do hotspots fall within protected areas? A Geographic Approach to Planning analysis of regional freshwater biodiversity

2019 ◽  
Vol 64 (11) ◽  
pp. 2046-2056
Author(s):  
Ashley D. Walters ◽  
Madelyn A. Brown ◽  
Gina M. Cerbie ◽  
Marsha G. Williams ◽  
Joshua A. Banta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Freshwater Biodiversity

scholarly journals More than $1 billion needed annually to secure Africa’s protected areas with lions

2018 ◽  
Vol 115 (45) ◽  
pp. E10788-E10796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter A. Lindsey ◽  
Jennifer R. B. Miller ◽  
Lisanne S. Petracca ◽  
Lauren Coad ◽  
Amy J. Dickman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ecosystem Services ◽  
Protected Areas ◽  
Carrying Capacity ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
International Community ◽  
Panthera Leo ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Effective Conservation

Protected areas (PAs) play an important role in conserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services, yet their effectiveness is undermined by funding shortfalls. Using lions (Panthera leo) as a proxy for PA health, we assessed available funding relative to budget requirements for PAs in Africa’s savannahs. We compiled a dataset of 2015 funding for 282 state-owned PAs with lions. We applied three methods to estimate the minimum funding required for effective conservation of lions, and calculated deficits. We estimated minimum required funding as $978/km2per year based on the cost of effectively managing lions in nine reserves by the African Parks Network; $1,271/km2based on modeled costs of managing lions at ≥50% carrying capacity across diverse conditions in 115 PAs; and $2,030/km2based on Packer et al.’s [Packer et al. (2013)Ecol Lett16:635–641] cost of managing lions in 22 unfenced PAs. PAs with lions require a total of $1.2 to $2.4 billion annually, or ∼$1,000 to 2,000/km2, yet received only $381 million annually, or a median of $200/km2. Ninety-six percent of range countries had funding deficits in at least one PA, with 88 to 94% of PAs with lions funded insufficiently. In funding-deficit PAs, available funding satisfied just 10 to 20% of PA requirements on average, and deficits total $0.9 to $2.1 billion. African governments and the international community need to increase the funding available for management by three to six times if PAs are to effectively conserve lions and other species and provide vital ecological and economic benefits to neighboring communities.

scholarly journals A global systematic review on orchid data in Protected Areas

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (Suppl.1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anatoliy A. Khapugin ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Protected Areas
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document