Page "WP 2 – Integrate climate change into nature conservation and management strategies"

[Erika Baus]

Dear forum members,

Please find below the link to the very interesting contribution of
Hans Van Dyck's to WP 2: "Integrate climate change into nature
conservation and management strategies".

Click on the link
http://groups.google.com/group/biodiversity-and-climate-change/web/wp-2--integrate-climate-change-into-nature-conservation-and-management-strategies
or copy/paste it in your browser.

We are looking forward to your reactions and comments on this draft
for December the 19th at the latest.

You can either (preferably) use the google page system to send your
comments (if you have a google account), or copy/paste the text into a
Word document and comment it using track changes.

Thank you in advance for your collaboration!
Best regards,
Erika BAUS.

[Matthysen Erik]

Dear all,

I attach the draft text (pasted in Word) with a few minor comments.
There is one more substantial comment which is that under point II it
could also be mentioned that current conservation-related legislation is
largely based on the static, "status quo" approach. For many Belgian
nature areas, quantitative conservation goals
(instandhoudingsdoelstellingen) have been or are currently being drafted
whereby the maintenance of a particular population size of particular
species becomes legally binding. Obviously in a changing climate this
approach will be too restrictive because some conservation goals will
become impossible to achieve and on the other hand opportunities such as
(assisted) establishment of specialized southern species will not be
rewarded, and might conflict with the original goals.

Erik


Prof. Dr. Erik Matthysen
Evolutionary Ecology Group
Department of Biology, University of Antwerp

New telephone number and street address
Groenenborgerlaan 171, 2020 Antwerpen
+32 3 265 3464

[ebran...@gmail.com]

Dear Hans et al., dear All,

First of all, I would like to thank Hans et al. for the very nice
synthesis work they did and links to interesting recent literature. I
fully agree that conservation should become more and more
scientifically grounded to allow biodiversity to resist/adapt to the
increasing pressure from multiple driving forces. Please note that
bridging the gap between theory and practice was the core element
discussed in details during a European (EPBRS) electronic conference
organised by the Platform in November-December 2001 (Biodiversity
Conservation in theory and practice) (see Segers et al. 2001).

Though I agree with most of the text, I'm not fully convinced by the
very last paragraph. I'm not sure that increasing social pressures in
a climate change context will necessarily conflict with biodiversity
conservation issues. What I heard from Patrick Meire about the
restoration of Scheldt wetlands as climatic buffer areas is more a win-
win situation for biodiversity and climate than diverging options.
Urban forests are a typical example where social pressure can lead to
a decrease in the demand for wood products and favour conservation
goals (see e.g. Zoniënwoud). I would advice to adopt a more balanced
opinion here.

I agree with the substantial comment by Erik. It can be asked, for
example, if the static conservation targets of Natura 2000 are really
an adequate way to make nature conservation in a climate change
context. For example, the principle to consider the different phases
of ecological successions as independent and fixed conservation units
is probably not the best way to cope with climate change. We need
probably more flexibility here. Maybe something that can be developed
a little bit in part II or IV of the text.

At last, I would like to make another substantial comment (sic). What
would you think to present in part IV responses that should be
developed for biodiversity conservation for two different climatic
scenarios? Scenario 1 would consider answers to weak environmental
changes that do not necessarily lead to massive species migrations. In
that case, conservation should focus on improving ecosystem resistance/
resilience, the preservation of biodiversity hotspots, etc. With a
focus on "climatically trapped systems" like boreo-alpine, peatbogs,
etc. Scenario 2 would consider answers to be given to strong changes,
e.g. migration and connectivity issues, permeable landscapes,
ecosystem capacity to accommodate southern species, etc. Just a
thought... Something that can be illustrated through an example for a
given ecosystem type. Considering peatbogs, for example, it would be
nice to present concrete measures that can be proposed to managers.

Best regards,

Etienne Branquart

> Click on the linkhttp://groups.google.com/group/biodiversity-and-climate-change/web/wp-2-

> -integrate-climate-change-into-nature-conservation-and-management-strate
> gies
> or copy/paste it in your browser.
>
> We are looking forward to your reactions and comments on this draft for
> December the 19th at the latest.
>
> You can either (preferably) use the google page system to send your
> comments (if you have a google account), or copy/paste the text into a
> Word document and comment it using track changes.
>
> Thank you in advance for your collaboration!
> Best regards,
> Erika BAUS.
>
>
>

>  Biodiversity and Climate Change Forum.doc
> 173KAfficherTélécharger