Usefulness of the Umbrella Species Concept as a Conservation Tool

Abstract: In the face of limited funding, knowledge, and time for action, conservation efforts often rely on shortcuts for the maintenance of biodiversity. The umbrella species concept—proposed as a way to use species requirements as a basis for conservation planning—has recently received growing attention. We reviewed the literature to evaluate the concept's general usefulness. An umbrella species is defined as a species whose conservation is expected to confer protection to a large number of naturally co-occurring species. This concept has been proposed as a tool for determining the minimum size for conservation areas, selecting sites to be included in reserve networks, and setting minimum standards for the composition, structure, and processes of ecosystems. Among the species suggested as potential umbrellas, most are large mammals and birds, but invertebrates are increasingly being considered. Eighteen research papers, most of which were based on hypothetical reserves or conservation networks, have provided evaluations of umbrella species schemes. These show that single-species umbrellas cannot ensure the conservation of all co-occurring species because some species are inevitably limited by ecological factors that are not relevant to the umbrella species. Moreover, they provide evidence that umbrella species from a given higher taxon may not necessarily confer protection to assemblages from other taxa. On the other hand, multi-species strategies based on systematic selection procedures (e.g., the focal species approach) offer more compelling evidence of the usefulness of the concept. Evaluations of umbrella species schemes could be improved by including measures of population viability and data from many years, as well as by comparing the efficiency of the proposed scheme with alternative management strategies.

[1]  T. Caro,et al.  Umbrella species: critique and lessons from East Africa , 2003 .

[2]  J. L. Gittleman,et al.  The Future of Biodiversity , 1995, Science.

[3]  P. Angelstam Towards a Logic for Assessing Biodiversity in Boreal Forest , 1998 .

[4]  L. Kaila,et al.  Threatened Beetles in White‐Backed Woodpecker Habitats , 1998 .

[5]  Dennis D. Murphy,et al.  EMPIRICAL VALIDATION OF A METHOD FOR UMBRELLA SPECIES SELECTION , 2001 .

[6]  D. Rubinoff,et al.  Evaluating the California Gnatcatcher as an Umbrella Species for Conservation of Southern California Coastal Sage Scrub , 2001 .

[7]  C. L. Shafer,et al.  NATURE RESERVES - Island Theory and Conservation Practice , 1991 .

[8]  J. Kerr Species Richness, Endemism, and the Choice of Areas for Conservation , 1997 .

[9]  Randall T Ryti,et al.  Effect of the Focal Taxon on the Selection of Nature Reserves. , 1992, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[10]  Dennis D. Murphy,et al.  A NEW METHOD FOR SELECTION OF UMBRELLA SPECIES FOR CONSERVATION PLANNING , 2000 .

[11]  James E. M. Watson,et al.  An Assessment of the Focal‐Species Approach for Conserving Birds in Variegated Landscapes in Southeastern Australia , 2001 .

[12]  L. Bottoni,et al.  The Use of Focal Species in Designing a Habitat Network for a Lowland Area of Lombardy, Italy , 2002 .

[13]  T. Ranius Osmoderma eremita as an indicator of species richness of beetles in tree hollows , 2002, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[14]  F. van Langevelde,et al.  Competing land use in the reserve site selection problem , 2000, Landscape Ecology.

[15]  J. Berger,et al.  Population Constraints Associated with the Use of Black Rhinos as an Umbrella Species for Desert Herbivores , 1997 .

[16]  Malcolm L. Hunter,et al.  Maintaining Biodiversity in Forest Ecosystems , 2000 .

[17]  Kevin J. Gaston,et al.  Threatened and endemic species: are they good indicators of patterns of biodiversity on a national scale? , 2002 .

[18]  Daniel Simberloff,et al.  The role of science in the preservation of forest biodiversity , 1999 .

[19]  R. Noss,et al.  CARNIVORES AS FOCAL SPECIES FOR CONSERVATION PLANNING IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION , 2001 .

[20]  O. H. Frankel,et al.  Conservation and Evolution , 1983 .

[21]  T. Caro,et al.  On the Use of Surrogate Species in Conservation Biology , 1999 .

[22]  Dennis D. Murphy,et al.  Umbrella species and the conservation of habitat fragments: a case of a threatened butterfly and a vanishing grassland ecosystem , 1994 .

[23]  R. Lambeck,et al.  Focal Species: a Multi-species Umbrella for Nature Conservation Focal Species for Nature Conservation Lambeck , 2022 .

[24]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  Sound science or social hook—a response to Brooker’s application of the focal species approach , 2003 .

[25]  D. S. Hammond,et al.  Short-term effects of canopy openness on insect herbivores in a rain forest in Guyana , 2001 .

[26]  R. F. Graf,et al.  Capercaillie (Tetrao urogallus) and Avian Biodiversity: Testing the Umbrella‐Species Concept , 2002 .

[27]  D. Simberloff Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: Is single-species management passé in the landscape era? , 1998 .

[28]  K. A. Poiani,et al.  Identifying Conservation‐Priority Areas in a Fragmented Minnesota Landscape Based on the Umbrella Species Concept and Selection of Large Patches of Natural Vegetation , 2001 .

[29]  O. Ovaskainen,et al.  Extinction Debt at Extinction Threshold , 2002 .

[30]  R. East Species-area curves and populations of large mammals in African savanna reserves , 1981 .

[31]  P. Angelstam Maintaining and restoring biodiversity in European boreal forests by developing natural disturbance regimes , 1998 .

[32]  T. Hovestadt,et al.  Are There Minimal Areas for Animal Populations , 1991 .

[33]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  The Focal‐Species Approach and Landscape Restoration: a Critique , 2002 .

[34]  J. Rappole,et al.  The Science of Conservation Planning: Habitat Conservation Under The Endangered Species Act , 1997 .

[35]  L. Brooker The application of focal species knowledge to landscape design in agricultural lands using the ecological neighbourhood as a template , 2002 .

[36]  M. Zacharias,et al.  Use of focal species in marine conservation and management: a review and critique , 2001 .

[37]  Barbara L. Marks,et al.  An Approach for Managing Vertebrate Diversity Across Multiple-Use Landscapes. , 1993, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[38]  George R. Hess,et al.  Planning open spaces for wildlife: I. Selecting focal species using a Delphi survey approach , 2002 .

[39]  D. H. Vuren,et al.  Detectability, philopatry, and the distribution of dispersal distances in vertebrates. , 1996, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[40]  Boris Schröder,et al.  Habitat models and their transfer for single and multi species groups: a case study of carabids in an alluvial forest , 2001 .

[41]  B. McNab,et al.  Bioenergetics and the Determination of Home Range Size , 1963, The American Naturalist.

[42]  T. Caro Species richness and abundance of small mammals inside and outside an African national park , 2001 .

[43]  Paul C. Paquet,et al.  Conservation Biology and Carnivore Conservation in the Rocky Mountains , 1996 .

[44]  T. New Are Lepidoptera an effective ‘umbrella group‘ for biodiversity conservation? , 1997, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[45]  R. Lambeck,et al.  Landscape planning for biodiversity conservation in agricultural regions: a case study from the wheatbelt of Western Australia , 1999 .

[46]  S. Andelman,et al.  Umbrellas and flagships: efficient conservation surrogates or expensive mistakes? , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[47]  L. Fahrig How much habitat is enough , 2001 .

[48]  Paul Beier,et al.  Determining Minimum Habitat Areas and Habitat Corridors for Cougars , 1993 .

[49]  Edward O. Wilson,et al.  Challenges to Biological Diversity in Urban Areas , 1988 .

[50]  Carl J. Walters,et al.  Adaptive Management of Renewable Resources , 1986 .

[51]  Michiel F. De Vires Large Herbivores and the Design of Large‐Scale Nature Reserves in Western Europe , 1995 .