Abstract
As the influence of human activities on natural systems continues to expand, there is a growing need to prioritize not only pristine sites for protection, but also degraded sites for restoration. We present an approach for simultaneously prioritizing sites for protection and restoration that considers landscape patterns for a threatened population of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in southwestern Alberta, Canada. We considered tradeoffs between bottom-up (food resource supply) and top-down (mortality risk from roads) factors affecting seasonal habitat quality for bears. Simulated annealing was used to prioritize source-like sites (high habitat productivity, low mortality risk) for protection, as well as sink-like sites (high habitat productivity, high mortality risk) for restoration. Priority source-like habitats identified key conservation areas where future developments should be limited, whereas priority sink-like habitats identified key areas for mitigating road-related mortality risk with access management. Systematic conservation planning methods can be used to complement traditional habitat-based methods for individual focal species by identifying habitats where conservation actions (both protection and restoration) have the highest potential utility.
Highlights
Applied conservation biology aims to protect undisturbed sites from future degradation, and to restore degraded sites to their former states
Attractive sink (AS) index values were highest where both HLS and mortality index (MR) values were high, whereas safe harbour (SH) index values were highest in areas with high HLS values and low MR values
Paved roads accounted for only 6.1% of priority sink-like planning units, whereas gravel roads accounted for 26.0% of sink-like planning units
Summary
Applied conservation biology aims to protect undisturbed sites from future degradation, and to restore degraded sites to their former states. More pristine sites could benefit from future protection, whereas degraded sites require restoration. Needs for protection and restoration often outstrip the resources available to address them [2]. Methods for prioritizing conservation actions frequently fall under the banner of systematic conservation planning, which identifies conservation goals or objectives and optimizes management actions to achieve them [4,5,6]. Systematic conservation planning has frequently been used to optimize the design of protected area networks, there remains a need to expand these concepts to a wider area of conservation objectives and management actions, including landscape prioritization of sites for restoration [1,6].
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.