Mountains: Special places to be protected? An analysis of worldwide nature conservation efforts in mountains

Kollmair, Michael; Gurung, Ghana S.; Hurni, Kaspar; Maselli, Daniel

doi:10.1080/17451590509618091

Cited by 47 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Occurrence of high species richness, narrow elevation range of most species and absence of PAs at low to mid-elevation has pointed a way for extension of conservation efforts to these elevation sites (Acharya & Vijayan 2015). Since the areas below 2,000m are almost entirely inhabited by people and the major chunk of forests fall under private holdings, conservation can be achieved only through the involvement of the local community as suggested for mountainous areas (Kollmair et al 2005). Hence, the present study was undertaken to understand the biodiversity conservation value of agroecosystems in Sikkim by assessing the butterfly diversity in three representative human-modified ecosystems: farmbased agroforestry systems and large cardamom-based agroforestry system along with adjoining natural forest in southern Sikkim, the eastern Himalaya, India.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

<b>Butterfly diversity in human-modified ecosystems of southern Sikkim, the eastern Himalaya, India</b>

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding wild biodiversity of agroecosystems and other human dominated landscapes are crucial for the management and conservation of biological resources. Here, we studied the diversity, abundance, similarity and functionality of butterflies in different human modified ecosystems in southern Sikkim, the Eastern Himalaya. The study was conducted from January 2015 to May 2015 by covering three habitat types namely, farm-based agroforestry, large cardamom-based agroforestry and adjacent natural forest ecosystem. We followed point count method along the transect to collect data on butterflies in the study area. A total of 911 individual butterflies representing six families and 44 species were recorded during the present study in southern Sikkim. Species richness and abundances of butterflies were significantly different among the systems. While diversity and abundance were higher in forest patches, each system harbored unique species assemblages with low similarity between habitats. The information on larval host plants were available for 41 butterfly species which depended on 128 plant species belonging to 27 families. The butterfly community was dominated by oligophagous II (19 species) followed by polyphagous (11 species), monophagous (8 species) and oligophagous I (3 species). Similarly, generalist feeders had higher species and abundance compared to specialist feeders. Specialist species were confined to forest habitat, whereas generalist species were mostly restricted to cultivated systems. The findings of the study highlighted the need for conservation of traditionally managed agroecosystems in order to conserve butterflies and other associated biodiversity.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

<b>Butterfly diversity in human-modified ecosystems of southern Sikkim, the eastern Himalaya, India</b>

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…PAs in the HKH show similar trends in terms of number and extent of coverage as at the global scale (Chape et al 2005;Kollmair et al 2005;Naughton-Treves et al 2005). There has been considerable progress in the number and extent of PAs established from the 1980s till the 2000s.…”

Section: Trend and Management Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…In the recent past, there has been a tremendous increase in the number and coverage of PAs in mountain regions (Kollmair et al 2005). Enormous progress in terms of PA coverage in the HKH is evidence of the commitment shown by the countries of the HKH with respect to delineating biologically significant areas for conservation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mountains, due to their diverse habitats with varied micro-climatic and ecological conditions, have high levels of biodiversity (Price 2004;Kollmair et al 2005;Brooks et al 2006) and are therefore a priority for biodiversity conservation. The Hindu Kush-Himalayas (HKH), the working area of the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), is one such dynamic landscape with a rich and remarkable biodiversity (Pei 1995;Guangwei 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Status of a protected area system in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas: An analysis of PA coverage

Chettri¹,

Shakya²,

Thapa³

et al. 2008

International Journal of Biodiversity Science & Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYMultifaceted patterns of protected area (PA) expansion are reviewed considering: i) the increase in PA number and coverage; ii) distribution and extent of important bird areas (IBAs); and iii) distribution and coverage of global biodiversity hotspots and the Global 200 Ecoregions that fall within the Hindu Kush-Himalayas (HKH). The analysis revealed that biodiversity conservation is a priority for the eight regional member countries of the HKH, who have established 488 PAs over the last 89 years (1918 to 2007). The eight countries sharing the HKH have committed 39% of this total geographical area to the PA network and 11% to IBAs, which is quite significant when compared to the global target of 10%. There has been an increasing trend in PA establishment over the last four decades. The PA coverage within the HKH of China alone is significant (35.5%), followed by India (1.46%) and Nepal (0.58%). When IUCN management categories are considered, the majority of PAs belong to Category V (39%), followed by Category IV (29%). Only 0.6% of PAs are managed as Category I, and, in recent years, Categories V and VI have increased. Of the total HKH geographical area, 32% is covered by four global biodiversity hotspots and 62% by the Global 200 Ecoregions. However, only 25% of the global biodiversity hotspots and 40% of the Global 200 Ecoregions are part of the PA network. There are still numerous gaps in conservation in the HKH. Coordinated and committed efforts are required to bring other critical habitats within the PA network in the HKH.

show abstract

“…Nearly 90% of the mountain population lives in developing and transition countries. Mountain livelihoods still depend to a great extent on the use of natural resources, as 73% of all mountain people live in rural settings (Kollmair et al 2005).…”

Section: Mountain Regions: Definition and Specificitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Migration drivers in mountain regions in the context of climate change: A case study in Shangnan County of China

Lei

Finlayson

Thwaites

et al. 2013

Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mountains: Special places to be protected? An analysis of worldwide nature conservation efforts in mountains

Cited by 47 publications

References 0 publications

<b>Butterfly diversity in human-modified ecosystems of southern Sikkim, the eastern Himalaya, India</b>

<b>Butterfly diversity in human-modified ecosystems of southern Sikkim, the eastern Himalaya, India</b>

Status of a protected area system in the Hindu Kush-Himalayas: An analysis of PA coverage

Migration drivers in mountain regions in the context of climate change: A case study in Shangnan County of China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About