Abstract
Percentage targets for conservation have become a popular tool (advocated in both the scientific literature and the conservation community) for setting minimum goals for the amount of land to be set aside as protected areas. However, there is little literature to support a consistent percentage target that might be widely applied. Moreover, most percentage targets have not taken into account issues of species persistence. A recent study of herbivores in Kruger National Park took into account issues of representation and persistence in setting conservation targets and found that results were consistently about 50% and were unaffected by different permutations of the reserve selection process. Here, we carry out a similar analysis for representation of mammals within sites that are predicted to allow for their persistence, across eight ecologically defined regions in Canada to test whether we see similar consistent patterns emerging. We found that percentage targets varied with the different permutations of the reserve selection algorithms, both within and between the study regions. Thus, we conclude that the use of percentage targets is not an appropriate conservation strategy.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Banfield A. W. F. (1974). The Mammals of Canada. University of Toronto Press, Toronto Ontario
Bedward M., Pressey R.L. and Keith D.A. (1992). A new approach for selecting fully representative reserve networks: addressing efficiency, reserve design and land suitability with an iterative analysis. Biol. Conserv. 62: 115–125
Beier P. (1993). Determining minimum habitat areas and habitat corridors for cougars. Conserv. Biol. 7: 94–108
Cabeza M. (2003). Habitat loss and connectivity of reserve networks in probability approaches to reserve design. Ecol. Lett. 6: 665–672
Cabeza M. (2003). Site-selection algorithms and habitat loss. Conserv. Biol. 17: 1402–1413
Cowling R.M., Pressey R.L., Rouget M. and Lombard A.T. (2003). A conservation plan for a global biodiversity hotspot – the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Biol. Conserv. 112: 191–216
Glenn S.M. and Nudds T.D. (1989). Insular biogeography of mammals in Canadian parks. J. Biogeogr. 16: 261–268
Gurd D.B., Nudds T.D. and Rivard D.H. (2001). Conservation of mammals in eastern North American wildlife reserves: how small is too small?. Conserv. Biol. 15: 1355–1363
Habib L.D., Wiersma Y.F. and Nudds T.D. (2003). Effects of errors in range maps on estimates of historical species richness of mammals in Canadian national parks. J. Biogeogr. 30: 375–380
Hager H.A. and Nudds T.D. (2001). Parks and protected areas as ecological baselines: Establishment of baseline data on species–area relations from islands in Georgian Bay. In: (eds) Ecology, Culture and Conservation of a Protected Area: Fathom Five National Marine Park, Canada, pp 269–280. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands
Hagmeier E.M. (1966). A numerical analysis of the distributional patterns of North American Mammals. II. Re-evaluation of the provinces. Syst. Zool. 15: 279–299
Humphreys W.F. and Kitchener D.J. (1982). The effect of habitat utilization on species–area curves: implications for optimal reserve area. J. Biogeogr. 9: 391–396
Kerley G.I.H., Pressey R.L., Cowling R.M., Boshoff A.F. and Sims-Castley R. (2003). Options for the conservation of large and medium-sized mammals in the Cape Floristic Region hotspotSouth Africa. Biol. Conserv. 112: 169–190
Lawes M.J. and Piper S.E. (1998). There is less to binary maps than meets the eye: the use of species distribution data in the southern African sub-region. S. Afr. J. Sci. 94: 207–210
Margules C.R., Nicholls A.O. and Pressey R.L. (1988). Selecting networks of reserves to maximize biological diversity. Biol. Conserv. 43: 63–76
McNeely J. and Miller K. (1984). National Parks Conservation and Development: the Role of Protected Areas in Sustaining Society, Proceedings of the World Congress on National Parks. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC
Noss R.F. (1993). A conservation plan for the Oregon Coast Range: some preliminary suggestions. Nat. Areas J. 13: 276–290
Noss R.F. (1996). Protected areas: how much is enough?. In: (eds) National Parks and Protected Areas: Their Role in Environmental Protection, pp 91–120. Blackwell Science, Cambridge, United Kingdom
Noss R.F., Carroll C., Vance-Borland K. and Wuerthner G. (2002). A multicriteria assessment of the irreplaceability and vulnerability of sites in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Conserv. Biol. 16: 895–908
Possingham H.P., Ball I. and Andleman S.J. 2000. (2000). Mathematical models for identifying representative reserve networks. In: (eds) Quantitative Methods in Conservation Biology, pp 291–305. Springer-Verlag, New York
Pressey R.L. and Nicholls A.O. (1989). Application of a numerical algorithm to the selection of reserves in semi-arid New South Wales. Biol. Conserv. 50: 263–278
Pressey R.L. and Logan V.S. (1995). Reserve coverage and requirements in relation to partitioning and generalization of land classes: analysis for western New South Wales. Conserv. Biol. 9: 1506–1517
Pressey R.L. and Logan V.S. (1998). Size of selection units for future reserves and its influence on actual vs targeted representation of features: a case study in western New South Wales. Biol. Conserv. 85: 305–319
Pressey R.L., Humphries C.J., Margules C.R., Vane-Wright R.I. and Williams P.H. (1993). Beyond opportunism: key principles for systematic reserve selection. Trends Ecol. Evol. 4: 124–128
Pressey R.L., Possingham H.P. and Margules C.R. (1996). Optimality in reserve selection algorithms: When does it matter and how much?. Biol. Conserv. 76: 259–267
Pressey R.L., Cowling R.M. and Rouget M. (2003). Formulating conservation targets for biodiversity pattern and process in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Biol. Conserv. 112: 99–127
Rodrigues A.S.L. and Gaston K.J. (2001). How large do reserve networks need to be?. Ecol. Lett. 4: 602–609
Rodrigues A.S.L., Gregory R.D. and Gaston K.J. (2000a). Robustness of reserve selection procedures under temporal species turnover. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 267: 49–55
Rodrigues A.S.L., Gaston K.J. and Gregory R.D. (2000b). Using presence–absence data to establish reserve selection procedures that are robust to temporal species turnover. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B. 267: 897–902
Saetersdal M., Line J.M. and Birks H.J.B. (1993). How to maximize biological diversity in nature reserve selection: vascular plants and breeding birds in deciduous woodlands, western Norway. Biol. Conserv. 66: 131–138
Schmiegelow F.K.A. and Nudds T.D. (1987). Island biogeography of vertebrates in Georgian Bay Islands National Park. Can. J. Zool. 65: 3041–3043
Schoenwald-Cox C.M., Baker R.J. and Bayless J.W. 1998. Applying the population/area model to the planning of large mammal translocation. In: Nielsen L. and Brown R.D.Translocation of Wild Animals. The Wisconsin Humane Society and Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Institute, Kingsville, TX, pp. 52–63.
Solomon M., van Jaarsveld A.S., Biggs H.C. and Knight M.H. (2003). Conservation targets for viable species assemblages?. Biodivers. Conserv. 12: 2435–2441
Soulé M.E. and Sanjayan M.A. (1998). Conservation targets: do they help?. Science 279: 2106–2108
Svancara L.K., Brannon R., Scott J.M., Groves C.R., Noss R.F. and Pressey R.L. (2005). Policy-driven vs. evidence-based conservation: a review of political targets and biological needs. BioScience 55: 989–995
Ryti R.T. (1992). Effect of the focal taxon on the selection of nature reserves. Ecol. Appl. 2: 404–410
Warman L.D., Sinclair A.R.E., Scudder G.G.E., Klinkenberg B. and Pressey R.L. (2004). Sensitivity of systematic reserve selection to decisions about scalebiological data and targets – a case study from southern British Columbia. Conserv. Biol. 18: 655–666
Wielgus R.B. (2002). Minimum viable population and reserve sizes for naturally regulated grizzly bears in British Columbia. Biol. Conserv. 106: 381–388
WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development) (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK
Zar J.H. (1999). Biostatistical Analysis. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, USA
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wiersma, Y.F., Nudds, T.D. Conservation Targets for Viable Species Assemblages in Canada: Are Percentage Targets Appropriate?. Biodivers Conserv 15, 4555–4567 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-005-5819-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-005-5819-5