in

Prioritizing conservation actions in urbanizing landscapes

  • 1.

    Game, E. T., Kareiva, P. & Possingham, H. P. Six common mistakes in conservation priority setting. Conserv. Biol. 27, 480–485 (2013).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 2.

    Bottrill, M. C. et al. Is conservation triage just smart decision making?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 649–654 (2008).

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 3.

    Wilson, K. A., Carwardine, J. & Possingham, H. P. Setting conservation priorities. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1162, 237–264 (2009).

    ADS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 4.

    Samhouri, J. F. & Levin, P. S. Linking land-and sea-based activities to risk in coastal ecosystems. Biol. Conserv. 145, 118–129 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 5.

    Shelton, A. O., Samhouri, J. F., Stier, A. C. & Levin, P. S. Assessing trade-offs to inform ecosystem-based fisheries management of forage fish. Sci. Rep. 4, 7110 (2014).

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 6.

    Tallis, H. Natural Capital: Theory and Practice of Mapping Ecosystem Services. (Oxford University Press, 2011).

  • 7.

    Murdoch, W. et al. Maximizing return on investment in conservation. Biol. Conserv. 139, 375–388 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 8.

    Carwardine, J. et al. Prioritizing threat management for biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Lett. 5, 196–204 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 9.

    Fonner, R., Bellanger, M. & Warlick, A. Economic analysis for marine protected resources management: challenges, tools, and opportunities. Ocean Coast. Manag. 194, 105222 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 10.

    Chan, K. M., Hoshizaki, L. & Klinkenberg, B. Ecosystem services in conservation planning: targeted benefits vs. co-benefits or costs?. PLoS ONE 6, e24378 (2011).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 11.

    McDonald, R. I., Kareiva, P. & Forman, R. T. The implications of current and future urbanization for global protected areas and biodiversity conservation. Biol. Conserv. 141, 1695–1703 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 12.

    Economic, U. N. D. of & Social Affairs, P. D. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision. (United Nations Publications New York, 2019).

  • 13.

    Liu, Z., He, C. & Wu, J. The relationship between habitat loss and fragmentation during urbanization: an empirical evaluation from 16 world cities. PLoS ONE 11, e0154613 (2016).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 14.

    Heidt, V. & Neef, M. Benefits of urban green space for improving urban climate. In Ecology, Planning, and Management of Urban Forests 84–96 (Springer, 2008).

  • 15.

    Wolch, J. R., Byrne, J. & Newell, J. P. Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: the challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’. Landsc. Urban Plan. 125, 234–244 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 16.

    Kondo, M. C., Fluehr, J. M., McKeon, T. & Branas, C. C. Urban green space and its impact on human health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 15, 445 (2018).

    PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 17.

    Wood, E. et al. Not all green space is created equal: biodiversity predicts psychological restorative benefits from urban green space. Front. Psychol. 9, 2320 (2018).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 18.

    Pickett, S. T. et al. Urban ecological systems: scientific foundations and a decade of progress. J. Environ. Manag. 92, 331–362 (2011).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 19.

    Grimm, N. B. et al. Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 319, 756–760 (2008).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 20.

    Walsh, C. J. et al. The urban stream syndrome: current knowledge and the search for a cure. J. North Am. Benthol. Soc. 24, 706–723 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 21.

    Paul, M. J. & Meyer, J. L. Streams in the urban landscape. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 32, 333–365 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 22.

    Schueler, T. R., Fraley-McNeal, L. & Cappiella, K. Is impervious cover still important? Review of recent research. J. Hydrol. Eng. 14, 309–315 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 23.

    Canessa, S. & Parris, K. M. Multi-scale, direct and indirect effects of the urban stream syndrome on amphibian communities in streams. PLoS ONE 8, e70262 (2013).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 24.

    Bernhardt, E. S. & Palmer, M. A. Restoring streams in an urbanizing world. Freshw. Biol. 52, 738–751 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 25.

    Hardy, S. D. & Koontz, T. M. Collaborative watershed partnerships in urban and rural areas: different pathways to success?. Landsc. Urban Plan. 95, 79–90 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 26.

    Ahiablame, L. M., Engel, B. A. & Chaubey, I. Effectiveness of low impact development practices: literature review and suggestions for future research. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. Int. J. 223, 4253–4273 (2012).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 27.

    McIntyre, J. et al. Soil bioretention protects juvenile salmon and their prey from the toxic impacts of urban stormwater runoff. Chemosphere 132, 213–219 (2015).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 28.

    McIntyre, J. K. et al. Severe coal tar sealcoat runoff toxicity to fish is prevented by bioretention filtration. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 1570–1578 (2016).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 29.

    Spromberg, J. A. et al. Coho salmon spawner mortality in western US urban watersheds: bioinfiltration prevents lethal storm water impacts. J. Appl. Ecol. 53, 398–407 (2016).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 30.

    Seattle, D. of P. & D. 2015 Environmentally Critical Areas: Best Available Science Review. (2015).

  • 31.

    Rondinini, C., Wilson, K. A., Boitani, L., Grantham, H. & Possingham, H. P. Tradeoffs of different types of species occurrence data for use in systematic conservation planning. Ecol. Lett. 9, 1136–1145 (2006).

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 32.

    Rhodes, J. R. et al. Regional variation in habitat–occupancy thresholds: a warning for conservation planning. J. Appl. Ecol. 45, 549–557 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 33.

    Carwardine, J., Klein, C. J., Wilson, K. A., Pressey, R. L. & Possingham, H. P. Hitting the target and missing the point: target-based conservation planning in context. Conserv. Lett. 2, 4–11 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 34.

    Ruckelshaus, M. H., Levin, P., Johnson, J. B. & Kareiva, P. M. The Pacific salmon wars: what science brings to the challenge of recovering species. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33, 665–706 (2002).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 35.

    Underwood, E. C. et al. Protecting biodiversity when money matters: maximizing return on investment. PLoS ONE 3, e1515 (2008).

    ADS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • 36.

    Murdoch, W., Ranganathan, J., Polasky, S. & Regetz, J. Using return on investment to maximize conservation effectiveness in Argentine grasslands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 20855–20862 (2010).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 37.

    Boyd, J., Epanchin-Niell, R. & Siikamäki, J. Conservation planning: a review of return on investment analysis. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 9, 23–42 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 38.

    Samhouri, J. F., Levin, P. S., James, C. A., Kershner, J. & Williams, G. Using existing scientific capacity to set targets for ecosystem-based management: a Puget Sound case study. Mar. Policy 35, 508–518 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 39.

    Martin, J., Runge, M. C., Nichols, J. D., Lubow, B. C. & Kendall, W. L. Structured decision making as a conceptual framework to identify thresholds for conservation and management. Ecol. Appl. 19, 1079–1090 (2009).

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 40.

    Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). 2050 Forecast of People and Jobs. https://www.psrc.org/ (2018).

  • 41.

    Ruckelshaus, M., Essington, T. & Levin, P. 2009 Puget Sound, Washington, USA. in Ecosystem-based Management for the Oceans 201–226 (Island Press, Washington, DC, USA, 2012).

  • 42.

    Feist, B. E. et al. Roads to ruin: conservation threats to a sentinel species across an urban gradient. Ecol. Appl. 27, 2382–2396 (2017).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 43.

    Scholz, N. L. et al. Recurrent die-offs of adult coho salmon returning to spawn in Puget Sound lowland urban streams. PLoS ONE 6, e28013 (2011).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 44.

    WAECY – Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA).

  • 45.

    Spromberg, J. A. & Scholz, N. L. Estimating the future decline of wild coho salmon populations resulting from early spawner die-offs in urbanizing watersheds of the Pacific Northwest, USA. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. 7, 648–656 (2011).

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 46.

    Bolte, J. & Vache, K. Envisioning Puget Sound Alternative Futures. Or. State Univ. (2010).

  • 47.

    King, M. A. & Fairfax, S. K. Beyond bucks and acres: land acquisition and water. Tex Rev 83, 1941 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  • 48.

    Bottrill, M. C. & Pressey, R. L. The effectiveness and evaluation of conservation planning. Conserv. Lett. 5, 407–420 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 49.

    Rissman, A. R. & Smail, R. Accounting for results: how conservation organizations report performance information. Environ. Manag. 55, 916–929 (2015).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 50.

    Dinerstein, E. et al. A global deal for nature: guiding principles, milestones, and targets. Sci. Adv. 5, eaaw2869 (2019).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 51.

    Jones, K. R. et al. The location and protection status of Earth’s diminishing marine wilderness. Curr. Biol. 28, 2506–2512 (2018).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 52.

    Tulloch, V. J. et al. Why do we map threats? Linking threat mapping with actions to make better conservation decisions. Front. Ecol. Environ. 13, 91–99 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 53.

    Moilanen, A. et al. Balancing alternative land uses in conservation prioritization. Ecol. Appl. 21, 1419–1426 (2011).

    PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 54.

    Rodewald, A. D., Strimas-Mackey, M., Schuster, R. & Arcese, P. Tradeoffs in the value of biodiversity feature and cost data in conservation prioritization. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–8 (2019).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 55.

    Walsh, J. C. et al. Prioritizing conservation actions for Pacific salmon in Canada. J. Appl. Ecol. (2020).

  • 56.

    Chow, M. I. et al. An urban stormwater runoff mortality syndrome in juvenile coho salmon. Aquat. Toxicol. 214, 105231 (2019).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 57.

    Battin, J. et al. Projected impacts of climate change on salmon habitat restoration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 104, 6720–6725 (2007).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 58.

    Council, N. R. et al. Upstream: Salmon and Society in the Pacific Northwest. (National Academies Press, 1996).

  • 59.

    Benda, L., Andras, K., Miller, D. & Bigelow, P. Confluence effects in rivers: interactions of basin scale, network geometry, and disturbance regimes. Water Resour. Res. 40, (2004).

  • 60.

    Nel, J. L. et al. Progress and challenges in freshwater conservation planning. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 19, 474–485 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 61.

    Booth, D. B., Roy, A. H., Smith, B. & Capps, K. A. Global perspectives on the urban stream syndrome. Freshw. Sci. 35, 412–420 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 62.

    Feist, B. E., Buhle, E. R., Arnold, P., Davis, J. W. & Scholz, N. L. Landscape ecotoxicology of coho salmon spawner mortality in urban streams. PLoS ONE 6, e23424 (2011).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 63.

    Sethi, S. A., O’Hanley, J. R., Gerken, J., Ashline, J. & Bradley, C. High value of ecological information for river connectivity restoration. Landsc. Ecol. 32, 2327–2336 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 64.

    Watts, M. E. et al. Marxan with Zones: software for optimal conservation based land-and sea-use zoning. Environ. Model. Softw. 24, 1513–1521 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 65.

    Beger, M. et al. Incorporating asymmetric connectivity into spatial decision making for conservation. Conserv. Lett. 3, 359–368 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 66.

    Bower, S. D. et al. Making tough choices: picking the appropriate conservation decision-making tool. Conserv. Lett. 11, e12418 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 67.

    Schwartz, M. W. et al. Decision support frameworks and tools for conservation. Conserv. Lett. 11, e12385 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 68.

    Jarden, K. M., Jefferson, A. J. & Grieser, J. M. Assessing the effects of catchment-scale urban green infrastructure retrofits on hydrograph characteristics. Hydrol. Process. 30, 1536–1550 (2016).

    ADS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 69.

    Pyke, C. et al. Assessment of low impact development for managing stormwater with changing precipitation due to climate change. Landsc. Urban Plan. 103, 166–173 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 70.

    Kim, D.-G., Jeong, K. & Ko, S.-O. Removal of road deposited sediments by sweeping and its contribution to highway runoff quality in Korea. Environ. Technol. 35, 2546–2555 (2014).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 71.

    Scheffer, M. Foreseeing tipping points. Nature 467, 411–412 (2010).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 72.

    Halpern, B. S. Addressing Socioecological Tipping Points and Safe Operating Spaces in the Anthropocene. in Conservation for the Anthropocene Ocean 271–286 (Elsevier, 2017).

  • 73.

    Malhado, A. C. M., Pires, G. F. & Costa, M. H. Cerrado conservation is essential to protect the Amazon rainforest. Ambio 39, 580–584 (2010).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 74.

    Selkoe, K. A. et al. Principles for managing marine ecosystems prone to tipping points. Ecosyst. Health Sustain. 1, 1–18 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 75.

    Schilling, J. & Logan, J. Greening the rust belt: a green infrastructure model for right sizing America’s shrinking cities. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 74, 451–466 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 76.

    Hughes, R. M. et al. A review of urban water body challenges and approaches:(2) mitigating effects of future urbanization. Fisheries 39, 30–40 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 77.

    Parker, D. P. Land trusts and the choice to conserve land with full ownership or conservation easements. Nat. Resour. J. 483–518 (2004).

  • 78.

    Kennedy, C. M. et al. Optimizing land use decision-making to sustain Brazilian agricultural profits, biodiversity and ecosystem services. Biol. Conserv. 204, 221–230 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 79.

    Kaeriyama, M., Seo, H., Kudo, H. & Nagata, M. Perspectives on wild and hatchery salmon interactions at sea, potential climate effects on Japanese chum salmon, and the need for sustainable salmon fishery management reform in Japan. Environ. Biol. Fishes 94, 165–177 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 80.

    Willson, M. F. & Halupka, K. C. Anadromous fish as keystone species in vertebrate communities. Conserv. Biol. 9, 489–497 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 81.

    McIntyre, J. K. et al. Interspecies variation in the susceptibility of adult Pacific salmon to toxic urban stormwater runoff. Environ. Pollut. 238, 196–203 (2018).

    CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 82.

    Service (NMFS), N. M. F. Report: 5-Year Review: Summary & Evaluation of Puget Sound Chinook Salmon, Hood Canal Summer-run Chum Salmon, Puget Sound Steelhead. (2016).

  • 83.

    Spromberg, J. A. & Meador, J. P. Relating results of chronic toxicity responses to population-level effects: modeling effects on wild chinook salmon populations. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag. Int. J. 1, 9–21 (2005).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • 84.

    Allan, J. D. Landscapes and riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 35, 257–284 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 85.

    Bierwagen, B. G. et al. National housing and impervious surface scenarios for integrated climate impact assessments. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 20887–20892 (2010).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • 86.

    Walsh, C. J., Fletcher, T. D. & Burns, M. J. Urban stormwater runoff: a new class of environmental flow problem. PLoS ONE 7, e45814 (2012).

    ADS  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Article  Google Scholar 


  • Source: Ecology - nature.com

    Atmospheric dynamic constraints on Tibetan Plateau freshwater under Paris climate targets

    A pilot study of eDNA metabarcoding to estimate plant biodiversity by an alpine glacier core (Adamello glacier, North Italy)