GAP management status and regional indicators of threats to biodiversity

Conservation assessment requires quantitative criteria for evaluating the relative degree of threat faced by species or ecological communities. Identifying appropriate criteria for communities is complicated because the species inhabiting them can have many different responses to land uses and other forms of environmental stress. The Gap Analysis Program (GAP) uses summary data on the proportion of the community that is protected as an estimate of its vulnerability. Management status from a gap analysis of California was compared with three ecological indicators (permitted land uses, human population growth, and the spatial extent of road effects) that more directly represent impacts on biodiversity. The classification of management status appears to provide a crude first approximation of these three indicators. Public and private lands that are not formally protected were susceptible to extensive land use conversion or resource extraction in both rural and urban settings. Some plant community types are more susceptible to future infringement by human population increases that were not well predicted by management status alone. Other community types have a high road density despite being moderately well protected. It is suggested that indicators such as future growth and current road effects could complement status in rating the potential vulnerability of plant communities and setting conservation priorities. The choice of indicators will depend on the threatening processes in a given region and the availability of spatial data to map or model them.

[1]  M. Kuitunen,et al.  Do Highways Influence Density of Land Birds? , 1998, Environmental management.

[2]  N. Myers Threatened biotas: "Hot spots" in tropical forests , 1988, The Environmentalist.

[3]  L J Lyon,et al.  Road Density Models Describing Habitat Effectiveness for Elk , 1983 .

[4]  Monica G. Turner,et al.  Land Ownership and Land‐Cover Change in the Southern Appalachian Highlands and the Olympic Peninsula , 1996 .

[5]  Eric Dinerstein,et al.  Beyond “Hotspots”: How to Prioritize Investments to Conserve Biodiversity in the Indo-Pacific Region , 1993 .

[6]  R. Forman Road ecology: A solution for the giant embracing us , 1998, Landscape Ecology.

[7]  R. Olson,et al.  Land-use Conflicts with Natural Vegetation in the United States , 1979, Environmental Conservation.

[8]  Thomas A. Spies,et al.  Dynamics and Pattern of a Managed Coniferous Forest Landscape in Oregon , 1994 .

[9]  André Bouchard,et al.  Selection of areas for protecting rare plants with integration of land use conflicts: A case study for the west coast of Newfoundland, Canada , 1998 .

[10]  David A. Norton,et al.  An evaluation of representativeness for nature conservation, Hokitika Ecological District, New Zealand , 1996 .

[11]  Reed F. Noss,et al.  From plant communities to landscapes in conservation inventories: A look at the nature conservancy (USA) , 1987 .

[12]  R. Boerner,et al.  Applying Biodiversity Gap Analysis in a Regional Nature Reserve Design for the Edge of Appalachia, Ohio (U.S.A.) , 1995 .

[13]  Paul M. Randall,et al.  Evaluating the Biotic Integrity of Watersheds in the Sierra Nevada, California , 1998 .

[14]  Robert V. O'Neill,et al.  Modeling Effects of Land Management in the Brazilian Amazonian Settlement of Rondônia , 1994 .

[15]  R. Deblinger,et al.  THE ECOLOGICAL ROAD-EFFECT ZONE FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY EXAMPLE , 1998 .

[16]  W. Laurance Ecological Correlates of Extinction Proneness in Australian Tropical Rain Forest Mammals , 1991 .

[17]  Marybeth Buechner,et al.  Park Protection and Public Roads , 1992 .

[18]  Denis White,et al.  Assessing Risks to Biodiversity from Future Landscape Change , 1997 .

[19]  R. Haight,et al.  A Regional Landscape Analysis and Prediction of Favorable Gray Wolf Habitat in the Northern Great Lakes Region , 1995 .

[20]  K. Chomitz,et al.  Roads, land use, and deforestation : a spatial model applied to Belize , 1996 .

[21]  R. G. Wright,et al.  GAP ANALYSIS: A GEOGRAPHIC APPROACH TO PROTECTION OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY , 1993 .

[22]  W. Baker,et al.  Contribution of Roads to Forest Fragmentation in the Rocky Mountains , 1996 .

[23]  M. Usher,et al.  Wildlife Conservation Evaluation , 1986 .

[24]  Gerardo Ceballos,et al.  Transnational Gap Analysis of the Rio Bravo/Rio Grande Region , 1998 .

[25]  L. Niles,et al.  Defining Forest Fragmentation by Corridor Width: The Influence of Narrow Forest-Dividing Corridors on Forest-Nesting Birds in Southern New Jersey , 1994 .

[26]  Keith C. Clarke,et al.  A Self-Modifying Cellular Automaton Model of Historical Urbanization in the San Francisco Bay Area , 1997 .

[27]  James D. Wickham,et al.  An ecological assessment of the United States mid-Atlantic region , 1997 .

[28]  W. Baker,et al.  Watershed analysis of forest fragmentation by clearcuts and roads in a Wyoming forest , 2004, Landscape Ecology.

[29]  R. Forman,et al.  ROADS AND THEIR MAJOR ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS , 1998 .

[30]  David M. Stoms,et al.  Gap analysis of the vegetation of the Intermountain Semi-Desert ecoregion , 1998 .

[31]  Reed F. Noss,et al.  Endangered Ecosystems of the United States: A Preliminary Assessment of Loss and Degradation , 1996, Restoration & Management Notes.

[32]  R. Thiel,et al.  Relationship between Road Densities and Wolf Habitat Suitability in Wisconsin , 1985 .