Integrated coastal reserve planning: making the land–sea connection

Abstract

Land use, watershed processes, and coastal biodiversity are often intricately linked, yet land–sea interactions are usually ignored when selecting terrestrial and marine reserves with existing models. Such oversight increases the risk that reserves will fail to achieve their conservation objectives. The conceptual model underlying existing reserve selection models presumes each site is a closed ecological system, unaffected by inputs from elsewhere. As a short‐term objective, we recommend extending land‐conservation analyses to account for effects on marine biodiversity by considering linkages between ecosystems. This level of integration seems feasible and directly relevant to agencies and conservancies engaged in protecting coastal lands. We propose an approach that evaluates terrestrial sites based on whether they benefit or harm marine species or habitats. We then consider a hypothetical example involving estuarine nurseries. Whether this approach will produce more effective terrestrial reserves remains to be seen.

Forest conservation delivers highly variable coral reef conservation outcomes

“…There are a variety of land-sea connections important to marine resource management, including (1) land-sea processes (e.g., oceanic foraging by seabirds nesting in coastal forests); (2) cross-system threats (e.g., pollution and sedimentation from watersheds); and (3) socioeconomic interactions (e.g., the impact of land-based threats on marine-based tourism) (Beger et al 2010, Alvarez-Romero et al 2011. The utility and necessity of incorporating land-sea connections into systematic conservation planning is well established (Dutton et al 1994, Stoms et al 2005, Gordon 2007, Olsson et al 2008). Yet, planning for the land and sea is typically conducted separately, and we often act as though the ecological and socioeconomic systems are unconnected (Beck 2003, Stoms et al 2005.…”

“…The utility and necessity of incorporating land-sea connections into systematic conservation planning is well established (Dutton et al 1994, Stoms et al 2005, Gordon 2007, Olsson et al 2008). Yet, planning for the land and sea is typically conducted separately, and we often act as though the ecological and socioeconomic systems are unconnected (Beck 2003, Stoms et al 2005. Although conceptual frameworks for pursuing land-sea planning have been proposed (see Stoms et al 2005, Beger et Decisions about the location of protected areas are often supported by spatial conservation prioritization analyses.…”

Salmon for terrestrial protected areas

“…Recognizing that important linkages exist between protected areas and nearby lands or waters (Stoms et al 2005), promoting positive upstream processes like salmon migrations should be granted the same consideration as minimizing negative downstream processes such as habitat modification. This might be important because migrations in general are becoming increasingly endangered phenomena (Berger 2004).…”

Ridge to reef modelling for use within land–sea planning under data‐limited conditions

“…Given the threat of terrestrial runoff to coastal and marine areas, the practice of including land-sea interactions into marine spatial planning has been well established (Stoms et al, 2005;Halpern et al, 2008;Klein et al, 2010;Álvarez-Romero et al, 2011). Myriad studies aim to better understand the impacts of terrestrial runoff on marine resources, identify regions of particular vulnerability, and prioritize conservation investments accordingly (Halpern et al, 2008(Halpern et al, , 2009Paris and Chérubin, 2008;Tallis et al, 2008;Klein et al, 2010Klein et al, , 2012Burke et al, 2011;Álvarez-Romero et al, 2013).…”