Identifying Conservation‐Priority Areas in the Tropics: a Land‐Use Change Modeling Approach

Abstract

Most quantitative methods for identifying conservation-priority areas require more detailed knowledge about the extent and distribution of biodiversity than is currently available. Accelerated and irreversible losses of biodiversity call for the development of alternative methods to identify priority sites for biodiversity inventory and protection. We focused on the state of Arunachal Pradesh, a biodiversity-rich region in northeast India. We used a geographic information system and spatially explicit modeling to examine the correlation of land-cover and land-use patterns with biogeophysical characteristics and to project future patterns of land-use change. In 1988, 70% of Arunachal Pradesh was covered by forest. We project that 50% of the state's 1988 forest will be lost by 2021, based on anticipated growth of the human population and resulting resource use. Of the total simulated deforestation, 76% occurs in areas that have no legal state protection. We developed a map of threats to biodiversity that divides areas that were forested in 1988 into four categories: (1) susceptible to future deforestation and currently unprotected; (2) susceptible to future deforestation but currently within the protected-area network; (3) not susceptible to future deforestation and protected; and (4) neither susceptible to future deforestation nor currently protected. We make the following recommendations based on our analyses. Areas in category 1 should be a high priority for biodiversity inventory and conservation action. Areas in category 2 should have rigid enforcement of protection. Areas in category 3 are locations of relatively low priority for enforcement. Areas in category 4 that have a high conservation potential are politically the easiest to include in the protected-area network and should be protected before they become targets of future land-use change. Reserve forests-forests managed by the state forest department for a variety of purposes, including selective logging for timber harvesting-are predominantly located in areas susceptible to land-use change and are prime candidates for upgrading of protection status. Identificación de Areas Prioritarias de Conservación en los Trópicos: un Modelo Enfocado al Cambio en el Uso del SueloResumen: La mayoría de los métodos cuantitativos para identificar áreas prioritarias de conservación requieren de conocimiento más detallado que el que actualmente se tiene acerca de la magnitud y distribución de la biodiversidad. La pérdida acelerada e irreversible de biodiversidad exige el desarrollo de métodos alternativos para identificar sitios prioritarios para inventariar y proteger la biodiversidad. Enfocamos el estado de Arunachal Pradesh, una región rica en biodiversidad del noreste de India. Utilizamos SIG y modelos espacialmente explícitos para examinar la correlación de superficie y patrones de uso del suelo con características biogeofísicas y para proyectar patrones futuros de cambio en el uso del suelo. En 1988, el 70% de Arunachal Pradesh estaba cubierto por bosques. Proyect...

The ichthyofauna of upper rio Capivari: defining conservation strategies based on the composition and distribution of fish species

“…This approach, analysis of geographic patterns assuming a particular taxonomic authority list to be representative, leads investigators to focus attention on species' distributions without concern for geographic variation, systematic problems, or species limits (Peterson & Navarro-Sigüenza, 1999). In addition, identification of conservation areas ideally requires exhaustive knowledge of species and ecosystem diversity and distribution, but detailed inventories in the field are severely constrained by limited resources and time (Menon et al, 2001). For this reason, the analysis of threats to biodiversity is frequently based on threatened vegetation categories, presenting high integrity areas susceptible to deforestation and not protected by law restrictions, have been the most selected areas for conservation.…”

Potential future land use threats to California’s protected areas

“…Such an approach would incorporate biodiversity threat into biological assessments (Theobald 2003). Vulnerability indicators such as future population growth and presence of roads have already been used to rate the potential vulnerability of plant communities and to set conservation priorities (White et al 1997;Stoms 2000;Menon et al 2001;Radeloff et al 2010). However, selection of appropriate vulnerability indicators is regionally dependent on the land use threat (e.g.…”

Zonation of Conservation Priority Sites for Effective Management of Tropical Forests in India: A Value-Based Conservation Approach

“…The forest loss and degradation are associated directly with proximity to roads and villages up to 6 Km [13,29] that confirms the disturbing effect of roads by means of logging, mining, grazing, agriculture and urban development. Around 6500 ha of the reserved forest come into the risk area.…”

“…Two types of information are necessary for setting conservation priorities; the conservation value of an area and its vulnerability [13]. These pieces of information should include multiple criteria such as vegetation type [33], species richness [22], socio-economic and socio-cultural value sites [21], endemism [6], concentration of red listed plants [8,1] and stresses on the biota [28].…”