Skip to main content
WCS
Menu
Library
Library Catalog
eJournals & eBooks
WCS Research
Archives
Research Use
Finding Aids
Digital Collections
WCS History
WCS Research
Research Publications
Science Data
Services for WCS Researchers
Archives Shop
Bronx Zoo
Department of Tropical Research
Browse By Product
About Us
FAQs
Intern or Volunteer
Staff
Donate
Search WCS.org
Search
search
Popular Search Terms
WCS History
Library and Archives
Library and Archives Menu
Library
Archives
WCS Research
Archives Shop
About Us
Donate
en
fr
Title
Testing the effectiveness of surrogate species for conservation planning in the Greater Virunga Landscape, Africa
Author(s)
Jones, K.R.;Plumptre, A.J.;Watson, J.E.M.;Possingham, H.P.;Ayebare, S.;Rwetsiba, A.;Wanyama, F.;Kujirakwinja, D.;Klein, Carissa J.
Published
2016
Publisher
Landscape and Urban Planning
Published Version DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.09.006
Abstract
Given the limited funds available, spatial prioritisation is necessary to help decide when and where to undertake conservation. One method for setting local scale priorities for conservation action is the landscape species approach which aims to identify priorities based on the needs of a small number of wide ranging species with large environmental impacts. Despite being used for the past decade by conservation organisations such as Wildlife Conservation Society, the effectiveness of the approach for representing a more comprehensive range of biodiversity has never been evaluated. Here we compare conservation priorities identified using a suite of landscape species (n = 13) against those using many alternative sets of threatened or endemic species (n = 7–88) to assess the applicability and suitability of the landscape species approach in a biologically diverse landscape (Greater Virunga Landscape, Uganda, Rwanda, and Democratic Republic of Congo, Africa). We defined the minimum area needed to conserve each species on the basis of the species’ range size. We found that prioritising for landscape species adequately conserves only 31 (35%) species, whereas prioritising for an equal number of endemic species, threatened species, or randomly sampled species adequately conserves 74%, 69% and 42% of species, respectively. We also found that prioritising for one taxonomic group (birds or plants) alone resulted in better surrogacy performance than the Landscape Species. These results question the underlying assumption of the landscape species approach, that managing threats to Landscape Species will also manage threats to all other species, as it is applied in the Greater Virunga Landscape.
Keywords
Surrogates;Spatial prioritisation;Landscape species approach;Protected area planning;Threat management;Marxan
Access Full Text
A full-text copy of this article may be available. Please email the
WCS Library
to request.
Back
PUB18963