The Effectiveness of Iberian Protected Areas in Conserving Terrestrial Biodiversity

Abstract

The Iberian Peninsula harbors about 50% of European plant and terrestrial vertebrate species and more than 30% of European endemic species. Despite the global recognition of its importance, the selection of protected areas has been ad hoc and the effectiveness of such choices has rarely been assessed. We compiled the most comprehensive distributional data set of Iberian terrestrial plant and vertebrate species available to date and used it to assess the degree of species representation within existing protected areas. Existing protected areas in Spain and Portugal reasonably represented the plant and animal species we considered (73-98%). Nevertheless, species of some groups (amphibians, reptiles, birds, and gymnosperms) did not accumulate in protected areas at a rate higher than expected by chance (p > 0.05). We determined that to conserve all vertebrate and plant species in the Iberian Peninsula, at least 36 additional areas are needed. Selection of additional areas for conservation would be facilitated if such areas coincided with sites of community importance (SCI) designated under the European Commission Habitats Directive. Additional areas required for full representation of the selected plant and animal species all coincide with SCI in Spain. Nevertheless, the degree of coincidence varies between 0.3% and 74.6%, and there is a possibility that important areas for conservation occur outside the SCI. Our results support the view that current SCI can be used for prioritization of areas for conservation, but a systematic reevaluation of conservation priorities in Spain and Portugal would be necessary to ensure that effective conservation of one of European's most important biodiversity regions is achieved.

“Mind the gap!” – How well does Natura 2000 cover species of European interest?

“…Even though these and other potential problems have been addressed at a regional scale in a series of "Biogeographical Seminars", which reviewed national proposals for site designations, there has been no systematic pan-European evaluation of the effectiveness of the Natura 2000 network although there have been a number of regional studies , e.g. Greece, Crete, Spain, Poland, and Italy (Araujo et al 2007;Dimitrakopoulos et al 2004;Grodzinska-Jurczak and Cent 2011;Iojă et al 2010;Maiorano et al 2007) or certain habitat types, e.g. wetlands (Jantke et al 2010).…”

“…Biodiversity conservation, gap species, Natura 2000 network, reserve site selection, Habitats Directive, reserve system, conservation planning introduction Systematic approaches in planning reserve networks have been intensively developed to guide efficient reserve site selection (Brooks et al 2006;Drechsler 2005;Margules and Pressey 2000;Margules and Sarkar 2007;Moilanen and Wintle 2006;Myers et al 2000;Trakhtenbrot and Kadmon 2006). On a global scale no concerted action plan exists to nominate conservation areas, despite repeated calls for international coordination (Brooks et al 2006;Knight et al 2007;Mace et al 2000) and available tools for conservation prioritization (Moilanen et al 2009;Schmeller et al 2008b).…”

“…On a global scale no concerted action plan exists to nominate conservation areas, despite repeated calls for international coordination (Brooks et al 2006;Knight et al 2007;Mace et al 2000) and available tools for conservation prioritization (Moilanen et al 2009;Schmeller et al 2008b). The main common strategy has been to designate conservation areas for species listed as threatened -so called "Red List species" (Rodrigues et al 2004a).…”

Hidden diversity in forest soils: Characterization and comparison of terrestrial flatworm’s communities in two national parks in Spain

“…Among its objectives, one of the most important is the protection and management of its biodiversity in order to ensure the proper functioning of ecosystems. It is desirable therefore that they house a biological diversity that is representative of its original biodiversity (Araújo, Lobo, & Moreno, 2007), that includes the levels of genetic diversity needed for the maintenance of its populations and that it is also representative of the diversity in the region. But for this it is necessary to know what was the original situation of the fauna inhabiting them, knowledge that is currently inexistent for the terrestrial planarian communities, as well as for other cryptic forest soil dwellers.…”

Territorio y áreas protegidas en España y Portugal: dos modelos de intervención en una geografía compartida

“…En efecto, todavía en 1980 (Tabla 1) los escasos ámbitos declarados no tenían consistencia territorial ni socioeconómica, ni tampoco eran suficientemente representativos de la extraordinaria biodiversidad que registra la Península Ibérica. Se trata de una constatación alarmante si se considera la importancia biogeográfica de esta península en su contexto territorial: equivale al 6% de Europa Occidental, pero alberga alrededor del 50% de las especies europeas de plantas y vertebrados terrestres, así como el 31% de endemismos censados de ambos grupos (Araujo, Lobo y Moreno, 2007).…”