|
An urgent question in biodiversity conservation is the extent to which
priority areas for one well-known indicator group, like birds,
"capture" species within other groups. The first tests of this question
have indicated that capture is high. BirdLife International's
"Important Bird Areas" (IBAs) work on this assumption. We test this for
East African IBAs using databases on the distribution of all
Afrotropical birds, mammals, snakes and amphibians, compiled at the
Zoological Museum of the University of Copenhagen and mapped on a
I-degree grid in the software WORLDMAP, We assess how well the IBAs
capture terrestrial vertebrate species in the region, and find that
absolute capture is high. Moreover, capture of regionally endemic and
threatened species is also very high. We indicate those few important
species and areas not covered by IBAs. However, the IBAs do not
generally capture other groups significantly better than do random sets
of areas covering the same extent. Further, systematically selected
near-minimum sets of areas can capture more species in considerably
less area. Nevertheless, these near-minimum sets take into account
neither ecological processes (in particular, avian migration) nor
actual land-use patterns. As data become available to incorporate these
factors and other taxa into quantitative priority-setting techniques,
IBAs may be able to be planned with added area-efficiency. For now,
though,we suggest that IBAs are not only very effective on-the-ground
priorities for the conservation of birds but they also represent the
majority of other terrestrial vertebrate diversity. | |
|