Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from...
-
Upload
sterling-devereux -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
1
Transcript of Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from...
![Page 1: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Freshwater conservation planning
Systematic conservation planning and the role of
software: from data to implementation and management
Society for Conservation Biology
Port Elizabeth
26-29 June 2007
Jeanne Nel
![Page 2: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Page 2
Outline
• Framework for freshwater conservation planning
• Planning units for freshwater
• Mapping biodiversity pattern
• Incorporating biodiversity processes
• Quantitative targets
• Conservation design
• Scheduling catchments for implementation
• Integration with terrestrial conservation
• Implications of climate change
• Try to cover “high road” (plenty of data, time and funding) and “low road” (no data, or rapid assessment) options
![Page 3: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Page 3
Framework for freshwater conservation planning
• Same overarching goals and principles to terrestrial
• No single “recipe” as methods depend on:
• Data availability
• Expert knowledge
• Skills & training of the conservation planning team
• Time & budgetary constraints
• Attention needs to be given to:
• Supporting process data layers, especially connectivity
• Rehabilitation
• Supporting process layers are space hungry – make more palatable for implementation through:
• Multiple-use zoning
• Scheduling
![Page 4: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Page 4
Planning units
• Sub-catchments small enough to match variability of biodiversity pattern
• Immediately captures some degree of connectivity
• These are still generally larger than terrestrial planning units
![Page 5: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Page 5
Biodiversity pattern
• River types
• Focal fish species
• Focal invertebrate species
• Wetland types
• Free-flowing rivers
• Special features
• Riparian forests
• Scenic gorges and waterfalls
• Large intact wetlands
![Page 6: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Page 6
Biodiversity pattern: river types
• Top down vs bottom up approaches (Kingsford et al. 2005)
• Based on variables that drive heterogeneity vs those that respond to heterogeneity
• Drivers generally based on hydrology and geomorphology, for which surrogates can be derived
• Response variables generally use biota and water chemistry, are data intensive and often confounded by human impacts
• General trend is to use hydrogeomorphological classification
………..AND supplement wherever possible with freshwater focal species
Classification approaches:• Higgins et al. 2005. Conservation Biology 19(2): 432-445 • Kingsford, R.T. et al. 2005. Available from: http://www.ids.org.au/~cnevill/RiversBlueprint.pdf
![Page 7: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Page 7
Application of classification approaches:• Nel et al. 2007. Diversity and Distributions 13: 341-352 • Thieme et al. 2007. Biological Conservation 135: 484-501
Biodiversity pattern: river types
VEGETATION
HYDROLOGICALVARIABILITY
LANDSCAPE-LEVEL CLASSIFICATION
STREAM GRADIENTS
RIVERTYPES
STREAM-LEVEL CLASSIFICATION
Spatialoverlay
Spatialoverlay
GEOLOGY
CLIMATE
…clean slivers & assess ”false heterogeneity”
![Page 8: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Page 8
Biodiversity pattern: River types
• Hydrological variation• Low road: model water balance using mean annual precipitation and
evapotranspiration; provides sub-catchment level hydrology
• Middle road: model using hydrological gauge data; generally only available for main rivers
• High road: use topocadastral data which ID’s perenniality based on seasonal surveys
• Stream gradients• Low road: use elevation thresholds to ID high-elevation, mid-elevation and
lowland streams
• High road: Model stream slope based on rivers and DEM GIS layers & assign geomorphological zonation:
Lumped geomorphological zone
Rowntree and Wadeson (1999) zones
Source zone Source zones
Mountain stream Mountain headwater & mountain streams
Upper foothills Transitional zones and upper foothills
Lower foothills Lower foothills
Lowland river Lowland river
![Page 9: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Page 9
Example of river types……
River type nameTotal length (km)
Length intact (km)
Target (km)
Perennial-South Western Coastal Belt-Mountain stream 13 0 2545
Perennial-South Western Coastal Belt-Upper foothills 17 0 3338
Perennial-South Western Coastal Belt-Lower foothills 14 0 2900
Perennial-Western Folded Mountains-Mountain stream 115 98 22929
Perennial-Western Folded Mountains-Upper foothills 375 308 75042
Perennial-Western Folded Mountains-Lower foothills 60 38 11906
Perennial-Western Folded Mountains-Lowland river 36 22 7231
Non-perennial-Great Karoo-Mountain stream 22 16 4368
Non-perennial-Great Karoo-Lower foothills 53 17 10649
From:
• Nel et al. 2006. Available from: http://www.waternet.co.za/rivercons/
![Page 10: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Page 10
Biodiversity pattern: Wetland delineations
• Orthophotos and user-interpretation – works very well but time-consuming and mentally tedious
• Remote sensing:
• Fine-resolution (< 30 m) imagery hold potential but is still relatively expensive
• 30 m resolution imagery with wetness potential models (based on seasonality, geology, topography) has been used in South Africa, but with disconcerting levels of accuracy
• Amalgamation of existing GIS layers:
• Delineations from ad hoc site visits by ecologists
• Wetlands marked on 1:50 000 topocadastral maps
• 30 m resolution waterbodies corrected for dams, and enhanced using wetness potential models)
Relevant literature:• Ewart-Smith et al. 2006. Available from the Water Research Commission, South Africa, Report K8/652.• Goetz et al. 2006. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 42(1):133-143.
![Page 11: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Page 11
Biodiversity pattern: Wetland types
• Floristic vs hydrogeomorphological classification frameworks
• Hydrogeomorphological frameworks classify according to ecological functional type and tend to be more commonly used
• South African National Classification Framework:
• Hierarchical
• Based primarily on hydrogeomorphological criteria
• Biotic criteria are used as secondary descriptors
Vegetation group
Alluvial
Dune Strandveld
Fynbos
Nama Karoo
Renosterveld
Salt Marsh
Salt Pans
Sand and Dune Fynbos
Succulent Karoo
Drainage Landform (shape and/or setting)
Non-isolated Valley bottom
Floodplain
Depression linked to channel
Seep linked to channel
Isolated Depression not linked to a channel
Seep not linked to a channel
Level 1: Primary descriptors
Secondary descriptors
Relevant literature:• Ewart-Smith et al. 2006. Available from the Water Research Commission, South Africa, Report K8/652.
![Page 12: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Page 12
Biodiversity pattern: Wetland types
• Functional type is based on drainage, landform and/or setting
• Can use surrogates based on river buffers, soil depth and slope
• Slope from United States 90 m digital
elevation data;
http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/j/z/jzs169/Project3.htm
• Soil from General Soils Pattern Map of
South Africa which provides soil and
terrain information at a 1:250000 scale.
Available from www.agis.agric.za.
• Results are strongly limited by scale of
environmental surrogates
Functional Surrogate
Valley bottom Wetlands occurring on slopes of 0-2.4° and soils < 450 m that are not “Depression” or “Floodplain”
Floodplain Wetlands intersecting a 100 m GIS buffer around lowland river reaches
Depression Pans from 1:50000 topocadastral
Seep linked to channel Wetlands occurring within a 100 m GIS buffer of a 1:50,000 river, on slopes of > 2.4° and soils > 450 mm that are not “Depression” or “Floodplain”
Seep not linked to a channel Wetlands occurring outside a 100 m GIS buffer of a 1:50,000 river, on slopes of > 2.4° and soils > 450 mm that are not “Depression” or “Floodplain”
![Page 13: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Page 13
Example of wetland types……
Drainage Landform Vegetation group Wetland type Total area (ha) Intact area (ha) TargetChannelled Valley bottom Alluvial Channelled-Valley bottom-Alluvial 3173 1155 635Channelled Valley bottom Dune Strandveld Channelled-Valley bottom-Dune Strandveld 329 0 66Channelled Valley bottom Fynbos Channelled-Valley bottom-Fynbos 1794 610 359Channelled Valley bottom Nama Karoo Channelled-Valley bottom-Nama Karoo 70 70 14Channelled Valley bottom Renosterveld Channelled-Valley bottom-Renosterveld 199 60 40Channelled Valley bottom Sand & Dune Fynbos Channelled-Valley bottom-Sand & Dune Fynbos 1656 26 331Channelled Valley bottom Succulent Karoo Channelled-Valley bottom-Succulent Karoo 3462 2806 692Channelled Floodplain Alluvial Channelled-Floodplain-Alluvial 12069 0 2414Channelled Floodplain Fynbos Channelled-Floodplain-Fynbos 3420 3420 684Channelled Floodplain Renosterveld Channelled-Floodplain-Renosterveld 649 0 130Channelled Floodplain Sand & Dune Fynbos Channelled-Floodplain-Sand & Dune Fynbos 4177 0 835Channelled Seep Alluvial Channelled-Seep-Alluvial 1709 951 342Channelled Seep Fynbos Channelled-Seep-Fynbos 1533 538 307Channelled Seep Nama Karoo Channelled-Seep-Nama Karoo 65 42 13Channelled Seep Renosterveld Channelled-Seep-Renosterveld 866 408 173Channelled Seep Sand & Dune Fynbos Channelled-Seep-Sand & Dune Fynbos 1337 40 267Channelled Seep Succulent Karoo Channelled-Seep-Succulent Karoo 5844 4789 1169Unchannelled Seep Alluvial Unchannelled-Seep-Alluvial 45 20 9Unchannelled Seep Fynbos Unchannelled-Seep-Fynbos 107 74 21Unchannelled Seep Nama Karoo Unchannelled-Seep-Nama Karoo 12 12 2Unchannelled Seep Renosterveld Unchannelled-Seep-Renosterveld 190 62 38Unchannelled Seep Sand & Dune Fynbos Unchannelled-Seep-Sand & Dune Fynbos 49 16 10Unchannelled Seep Succulent Karoo Unchannelled-Seep-Succulent Karoo 360 318 72Unchannelled Depression Alluvial Unchannelled-Depression-Alluvial 507 477 101Unchannelled Depression Fynbos Unchannelled-Depression-Fynbos 23 16 5Unchannelled Depression Nama Karoo Unchannelled-Depression-Nama Karoo 82 82 16Unchannelled Depression Renosterveld Unchannelled-Depression-Renosterveld 51 0 10Unchannelled Depression Salt Marsh Unchannelled-Depression-Salt Marsh 260 260 52Unchannelled Depression Salt Pans Unchannelled-Depression-Salt Pans 120 46 24Unchannelled Depression Sand & Dune Fynbos Unchannelled-Depression-Sand & Dune Fynbos 63 23 13Unchannelled Depression Succulent Karoo Unchannelled-Depression-Succulent Karoo 274 274 55
From:• Nel et al. 2006. Available from: http://www.waternet.co.za/rivercons/
![Page 14: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Page 14
Biodiversity pattern: Focal fish species
• Umbrella, keystone, flagship, threatened, rare or endemic species
• Point locality & expert knowledge
• What is the status of the population at each locality
• Exclude marginal river reaches; select ones with the most suitable habitat & containing populations large enough to be “viable”
• Modelled distributions and probability of occurrence
• Core populations based on abundances
• Needs to be accompanied by persistence considerations
Relevant literature:• Brewer et al. 2007. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 27:326–341.• Filipe et al. 2004. Conservation Biology 18:189-200.• Nel et al. 2006. Available from: http://www.waternet.co.za/rivercons/• Winston & Angermeier 1995. Conservation Biology 9:1518-1527.
![Page 15: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Page 15
Example of fish sanctuaries and connector areas
From:• Nel et al. 2006. Available from: http://www.waternet.co.za/rivercons/
![Page 16: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Page 16
Biodiversity pattern: other focal species
• Data almost non-existent
• Invertebrates often exist at family level; rarely species level problematic
All families (90) Focal genera (25)
• But see Linke et al. 2007
Relevant literature:• Linke et al. 2007. Freshwater Biology 52:918–938.
![Page 17: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Page 17
Biodiversity pattern: special features
• The low road option of incorporating expert knowledge!
• Features generally include:
• Rivers free of alien fish
• Intact river gorges & waterfalls (scenic and evolutionary value)
• Large known & intact wetland systems
• All were included as moderate protection zones in the final conservation design, PLUS
• Planning unit cost was “discounted” for all sub-quaternary catchments containing special features
![Page 18: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Page 18
Outline
• Framework for freshwater conservation planning
• Planning units for freshwater – sub-catchments….see Hydrosheds
• Mapping biodiversity pattern
• Incorporating biodiversity processes
• Quantitative targets
• Conservation design
• Scheduling catchments for implementation
• Integration with terrestrial conservation
• Implications of climate change
• Try to cover “high road” (plenty of data, time and funding) and “low road” (no data, or rapid assessment) options
![Page 19: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Page 19
Biodiversity processes
• Four key considerations for freshwaters:
• Step 1: Select systems of high ecological integrity
• Step 2: Incorporate connectivity
• Step 3: Incorporate any additional spatial processes
• Step 4: Select persistent populations
Relevant literature:• Pressey et al. in press. Trends in Ecology and Evolution.• Pressey et al. 2003. Biological Conservation 112: 99–127.• Rouget et al. 2006. Conservation Biology 20(2): 549–561.• Sarkar et al. 2006. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 31:123–59.
![Page 20: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Page 20
Step 1: Select systems of high ecological integrity
• Incorporates numerous local-scale processes & large-scale processes associated with the natural flow regime
• Use as an initial screening mechanism in selecting for pattern targets
• Field-based biological assessments at site-level BUT labour intensive
• Land cover surrogates in riparian buffers & throughout the catchment
• BUT cumulative upstream impacts can be problematic
• Wherever possible use field-based data and modelling in combination
Relevant literature:• Amis et al. 2007. Water SA 33(2): 217-221.• Matteson & Angermeier 2007. Environmental Management 39:125–138.• Snyder et al. 2007. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 41: 659-677.
![Page 21: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Page 21
Methods for mapping ecological integrity
• Used national data (Kleynhans 2000) • Flow
• Inundation
• Water quality
• Stream bed condition
• Introduced instream biota
• Riparian or stream bank condition
• Integrity categories• A (largely natural) to F (unacceptably
modified)
• Evaluated against site assessment data
• Used 30 x 30 m national land cover to calculate % natural vegetation, deriving:• Catchment disturbance index (sub-
quaternary catchment)
• Riparian disturbance index (within a GIS buffer of 500 m)
• Macro-channel disturbance index (within a GIS buffer of 100 m)
• Used 80% as threshold for “intact” vs “not intact”
• Downgraded any intact tributaries with > 5 % erosion within 500 m of channel
Main rivers in quaternary Tributaries (all other 500K rivers)
![Page 22: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Page 22
Map of ecological integrity
• 23% main rivers intact; 57% if tributaries are added
• Emphasizes the role of tributaries as refugia
• Main rivers need to be in a state that supports connectivity
From:• Nel et al. 2006. Available from:
http://www.waternet.co.za/rivercons/
Other application studies:• Linke et al. 2007. Freshwater Biology 52:918–938• Thieme et al. 2007. Biological Conservation 135: 484-501
![Page 23: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Page 23
Wetland integrity/condition
• Use NLC2000 to calculate % natural vegetation, deriving:• Catchment disturbance index (sub-quaternary catchment)
• Buffered core disturbance index (within a GIS buffer of 100 m)
• Core disturbance index (within a GIS buffer of 50 m)
• Assign the minimum of these three indices to each wetland
• Any wetland with a minimum natural vegetation of ≥ 90 % considered “Intact”, all others “Not intact”
• For 10 wetland types that cannot meet their conservation targets in “Intact” wetlands, lower the minimum natural vegetation threshold to 80 %
• 8 wetlands still cannot achieve targets……Need to look at rehab
![Page 24: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Page 24
Step 2: Incorporate connectivity
• 3 spatial dimensions:
• Longitudinal
• Lateral
• Vertical
• 1 temporal dimension
• natural flow regime
• temporal availability of surface water
• All 4 dimensions are highly inter-dependent
• Space hungry so try to allocate different protection levels
Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group 1998 (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/stream_restoration/Images/scrhimage/part1/part1a.jpg).Relevant literature:
• Freeman et al. 2007. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 43(1):5-14. • Pringle 2001. Ecological Applications 11(4): 981-998. • Ward 1989. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 8: 2–8.
![Page 25: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Page 25
Olifants
Doring
Longitudinal connectivity
• Large rivers free of artificial barriers
• “High” protection level
• Habitat requirements explicitly mapped
• “High” & “Moderate” protection level
• Upstream management zones
• “Moderate” protection level
![Page 26: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Page 26
Lateral connectivity
• Modelled sub-catchments
• Allocated a “Very high” protection level if needed for pattern targets
• Riparian zones
• 50 m: mountain & upper foothill streams
• 100 m: lower foothills & lowland rivers
• Allocated a “High” protection level
• Wetland functioning zones
• Functional types were afforded different protections levels based on their functional importance & sensitivity
Landform (shape and/or setting) Functional importance
Sensitivity Protection level
Valley bottom Very high High High
Floodplain High Moderate Moderate
Seep linked to channel High Very High High
Seep not linked to a channel Moderate Very High Moderate
![Page 27: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Page 27
Wetland functioning zones
Need to investigate linking different buffer widthsto functional importance and sensitivity …………
![Page 28: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Page 28
Vertical connectivity
• Groundwater sustains river flow and refuge pools in the summer low flow periods
• Significant areas of groundwater-surface water discharge
• Areas where there is a medium to high prediction of groundwater to surface water interaction
• Modelled using 6 GIS surrogates: geological permeability, groundwater depth, springs, faults, presence of groundwater dependent vegetation, national estimates of baseflow contribution
• Significant areas of groundwater recharge
• Use 1 x 1 km national recharge data, based on the Chloride Mass Balance
• Areas with > 30 mm/yr recharge considered significant
• These were allocated a “Moderate” protection level
Relevant literature:• Baker et al. 2003. Environmental Management. 32(6): 706-719.• Brown et al. 2007. CSIR Report No. CSIR/NEW/WR/ER/2006/0187B/C, CSIR, Pretoria.
![Page 29: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Page 29
Vertical connectivityGroundwater-surface water discharge Groundwater recharge
![Page 30: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Page 30
Olifan
ts
Doring
Relevant literature:• Brown et al. 2007. CSIR Report No. CSIR/NEW/WR/ER/2006/0187B/C, CSIR, Pretoria.
Temporal connectivity
• Spatial dimensions are strongly dependent on temporal dynamics of the natural flow regime
• Rivers cannot be “locked-away”
• Environmental Flow Assessments try to balance human & ecological requirements
• Recommendations for Olifants, Doring and 2 major tributaries:
• Compromise middle reaches of Olifants for no further development of the Doring; & for some rehabilitation
• Tributaries of the Doring responsible for majority of Mean Annual Runoff included as upstream management zones & afforded “Moderate” protection levels
intactnot intact
![Page 31: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Page 31
Step 3: Incorporate any additional spatial processes• Steps 1 and 2 cater for generic processes of most freshwater systems
• There may be other specific processes that can be mapped, also termed:
• “Fixed spatial components" (Rouget et al. 2006) / “Spatial catalysts" (Pressey et al. in press)
• Commonly defined using environmental surrogates such as climate, topography, geology, soils and vegetation
• Freshwater-specific examples:
• Areas of significant water yield (Driver et al. 2005)
• Areas of high erosion potential (Adinarayana et al. 1999)
• Evolutionary barriers, e.g. waterfalls & gorges (Roux et al. 2002)
• Generally can be allocated a “Moderate” level of protection.
Relevant literature:• Adinarayana et al. 1999. Catena 37:309–318• Driver et al. 2005. Strelitzia 17: 1-45.• Pressey et al. in press. Trends in Ecology and Evolution.• Rouget et al. 2006. Conservation Biology 20(2): 549–561. • Roux et al. 2002. Conservation Ecology 6(2): 6. [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol6/iss2/art6
![Page 32: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Page 32
Step 4: Select persistent populations
• Accommodated by Steps 1 and 2, but serves as a further safe-guard where data exist
• Considers requirements specific to the persistence of each focal species, for example:
• Identifying and establishing linkages between all critical habitat
• Identification of spatial refugia and relevant linkages
• Replication within the planning region in areas that are unlikely to be influenced by the same natural or human disturbances
• Incorporating populations or metapopulations that are large enough to prevent extinction from random demographic and genetic events
Relevant literature:• Moyle & Yoshiyama 1994. Fisheries 19:6-18.• Poiani et al. 2000. BioScience 50(2): 133-146.
![Page 33: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Page 33
Persistent populations• Replication
• Pattern targets can stipulate that each species must be represented at least twice by populations preferably on different major river systems
• Suitable habitat & populations • Core populations• River with the most suitable habitat & containing the largest
populations should be selected from point locality data for achieving pattern target
• Habitat requirements • Many of the larger-sized species require a combination of mainstem
and tributary habitat• For small-sized species, vulnerable to predation by invasive
species in the mainstem, connectivity was excluded
• Fish sanctuaries for pattern targets afforded the highest protection level (“Very high”); linkages between sanctuaries allocated a “Moderate” protection level
![Page 34: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Page 34
The importance of zones • So much land freaks managers out
• Allocating multiple-use zones can help, e.g. :• Freshwater focal area• Critical management zone• Catchment management zone
From:• Abell et al. 2007. Biological Conservation 134: 48-63.
![Page 35: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Page 35
How to incorporate all these processes
Sub-catchments as planning units
Ecological integrity
Species habitat suitability & population size
Species replication
[Habitat requirements]
Large, “free-flowing” rivers
Habitat requirements
High water yield areas
Riparian zones
Wetland functioning zones
Groundwater-surface water discharge areas
Groundwater recharge areas
Upstream management zones
ImplementationGuidelines on environmental flows
![Page 36: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Page 36
Outline
• Framework for freshwater conservation planning
• Planning units for freshwater – sub-catchments….see Hydrosheds
• Mapping biodiversity pattern
• Incorporating biodiversity processes
• Quantitative targets & conservation design
• Scheduling catchments for implementation
• Integration with terrestrial conservation
• Implications of climate change
• Try to cover “high road” (plenty of data, time and funding) and “low road” (no data, or rapid assessment) options
![Page 37: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Page 37
Conservation targets
• River and wetland types
• Generally use 20%, based on length of river; area of river buffered by 100 m; area of sub-catchment; area of wetland
• Occurrence has also been used – e.g. at least one of river type X
• Combination of 20% and occurrence can also be used – e.g. 20% of each wetland type represented in at least 3 different systems
• Species
• Simplistic – at least once
• Replication – at least twice, preferably on different major systems
• Free-flowing rivers & special features
• 100% but for special features generally do not include the whole planning unit, only the feature itself
• Discount the planning unit cost to favor selection for other conservation targets
![Page 38: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
Page 38
Spatial configuration for pattern targets
• Decision support software for achieving pattern targets, e.g. Marxan or C-Plan:
• C-Plan calculates irreplaceability better
• Marxan does costs and connectivity better
• Generally combine, but similar matrices so not much extra work
• Matrices
Sub-catchment id
River type A
River type A
River type A ………
Wet type A
Wet type B
Wet type B ………
Fish P/A
1
Extent of intact river type within sub-catchment Extent of intact wetland type within sub-catchment P/A
2
3
.
.
.
.
![Page 39: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Page 39
Spatial configuration for pattern targets• Planning unit cost used to achieve additional spatial efficiency
with:• Spatial catalysts (e.g. apply a discount to planning units containing free-
flowing rivers or water yield areas by)• Terrestrial priority areas• We hardly ever use area as cost; and have not yet integrated soic-economic
costs into our planning
• Boundary penalty• Strong boundary penalty to pass-
through sub-catchments will force connectivity
• Difficult to allocate multiple-use zones are selected planning units for pattern, connectivity or both
• Therefore tend to be conservative with the boundary penalty factor
![Page 40: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Page 40
Conservation design
• Using costs & boundary penalty, choose areas for pattern targets
![Page 41: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Page 41
Conservation design
• Using costs & boundary penalty, choose areas for pattern targets
• Add in areas requiring rehabilitation
![Page 42: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Page 42
Conservation design
• Using costs & boundary penalty, choose areas for pattern targets
• Add in areas requiring rehabilitation
• Add in supporting zones
![Page 43: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
Page 43
Future work
• Testing the performance of surrogates
• Integration with terrestrial
• Wetlands and riparian zones of selected rivers integrate well with terrestrial planning units
• In areas where there are no river choices, select rivers first and then achieve residual terrestrial and wetland targets
• In areas where there are choices, investigate using terrestrial priorities in the sub-catchment planning unit cost
• Terrestrial priority areas may conflict with FW goals
• Scheduling
• Integrating socio-economic costs; particularly with target achievement
![Page 44: Freshwater conservation planning Systematic conservation planning and the role of software: from data to implementation and management Society for Conservation.](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062409/56649c815503460f94939cab/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Page 44
Climate change
• Aaaargh!!! ------Eren help!!!!