Planning Across Freshwater and Terrestrial Realms: Cobenefits and Tradeoffs Between Conservation Actions

Abstract

Conservation planning has historically been restricted to planning within single realms (i.e., marine, terrestrial, or freshwater). Recently progress has been made in approaches for cross-realm planning which may enhance the ability to effectively manage processes that sustain biodiversity and ecosystem functions (e.g., connectivity) and thus minimize threats more efficiently. Current advances, however, have not optimally accounted for the fact that individual conservation management actions often have impacts across realms. We advance the existing cross-realm planning literature by presenting a conceptual framework for considering both co-benefits and tradeoffs between multiple realms (specifically freshwater and terrestrial). This conceptual framework is founded on a review of 1) the shared threats and management actions across realms and 2) existing literature on cross-realm planning to highlight recent research achievements and gaps. We identify current challenges and opportunities associated with the application of our framework and consider the more general prospects for cross-realm planning.

Biological Invasions in Conservation Planning: A Global Systematic Review

“…Despite the fact that some alien species might contribute to the achievement of conservation goals or provide socio-economic benefits to parts of society and the prediction by some scientists of an increasing contribution of alien species to conservation objectives in the future (Schlaepfer et al, 2011), we are far from that happening in practice. The specific positive impacts of some alien species on specific objectives have been mentioned in only one study (Adams et al, 2014), which did not set conservation targets for alien species.…”

“…Most studies did not specify an introduction pathway (93%) ( Figure 2E); among those that did, escape from confinement and intentional release in nature were the most common ones. Positive impacts of alien species have been reported by only one terrestrial and freshwater study (1.4%) (Figure 2E), which mentioned the use of feral animals as food resource for indigenous people (Adams et al, 2014).…”

“…These measures included the removal of invasive alien plants Rouget et al, 2003); the re-establishment of native vegetation on agricultural landscapes ; shooting, trapping or baiting invasive alien animals (Schüttler et al, 2009;Adams et al, 2014;Spatz et al, 2014;Tulloch et al, 2014). Only one study proposed to undertake pro-active, preventive management measures to minimize vectors of spreading (Reid et al, 2012).…”

“…A more complex approach was suggested by Adams et al (2014) who provided a conceptual framework considering cross-environment co-benefits and tradeoffs, and prioritizing sites based on the optimization of the spatial allocation of actions. Such actions were aimed to mitigate a large variety of stressors, e.g., urbanization, agriculture, grazing, mining, transport networks, exploitation of natural resources, including invasive alien species (e.g., weed management, invasive animal control).…”

“…Article Realm Protect/avoid Methodology followed Adams et al, 2014 Terrestrial, freshwater Protect "Protect" is indirectly inferred as the suggested approach. The authors propose a conceptual framework for considering cross-realm co-benefits and tradeoffs and prioritizing sites based on the optimization of the spatial allocation of actions Boykin et al, 2011 Terrestrial, freshwater Protect Invasive alien species were included in an index of cumulative stressors.…”