Showing papers by "Simon N. Stuart published in 2012"

Protecting Important Sites for Biodiversity Contributes to Meeting Global Conservation Targets

Abstract: Protected areas (PAs) are a cornerstone of conservation efforts and now cover nearly 13% of the world’s land surface, with the world’s governments committed to expand this to 17%. However, as biodiversity continues to decline, the effectiveness of PAs in reducing the extinction risk of species remains largely untested. We analyzed PA coverage and trends in species’ extinction risk at globally significant sites for conserving birds (10,993 Important Bird Areas, IBAs) and highly threatened vertebrates and conifers (588 Alliance for Zero Extinction sites, AZEs) (referred to collectively hereafter as ‘important sites’). Species occurring in important sites with greater PA coverage experienced smaller increases in extinction risk over recent decades: the increase was half as large for bird species with.50% of the IBAs at which they occur completely covered by PAs, and a third lower for birds, mammals and amphibians restricted to protected AZEs (compared with unprotected or partially protected sites). Globally, half of the important sites for biodiversity conservation remain unprotected (49% of IBAs, 51% of AZEs). While PA coverage of important sites has increased over time, the proportion of PA area covering important sites, as opposed to less important land, has declined (by 0.45–1.14% annually since 1950 for IBAs and 0.79–1.49% annually for AZEs). Thus, while appropriately located PAs may slow the rate at which species are driven towards extinction, recent PA network expansion has under-represented important sites. We conclude that better targeted expansion of PA networks would help to improve biodiversity trends.

Global threats to pinnipeds

Abstract: The 2008 IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) review of the status of the world’s mammals identified marine mammals (IUCN 2008) as disproportionally threatened and data poor compared to their terrestrial counterparts, and their status was noted as a particular concern (IUCN 2008, Mace et al. 2008, Schipper et al. 2008). The threats faced by marine mammals were identified as being different, with accidental mortality and pollution being dominant threats that superseded habitat loss, which was identified as the principal concern for land mammals. It was suggested that harvesting remained a major threat for half of the marine mammal species in the world. The distribution of marine mammals was described as being concentrated in tropical and temperate coastal platforms and associated with high levels of primary productivity. Threat levels were highest for marine mammals living in the North Atlantic, North Pacific and Southeast Asia. Range size was described as generally declining toward both poles. Although these generalities are of course correct for all marine mammals, it must be recognized that the larger number of species of cetaceans compared to other marine mammal groups (85 cetaceans, the polar bear Ursus maritimus, 4 extant sirenians and 36 pinniped species) biases the conclusions in the assessment for marine mammals to such a degree that a separate summary for the pinnipeds of the world is warranted. Additionally, a species-level assessment masks some important conservation concerns for pinnipeds with species classified as Least Concern actually containing threatened subspecies ( e.g., ringed seals). Finally, and perhaps most importantly, climate change issues were not specifically addressed in the vast majority of marine mammal assessments done for the 2008 IUCN review (IUCN 2008). We present here a complete assessment of the status and threats facing pinnipeds at the subspecies level, integrating the expected impacts of changing patterns of threat due to global climate change.

Why South-east Asia should be the world’s priority for averting imminent species extinctions, and a call to join a developing cross-institutional programme to tackle this urgent issue

Abstract: Global species loss during the present human-caused mass-extinction far exceeds background rates and is detrimental to human existence. Across the globe, vertebrate extinction risks are highest in South-east Asia. This region has among the world’s fastest recent habitat-loss rates. More of a determinant to the conservation status of many vertebrates has been a huge explosion in South-east and East Asian trade demand, and thus harvest rates, for wild species for luxury food, medicine, tonics, horns and other trophy parts, and captive animals. The region has little tradition of effectively managed protected areas. Consequently, many South-east Asian species will become extinct in the near future if current trends continue. An emerging programme coordinated by IUCN SSC on behalf of its member organisations is being developed to assist implementing agencies and their partners minimise the impending extinctions among South-east Asian non-marine vertebrates. The programme is neither a direct implementing body nor a direct donor, but is a supporter using the synergistic strength of its constituent organisations and IUCN’s intergovernmental status to ameliorate perennial challenges to these species’ conservation. Its two main components are (1) to identify species at greatest risk of extinction, specify their conservation needs and support conservation efforts to reduce this risk; and (2) to build, in selected ways, an enabling environment for species-specific interventions. To address the first component, the programme will: develop and maintain a priority species list with associated priority sites necessary to reduce extinction; determine what conservation mechanisms are already in place (many species presently have none), and encourage additional actions as warranted; and serve as a clearinghouse for information and skills exchange. To address the second component, the programme will: work with existing and new donors to prioritise these species and develop emergency and long-term conservation funding mechanisms for them; encourage the integration of priority species into relevant conservation plans; serve as a liaison body to support dialogue among relevant parties in improving species’ conservation (e.g. governmental and non-governmental site- and higher-level implementing agencies, and donors); support the functionality of information/expertise-based bodies such as IUCN SSC specialist groups; serve as a mechanism to link recommended conservation strategies with appropriate ‘stakeholders’; and increase public awareness of the severity of this extinction crisis. By October 2012, working species and site lists will be available and a stakeholder meeting will have discussed the working mechanics of the programme. Any highly collaborative effort of this magnitude faces stiff challenges. It must serve only as a catalyst, recognising and supporting existing efforts, and encouraging action for species presently not receiving it. All parties must recognise that not all conservation efforts will be successful: extinction potential of high-risk species is, by definition, not negligible. Many of the most-threatened South-east Asian species have high market value, or are bycatch of those which do, meaning that powerful vested interests oppose their conservation. Considerably increased funding, primarily to implementing agencies, for highly-threatened species in South-east Asia is required. Funding to run the programme must not compete with the implementing agencies’ existing sources. Human capacity is also limiting outcomes, and how to effect an appropriate increase in capable and committed personnel to use increased funding effectively remains unclear. Finally, the philosophy of the programme must be recognised by all as only part of overall species conservation in South-East Asia.