Identifying the Protection Status of Vulnerable and Endangered Plant Species in the Tropical Dry Forest of Colombia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Identifying the protection status of vulnerable and endangered plant species in the Tropical Dry Forest of Colombia Bachelor thesis Reineke van Tol Future Planet Studies Major Biology University of Amsterdam Supervisor: Dr. Suzette G.A. Flantua Examiner: Dr. Daniel Kissling Project leader: Dr. Mauricio Diazgranados June 2017 Abstract Colombia comprises many of the world’s biodiversity hotspots. Many of these areas are highly threatened and rapidly losing valuable species. The tropical dry forest (TDF) is the most threatened and neglected ecosystem, while harbouring unique and very vulnerable plant species. The conservation status of these species is to a great extend unknown. In this study, a new method is applied to identify Important Plant Areas (IPAs) for conservation that contain a significant amount of Prioritized Plant Species (PPS). Through a spatial analysis in ArcGIS, the protection status of the PPS and current threats are analysed. The results of this study show that the currently protected areas are not sufficiently protecting PPS in the Colombian dry forest. The study also shows that the newly proposed method can be applied in several ways. Climate change, coal mining and land-use seem to be the most important threats for TDF-PPS in Colombia. Results of this study contribute to the conservation of Colombia’s rich and unique biodiversity as well as to the establishment of a new IPA analysis method. Keywords: Colombia, Conservation, GIS, Important Plant Areas (IPAs), Prioritized Plant Species (PPS), Threats, Tropical dry forest (TDF) 2 Table of contents 1. Introduction p. 4 2. Methods p. 5 2.1 Main question p. 5 2.1.1 Data collection p. 5 2.1.2 IPA criteria p. 5 2.1.3 Analysis methods p. 6 2.1.4 Practical steps p. 7 2.1.5 Analysis p. 9 2.2 Sub-questions 2 and 3: Land use and Threats p. 10 3. Results p. 10 3.1 IPAs p. 10 3.1.1 Integrated p. 13 3.2 Land use and threats p. 16 3.2.1 Land use p. 16 3.2.2 Threats p. 16 3.2.2.1 Protection p. 17 3.2.2.2 Global threats and climate change p. 17 3.2.2.3 Mining p. 18 3.2.2.4 Coca production p. 20 4. Discussion p. 22 4.1 IPA method p. 22 4.2 Identifying threats p. 22 4.3 Data availability and accessibility p. 23 5. Conclusion and recommendations p. 23 5.1 Conclusions p. 23 5.2 Reflection & recommendations p. 24 Acknowledgements p. 25 References p. 25 Appendix 1: Used GIS layers p. 29 Appendix 2: IPA thresholds p. 30 Appendix 3: PSS list p. 31 Appendix 4: IPA results p. 32 Appendix 5: R scripts p. 35 Appendix 6: Team of collaborators p. 37 3 1. Introduction Colombia has been identified as one of the 17 megadiverse countries in world, harbouring many biodiversity hotpots (Mittermeier et al., 1997). This means that the country holds a great variety of endemic species, while suffering from severe losses in species and habitat in the meantime (Meyers et al., 2000). These hotspots span over a wide geographical range and comprise a high variety of biomes. In general, all of them have been prioritized for conservation, but proper management is still lacking in many places (Brooks et al., 2002). Moreover, Knight et al. (2008) reported that although there is a lot of knowledge on nature conservation, this knowledge is often not translated into action. Within the range of tropical ecosystems, the tropical dry forest (TDF) is the most threatened (Wilson, 1988). Miles et al. (2006) identified major threats for dry forests on a global scale, namely climate change, fire, deforestation conversion for agriculture and human population growth. Armenteras et al. (2003) reported that, although a major part of the fragmentation is natural, tropical dry forests are highly degraded and fragmented and over 98% is unprotected. Less than 2% is sufficiently intact to deserve attention from traditional conservationists (Wilson, 1988). Overall dry forests have been poorly studied and have received substantially less attention for conservation than other neotropical biomes. Also, spatial representation of biome maps, mainly of extremely fragmented areas, is highly insufficient to represent the TDF (Särkinen et al., 2011). The TDF forms a unique habitat due to the fact that it experiences a prolonged dry season of 4 to 7 months. Where the forest is uniformly green during the wet season, during the dry season it changes into a highly heterogenic system. Differential drying rates of vegetation and soil types give rise to a high variety of different niches that are only suitable for very specialized species that can handle the harsh circumstances (Wilson, 1988). Banda et al. (2016) confirmed the fact that TDF species are highly specialized and found that dry forest floristic groups experience high species turnover at relatively small spatial scales, resulting in extremely high species endemism. Only a few species are widespread or shared across dry forest fragments, meaning that losing fragments would result in major loss of biodiversity. Also, dry forests provide important ecosystem services, including soil stabilization, prevention of erosion and desertification, water regulation and contribution to productivity of agriculture and livestock farming (Pizano & García, 2014). Colombia comprises a significant proportion of these poorly protected but highly biodiverse dry forest fragments (Portillo-Quintero & Sánchez-Azofeifa, 2010). Over 90% of the Colombian TDF has been lost due to deforestation for agriculture. Of the remaining forest, less than 5% is formally protected (Pizano & García, 2014). However, although fragmented and highly unprotected, the Colombian dry forest harbours a great variety of endangered and vulnerable plant species (Pizano & García, 2014). Little is known about the effective conservation status of these species, making proper conservation management impossible. One way to assess the protection status of prioritized plant species (PPS) is to identify important plant areas (IPAs) for conservation based on the spatial distribution of PPS. This was done mainly for IPAs in Europe, but not yet for the tropics of South America. The Humboldt institute for biological research (IAvH, 2017) proposed a new method to identify IPAs in Colombia, based on the method of Anderson (2002) that was applied mainly in Europe. According to this method, an area is considered an IPA if it holds a significant percentage of the total plant population at local, regional or global scale. If IPAs lie significant outside protected areas, this is a major indication for poor conservation status of PPS in this study. I will use this approach to identify the conservation status of dry forest PPS in Colombia. Hereby contributing to the recently initiated Colombia Bio programme that aims to conserve Colombia’s rich biodiversity. The aim of this research is to investigate whether PPS in dry forest systems in Colombia currently fall under protection of officially protected areas and whether the newly addressed method is 4 suitable to address this question. Additionally, this study addresses sources of threats for PPSs falling both in and outside protected areas. Knowledge on threats and the conservation status of PPS is important for effective protection strategies of species in the tropical dry forest. Results of this study contribute to the conservation of one of the most neglected and rapidly disappearing ecosystems in Colombia. Moreover, this study contributes to the establishment of a new method to identify important plant areas for conservation. One main question and two additional questions are dressed in this research. The main question is: Are current protected dry forest areas in Colombia preserving the most important populations of PPS for conservation? Two additional questions are addressed, being (1) If PPS are not sufficiently protected, in what type of habitat do these unprotected PPS occur? And (2) What might be threats to populations of PPS both in and outside protected areas? Based on the literature discussed above, I expect the conservation status of TDF-PPS to be poor, meaning that a significant proportion of PPS falls outside protected areas. Also I expect that current land use practices and related deforestation for economic incentives form a major threat to the TDF-PPS. 2. Methods 2.1 Main question: Are current protected dry forest areas in Colombia preserving the most important populations of PPS for conservation? 2.1.1 Data collection PPSs were identified using dry forest species lists from Pizano & García (2014) and the Colombian biological catalogue CEIBA (Catalogador de Información Biológica). According to Anderson (2002), species indicated with CR (critically endangered), EN (endangered) and VU (vulnerable) are considered as PPS. Two categories of PPS were identified, based on the proposed method of IAvH (2017). Globally threatened (A1) species (16 species) were based on IUCN red list registration (‘lista roja’), whereas locally threatened species (A3) (21 species) were based on Colombian red lists (‘libro rojo’). The second category (A2) includes regionally threatened species, but unfortunately no regional red lists of tropical dry forest plants exist. Category A2 is therefore left out of this study. Distribution data of the identified PPS was obtained from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) and the Botanical Information and Ecological Network (BIEN). All data was processed in Excel (2016) and checked for irrelevant or incorrect records. Data without spatial reference was deleted. In total 11508 occurrences were left for analysis. Most GIS layers were obtained from Sistema de Información Ambiental de Colombia (SIAC) and some additional sources (Appendix 1 Table 1). 2.1.2 IPA criteria Criteria used for IPA analysis are as proposed by IAvH (2017): • For globally threatened species (A1) an area is considered an IPA if it holds ≥ 1% of the global population of one or more PPS. • For locally threatened species (A3), an area is considered an IPA if it holds ≥ 10% of the national population of one or more PPS.