.Site Conservation Planning (SCP) was used to assess Cockpit Country biodiversity. The Nature Conservancy (TNC) developed this planning method, which is an analytical process to produce effective conservation strategies regardless of the spatial scale of the site or the type of biodiversity that is targeted for conservation.
The concept of functional ecological processes is the foundation of SCP. Long-term viability of biodiversity depends on healthy functioning and interactions of ecological processes. The spatial reach of such processes defines a functional landscape. SCP groups biological diversity by a common dependence on an ecological process. Conservation targets, which may be at any level of biological organization (i.e., genes, species, communities, ecosystems, and landscapes) and geographic scale (e.g., square metres to millions of hectares), represent groups and their underlying ecological processes. Human activities may degrade ecological processes and undermine the viability of all dependent biological diversity. These are critical threats. Analyses of the socio-economic context of critical threats guides the development of focused and effective conservation strategies to abate ecological degradation.
SCP follows an analysis of six elements:
The biological assessment reported here covers steps 1-3. Steps 4-5 will be completed in a subsequent socio-economic assessment. Step 6 will be on-going as management activities are implemented.
Step 1 involves choosing conservation targets that represent the biodiversity at the site and/or are highly threatened. The targets that are chosen should represent or capture the array of ecological systems, communities and species at the site, and the multiple spatial scales at which they occur. Conservation targets may be (1) ecological communities - groupings of co-occurring species, (2) ecological systems - spatial assemblages of ecological communities that are aggregated on a landscape, are linked by ecological processes or underlying environmental features, and form a robust, cohesive, and distinguishable unit on the ground, or (3) individual species or species populations.
SCP imposes a limit of eight conservation targets to reflect the biodiversity of a site. The designers of SCP set this limit because they have learned from experience that it was not feasible to effectively manage and implement strategies for more than eight conservation targets at a time. Each SCP conservation target, however, represents many nested targets, which are explicitly named important or notable biodiversity linked to a conservation target through a dependence on similar ecological processes, states and gradients. Nested targets often include endangered or rare species, endangered or rare ecological communities, species or communities that are responsive indicators of biodiversity health, charismatic species and keystone species.
Step 1 considers the ecological viability of each of conservation target using the criteria of size, condition and landscape context (Figure 2). Size is a measure of the area or abundance of the conservation targetÕs occurrence. For ecological systems and communities, size may simply be a measure of the occurrenceÕs patch size or geographic coverage. For animal and plant species, size takes into account the area of occupancy and number of individuals. Minimum dynamic area, or the area needed to ensure survival or re-establishment of a target after natural disturbance, is another aspect of size. Condition is an integrated measure of the composition, structure, and biotic interactions that characterize the occurrence. This includes factors such as reproduction, age structure, biological composition (e.g., presence of native versus exotic species; presence of characteristic patch types for ecological systems), physical and spatial structure (e.g., canopy, understory, and groundcover in a forested community; spatial distribution and juxtaposition of patch types or seral stages in an ecological system), and biotic interactions that directly involve the target (e.g., competition, predation, and disease). Landscape context is an integrated measure of two factors: the dominant environmental regimes and processes that establish and maintain the target occurrence, and connectivity. Dominant environmental regimes and processes include hydrologic and water chemistry regimes (surface and groundwater), geomorphic processes, climatic regimes (temperature and precipitation), fire regimes, and many kinds of natural disturbance. Connectivity includes such factors as species targets having access to habitats and resources needed for life cycle completion, fragmentation of ecological communities and systems, and the ability of any target to respond to environmental change through dispersal, migration, or re-colonization (TNC, The Five-S Framework for Site Conservation: A practitionerÕs handbook 2000).
Step 2 involves a systematic estimate of disruptions or stresses to ecological processes, states, or gradients that are essential to maintain the viability of each conservation target and its associated nested targets, and the biodiversity health of the functional landscape site. Stresses impair or degrade the size, condition, or landscape context of a conservation target and thereby reduce the viability of the conservation target. The criteria SCP uses to rank stresses are (1) severity of damage and (2) scope of damage. Severity of damage is an estimate of the level of damage to the conservation target over at least some portion of the targetÕs occurrence that can reasonably be expected within 10 years under current circumstances. Scope of damage is the geographic scope of the impact to the conservation target that can reasonably be expected within 10 years under current circumstances. The possible ranks for both severity of damage and scope of damage are LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH and VERY HIGH. See Annex 7.2 for definitions of these rankings.
Step 3 identifies and ranks sources of stress. These are human activities that create disruptions to processes, states or gradients that maintain conservation target viability. Most sources of stress are incompatible or inappropriate human uses of land, water, and natural resources. Such activities may be happening now or they may have happened in the past and have left a legacy of persistent stresses. Source of stress ranks are based on two factors: (1) contribution of a source of stress to the disruptive stress and (2) irreversibility of either the human activity causing stress or the irreversibility of the biological consequences of stress. The definition of the contribution to a stress is the degree to which, acting alone, the source is responsible for a stress assuming existing conservation management continues. The definition of irreversibility is the difficulty of reversing either the source itself or the consequences of the stress it has produced on the biological system. Possible ranks for both contribution and irreversibility are LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH and VERY HIGH. See Annex 7.3 for definitions of these rankings.
When conservation targets are identified and their viability ranked, the stresses identified and ranked, and the sources of stress identified and ranked, a final list of critical threats is developed and prioritized using information contained in rankings of targets, stresses and sources of stress. The prioritized list of critical threats provides guidance in developing conservation strategies and allocating scarce conservation resources.
Information and judgments that contributed to the SCP analysis came from on on-line ÒVirtual WorkshopÓ of experts who have experience with Cockpit Country and/or management of karst limestone landscapes. An interactive website (http://www.scp.cockpitcountry.com) was developed by Windsor Research Centre (WRC) and will be maintained for continued re-assessments by local and overseas experts. Live workshop fora contributed further to the refinement of conservation targets and threat assessments. These workshops included attendance by a team representing the Cockpit Country PiP partner organisations of WRC, TNC, and the Southern Trelawny Environmental Agency (STEA) at the Islands Efroymson Fellowship Workshop in KauaÕi, May 2002 and participation of Forestry Department personnel in a one-day workshop hosted by WRC, June 2002 (see Annex 1 for listing of all SCP participants).