Results Using elicitation responses, we identified a scope (Figure 2), vision, and key ecological attributes for the conservation target (Antillean manatee), as well as create a conceptual diagram (Figure 3). We also identified threats to manatees and their habitat, as well as potential conservation strategies. Conclusions •Our model represents experts’ hypotheses regarding manatee requirements and threats. regional valuation approach clearly articulates assumptions about manatee ecology and anthropogenic threats. • Potential MPA regions or those areas with the greatest potential to reduce take and offer habitat resources necessary to attract and support manatees. Recommendations • Spatial data were limited when translating knowledge to a spatial model framework. Weaknesses within the spatial data resources likely introduced error at specific locations around Puerto Rico. Next steps should include site visits to validate resource presence and quality, as well as assess local threats and the political, social, and economic feasibility of each site. •MPA success can be measured in terms of positive changes in watercraft activity (boater behavior) and demographic parameters of manatees. As shown in the conceptual diagram (Figure 2), experts identified multiple threats to manatees, not all of which can be addressed by MPAs. •MPAs should be one of several, coordinated recovery strategies recommended in the revised Recovery Plan and shown in the conceptual diagram. Acknowledgments We thank the USGS Sirenia Project, the USFWS Caribbean Field Office, Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources , and the Caribbean Stranding Network. Louise Alexander 1 , C. Ashton Drew 1 , and Jaime Collazo 2 1 Environmental Decision Analysis Team, Department of Biology, NC State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA 2 USGS North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Biology, NC State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA A structured approach to designing protection areas for the Antillean manatee in Puerto Rico Introduction • Little was known about the Antillean manatees (Trichechus manatus manatus) occurring in Puerto Rico when listed as a federally endangered species in 1986. • The efforts of the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources to implement various recovery activities have provided new data and insights regarding the manatee population of Puerto Rico. • We used the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation framework to organize new data and to elicit expert knowledge for the purposes updating the recovery plan and to assist in the design of manatee protected areas. Methods 1. Review of literature and data (aerial survey counts of manatees, coastal bathymetry and benthic habitat, reports of manatee strandings, freshwater sources, and presence of boating activity). 2. We used the Open Standards to develop elicitation questions to guide data collection during two workshops and to administer surveys to identify threats to manatees and their habitat as well as potential strategies to alleviate those threats. 3. We generated spatial models of key ecological attribute resource values and presence of threats. Areas with high values for both resources and threats were proposed as potential Manatee Protected Areas (MPAs). Figure 1. Work flow depicting major steps (blue and orange squares) to gather available data and elicit expert knowledge of manatees in Puerto Rico for the purposes of supporting USFWS Manatee Protected Area site selection and design. Data products and recommendations reflecting best available science appear on right (red ovals and green diamond Term Open Standards definitions Vision The desired state or condition meant to be achieved by a conservation action, which if achieved would also signify success. Scope The thematic focus or geographic area of a project in which to concentrate efforts. Conservati on targets Specific species, ecological systems/habitats, or ecological processes around which a project is focused. Direct threats Events or activities that directly degrade, reduce or destroy a conservation target. We identify three direct threats to nesting habitat and two direct threats to foraging habitat. Indirect threats An anthropogenic action or event that underlies or leads to one or more direct threats Strategy A term used to describe specific conservation actions designed to restore natural systems, reduce threats, and/or develop capacity. KEA Map Data Key ecological attributes (KEAs) are biological characteristics, resources or elements required by a conservation target for success. Expert elicitation workshops result in three key ecological attributes: Seagrass, freshwater, and shelter. Below are the spatial data layers generated to depict key ecological attributes and threats. KEA Resource Value Data Experts indicated potential MPA sites include access to all key ecological attributes within 5 km. To calculate the potential MPA value of a site we calculated the geometric mean of the four MPA variables (three key ecological attributes and one threat). Each variable was scaled relative to the maximum value for that variable within the project scope, such that values range from 0 to 1. Potential MPAs Value MPA Value = (Seagrass * Freshwater * Shelter * Watercraft) ¼ The combined values for potential MPAs are presented below . Figure 4 represents the calculated MPA value of coastal waters given the abundance of attributes and watercraft threat within a 5 km radius. Figure 5 represents potential MPA regions with an 80 th percentile threshold value. Numbers indicate the regions rank from high to low based on the region’s mean MPA Value. Figure 2. Experts identified the project scope as the coastal shelf and estuarine waters of Puerto Rico excluding Mona, Monito, Desecheo Islands, and the US Virgin Islands. The vision for this region is the long term conservation and recovery of the endangered Antillean Manatee and its habitats in coastal and estuarine waters in Puerto Rico. 4. 5. Table 2. Corresponding potential MPA region name and summary information Table 1. Common terms and their definitions as used within the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation and Miradi software (Colors correspond to Figure 3) Source: NOAA (2001) Source: National Hydrography Dataset (2005), Autoridad de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, and Naval Activity Puerto Rico Report (2005) Source: USGS shelter model Source: NOAA (2005), Travel and Sports Puerto Rico (2010) Boats Freshwater Seagrass Shelter MPA Value Data Pts in Region Value* Data Pts in Regio n Value* Area in Region Value* Area in Regio n Value* Mean SD Region Name Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD 1. Santa Isabel to Bahía de Jobos 0.4 53 0.10 4 41 0.3 87 0.14 1 24 0.46 7 0.18 5 46 0.42 0 0.23 9 82.7 0.7 13 0.1 62 2. Guayanilla and Tallaboa 0.3 61 0.04 0 4 0.1 97 0.04 7 6 0.41 5 0.09 5 5.7 0.29 2 0.03 5 20.8 0.7 47 0.0 71 3. Roosevelt Roads 0.3 27 0.02 7 1 0.1 50 0.03 3 0 0.43 9 0.04 0 1.4 0.38 4 0.05 0 4.0 0.4 64 0.0 12 4. Punta Molino to Isla Cueva 0.3 23 0.03 1 6 0.2 50 0.09 2 4 0.23 8 0.02 8 19.6 0.63 1 0.12 6 9.1 0.3 18 0.0 67 5. Puerto Medio Mundo 0.3 22 0.02 7 1 0.2 31 0.03 4 2 0.50 2 0.04 9 3.3 0.33 5 0.04 2 2.1 0.2 86 0.0 58 6. Las Croabas 0.31 8 0.01 9 7 0.74 9 0.07 1 0 0.168 0.029 0.3 0.143 0.02 4 1.9 0.59 0 0.07 9 7. Mayagüez 0.30 6 0.01 2 4 0.54 4 0.02 7 1 0.571 0.039 1.5 0.605 0.07 9 0.2 0.04 7 0.00 4 8. Punta Santiago 0.30 3 0.01 7 3 0.24 4 0.04 2 3 0.359 0.060 5.6 0.291 0.05 0 7.3 0.34 5 0.03 4 9. Boquerón 0.29 9 0.01 1 0 0.54 4 0.03 7 2 0.517 0.044 0.9 0.277 0.01 8 0.5 0.10 3 0.01 0 10. Arroyo 0.29 4 0.00 7 0 0.29 7 0.02 2 0 0.282 0.030 2.2 0.352 0.01 5 0.6 0.25 5 0.01 5 11. Bahía Demajagua 0.29 3 0.00 7 0 0.35 8 0.03 1 0 0.529 0.044 0 0.243 0.01 9 0 0.16 2 0.01 2 12. Bahía de San Juan 0.29 1 0.00 6 5 0.96 5 0.01 7 0 0.585 0.049 0 0.020 0.00 0 2.9 0.63 9 0.02 5 Figure 3. Concept Diagram depicting target (green oval), direct threats (pink rectangles), indirect threats (orange rectangles), and MPA strategies (yellow hexagons). Major Steps Products
Results
Feb 25, 2016
A structured approach to designing protection areas for the Antillean manatee in Puerto Rico. Louise Alexander 1 , C. Ashton Drew 1 , and Jaime Collazo 2 1 Environmental Decision Analysis Team, Department of Biology, NC State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
ResultsUsing elicitation responses, we identified a scope (Figure 2), vision, and key ecological attributes for the conservation target (Antillean manatee), as well as create a conceptual diagram (Figure 3). We also identified threats to manatees and their habitat, as well as potential conservation strategies.
Conclusions
• Our model represents experts’ hypotheses regarding manatee requirements and threats.
• This regional valuation approach clearly articulates assumptions about manatee ecology and anthropogenic threats.
• Potential MPA regions or those areas with the greatest potential to reduce take and offer habitat resources necessary to attract and support manatees.
Recommendations• Spatial data were limited when translating knowledge to a spatial
model framework. Weaknesses within the spatial data resources likely introduced error at specific locations around Puerto Rico. Next steps should include site visits to validate resource presence and quality, as well as assess local threats and the political, social, and economic feasibility of each site.
• MPA success can be measured in terms of positive changes in watercraft activity (boater behavior) and demographic parameters of manatees. As shown in the conceptual diagram (Figure 2), experts identified multiple threats to manatees, not all of which can be addressed by MPAs.
• MPAs should be one of several, coordinated recovery strategies recommended in the revised Recovery Plan and shown in the conceptual diagram.
AcknowledgmentsWe thank the USGS Sirenia Project, the USFWS Caribbean Field Office, Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources , and the Caribbean Stranding Network.
Louise Alexander1, C. Ashton Drew1, and Jaime Collazo2
1Environmental Decision Analysis Team, Department of Biology, NC State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA 2USGS North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Biology, NC State University, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA
A structured approach to designing protection areas for the Antillean manatee in Puerto Rico
Introduction• Little was known about the Antillean manatees (Trichechus manatus
manatus) occurring in Puerto Rico when listed as a federally endangered species in 1986.
• The efforts of the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources to implement various recovery activities have provided new data and insights regarding the manatee population of Puerto Rico.
• We used the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation framework to organize new data and to elicit expert knowledge for the purposes updating the recovery plan and to assist in the design of manatee protected areas.
Methods1. Review of literature and data (aerial survey counts of manatees, coastal bathymetry and benthic habitat, reports of manatee strandings, freshwater sources, and presence of boating activity).
2. We used the Open Standards to develop elicitation questions to guide data collection during two workshops and to administer surveys to identify threats to manatees and their habitat as well as potential strategies to alleviate those threats.
3. We generated spatial models of key ecological attribute resource values and presence of threats. Areas with high values for both resources and threats were proposed as potential Manatee Protected Areas (MPAs).
Figure 1. Work flow depicting major steps (blue and orange squares) to gather available data and elicit expert knowledge of manatees in Puerto Rico for the purposes of supporting USFWS Manatee Protected Area site selection and design. Data products and recommendations reflecting best available science appear on right (red ovals and green diamond
Term Open Standards definitions
Vision The desired state or condition meant to be achieved by a conservation action, which if achieved would also signify success.
Scope The thematic focus or geographic area of a project in which to concentrate efforts.
Conservation targets
Specific species, ecological systems/habitats, or ecological processes around which a project is focused.
Direct threats Events or activities that directly degrade, reduce or destroy a conservation target. We identify three direct threats to nesting habitat and two direct threats to foraging habitat.
Indirect threats
An anthropogenic action or event that underlies or leads to one or more direct threats
Strategy A term used to describe specific conservation actions designed to restore natural systems, reduce threats, and/or develop capacity.
KEA Map DataKey ecological attributes (KEAs) are biological characteristics, resources or elements required by a conservation target for success. Expert elicitation workshops result in three key ecological attributes: Seagrass, freshwater, and shelter. Below are the spatial data layers generated to depict key ecological attributes and threats.
KEA Resource Value DataExperts indicated potential MPA sites include access to all key ecological attributes within 5 km. To calculate the potential MPA value of a site we calculated the geometric mean of the four MPA variables (three key ecological attributes and one threat). Each variable was scaled relative to the maximum value for that variable within the project scope, such that values range from 0 to 1.
Potential MPAs ValueMPA Value = (Seagrass * Freshwater * Shelter * Watercraft) ¼
The combined values for potential MPAs are presented below . Figure 4 represents the calculated MPA value of coastal waters given the abundance of attributes and watercraft threat within a 5 km radius. Figure 5 represents potential MPA regions with an 80th percentile threshold value. Numbers indicate the regions rank from high to low based on the region’s mean MPA Value.
Figure 2. Experts identified the project scope as the coastal shelf and estuarine waters of Puerto Rico excluding Mona, Monito, Desecheo Islands, and the US Virgin Islands. The vision for this region is the long term conservation and recovery of the endangered Antillean Manatee and its habitats in coastal and estuarine waters in Puerto Rico.
4.
5.
Table 2. Corresponding potential MPA region name and summary information
Table 1. Common terms and their definitions as used within the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation and Miradi software (Colors correspond to Figure 3)
Source: NOAA (2001)
Source: National Hydrography Dataset (2005), Autoridad de Acueductos y Alcantarillados, andNaval Activity Puerto Rico Report (2005)
Source: USGS shelter model
Source: NOAA (2005), Travel and Sports Puerto Rico (2010)
Boats Freshwater Seagrass ShelterMPA Value Data Pts
in Region
Value* Data Pts in
Region
Value*Area in Region
Value*Area in Region
Value*
Mean SDRegion Name Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
1. Santa Isabel to Bahía de Jobos
0.453 0.104 41 0.387 0.141 24 0.467 0.185 46 0.420 0.239 82.7 0.713 0.162
2. Guayanilla and Tallaboa 0.361 0.040 4 0.197 0.047 6 0.415 0.095 5.7 0.292 0.035 20.8 0.747 0.071
3. Roosevelt Roads 0.327 0.027 1 0.150 0.033 0 0.439 0.040 1.4 0.384 0.050 4.0 0.464 0.012
4. Punta Molino to Isla Cueva
0.323 0.031 6 0.250 0.092 4 0.238 0.028 19.6 0.631 0.126 9.1 0.318 0.067
5. Puerto Medio Mundo 0.322 0.027 1 0.231 0.034 2 0.502 0.049 3.3 0.335 0.042 2.1 0.286 0.058
6. Las Croabas 0.318 0.019 7 0.749 0.071 0 0.168 0.029 0.3 0.143 0.024 1.9 0.590 0.079
7. Mayagüez 0.306 0.012 4 0.544 0.027 1 0.571 0.039 1.5 0.605 0.079 0.2 0.047 0.004
8. Punta Santiago 0.303 0.017 3 0.244 0.042 3 0.359 0.060 5.6 0.291 0.050 7.3 0.345 0.034
9. Boquerón 0.299 0.011 0 0.544 0.037 2 0.517 0.044 0.9 0.277 0.018 0.5 0.103 0.010
10. Arroyo 0.294 0.007 0 0.297 0.022 0 0.282 0.030 2.2 0.352 0.015 0.6 0.255 0.015
11. Bahía Demajagua 0.293 0.007 0 0.358 0.031 0 0.529 0.044 0 0.243 0.019 0 0.162 0.012
12. Bahía de San Juan 0.291 0.006 5 0.965 0.017 0 0.585 0.049 0 0.020 0.000 2.9 0.639 0.025Figure 3. Concept Diagram depicting target (green oval), direct threats (pink rectangles), indirect threats
(orange rectangles), and MPA strategies (yellow hexagons).
Major Steps
Products
Related Documents
