Elsewhere on DAFF
3. conclusions/recommendations
This document was written in the context of the CRA process in the eastern forests. It is therefore acknowledged that for other ecosystems, such as arid or semi-arid landscapes, this framework may require adaptation. It is also acknowledged that there is limited opportunity to influence management of areas outside of public land as part of the immediate negotiations.
Notwithstanding the above, this document has referred to the broader application of reserve design principles by practitioners outside of the CRA as a means of better illustrating the application of these concepts.
Size, shape and connectivity reserve design criteria outlined in JANIS, and Section 7 in particular, are conflicting, both within and between criteria, and are highly context specific. This has implications for the successful implementation of a hierarchical operational approach to reserve design. As such, the following recommendations for addressing reserve design in the CRA process are context specific, and will focus mainly on design requirements for species and forest ecosystems.
3.1. RECOMMENDED APPROACH TO ADDRESSING JANIS RESERVE DESIGN CRITERIA IN CRAS
This section summarises recommendations made in Section 2. These recommendations are presented in relation to each of the reserve design criteria listed in Section 7 of JANIS, with reference to other JANIS design criteria where necessary.
1. Boundaries should be set in a landscape context with strong ecological integrity, such as catchments;
During reserve negotiations satellite imagery and shaded DEMs should be loaded and displayed, where necessary, as a backdrop behind the planning unit layer within C-Plan. This will facilitate alignment, where possible, of reserve boundaries with catchments and other natural features.
2. Large reserved areas are preferable to small reserved areas, though a range of reserve sizes may be appropriate to adequately sample conservation values;
A range of reserve sizes will be required to achieve a balance between maximising the number of entities reserved (to target) and maximising long term viability of reserved ecosystems and species (particularly space demanding fauna). The size of individual reserves should be determined largely by the requirements of the specific conservation entities intended to be protected. The areal target will need to allow for changes due to natural disasters, climate change and ecological processes. The patch size/connectivity functionality within C-Plan provides an effective means of guiding decisions on reserve size, particularly in relation to the needs of space demanding fauna species for which configuration goals have been set (in accordance with JANIS Biodiversity Criterion 6).
3. Boundary-area ratios should be minimised and linear reserves should be avoided where possible except for riverine systems and corridors identified as having significant value for nature conservation;
The patch size/connectivity functionality within C-Plan can provide some guidance in ensuring minimisation of boundary-area ratios and appropriate location of corridors. This functionality, however, should be augmented by the application of standard GIS functions to calculate and monitor the boundary-area ratio of the reserve system at key points during negotiations.
4. Reserves should be developed across the major environmental gradients if feasible, but only if these gradients incorporate key conservation attributes which should be incorporated in the CAR system;
The geographical/environmental spread functionality within C-Plan should be employed to guide selection of reserves across the geographical and environmental range of forest ecosystems for which configuration goals have been set (in accordance with JANIS Biodiversity Criteria 4 and 7). It is also recommended that this functionality be employed, where required, in relation to species to ensure that reservation is spread appropriately across the geographical range of species likely to exhibit substantial genetic variation.
5. Each reserve should contribute to satisfying as many reserve criteria as possible;
This criterion is already addressed effectively through the use of irreplaceability and summed irreplaceability indices within C-Plan.
6. Reserve design should aim to minimise the impact of threatening processes, particularly from adjoining areas;
During reserve negotiations satellite imagery and land tenure should be loaded and displayed, where necessary, as a backdrop behind the planning unit layer within C-Plan. This will assist in locating reserves, where possible, away from major developments and areas of intensive land use.
7. Reserves should be linked through a variety of mechanisms, wherever practicable, across the landscape;
The patch size/connectivity functionality within C-Plan should be employed to guide selection of corridors to best serve the needs of specific entities for which connectivity goals have been set (particularly space demanding fauna and those most sensitive to fragmentation of habitat).
19 Feb 2010