The issue of nature conservation was, is, and continues to be a common human practice. People have all along been involved in project works, whose main goal is to conserve the available natural values. Among these works are the reserves, which alone cannot meet the required natural conservation goals. Reading one provides an efficient approach that can help realize these goals; the systematic conservation planning. Following the ever changing and unpredictable dynamic world, questions have been raised on whether conservation planning is of any importance to this particular world. The second reading answers these questions. In addition, since climate is a factor that defines the conditions of the ecosystems established in national parks and reserves, reading three gives the possible alternatives that cater for these conditions as a result of the changing climate. This overview gives a detailed analysis of each reading, pointing out their relationships as well as raising the possible questions emerging from the readings.
Systematic conservation planning is an activity that runs in stages, each aimed at arriving at the set objectives, which have to be met by reserves thus enabling them realize their major role of maintaining the elements of biodiversity. According to Margules and Pressey, (2000, 245), the first stage is the application of statistics on the planning region where data is collected, compiled and analyzed. Stage two identifies the objectives of the conservation for the planning area whereas the available conservation domains are surveyed in stage three. Supplementary areas of conservation are chosen at stage four while the appropriate actions for conservation are enforced in stage five. The latter stage deals with preservation of the required values of the conservation regions. Basing on the above phases, conservation planning stands out as a bustle, in which changes occur on both social and political imperatives. Reading two specifically addresses the influence of the changing and unpredictable world on this conservation planning.
Following the evident changes and the uncertainties of this world, conservation planning has turned out to be the cornerstone that can maintain biodiversity. This reading; the second, is connected to the previous in that, systematic planning is employed here to help identify the most suitable decisions regarding which regions, both on land and sea, qualify for reserve networks. “In the real world, the process of identifying and implementing reserve networks…conservation investments are constrained by budgets, and opportunities to implement conservation actions tend to be unpredictable, both in space and through time” (Meir, Andelman, & Hugh, 2004, 615). It is clear that the changing world affects the conservation planning in that, as time and space changes, so must be the relevant conservation plans. Following these changes, which may be climatic, reading three addresses the alternative steps that can be established in the national parks and reserves to help maintain the ecosystems protected therein. According to Baron, Fleishman, Gunderson, & Allen (2009, 1033), curbing of all human activities in these areas, enforcing stern penalties for anybody interfering with these regions, among others, can be of great help if implemented to preserve the aforementioned ecosystems.
From these readings, the systematic approach for conservation stands out as quite helpful in that, following the set phases, the basic objectives, and hence the roles of reserves are realizable. This follows from the fact that each phase leads to the next, while all of them narrow down to the objectives. In fact, from article 1, Margules and Pressey (2001) claim that, “A structured systematic approach to conservation planning provides the foundation needed to meet the objectives” (p. 243). On the other hand, fostering a culture of trust, as step towards ecosystem preservation may be unhelpful. This follows from the fact that trust has become a rare attribute and therefore rarely considered and hence fruitless in this case. As a result, there is an evident degree of uncertainty and as Baron et al (2009) posits in article 3, “Management responses to scenarios should consider the degree of uncertainty” (p. 1038). This shows the extension of doubt because of the deteriorating trust among people. Based on the three readings, two questions stand out.
It is clear that habitats undergo changes. These may be changes of water, wind, to mention a few. The changes, on the other hand must affect the vegetation and any species along this chain and taking into account the cost of the effect that comes with the change, something ought to be done. Building on this, is there a working way that can monitor the change, prior to its occurrence, so that the necessary adjustments can be done in time? Secondly, reference conditions are subject to challenges. They are sometimes too high for some species while too low for some others. Therefore, is it possible to have an unbiased reference condition that does not favor some species or populations on the expense of others?
Reference List
Baron, S. et al. 2009. Environmental Management: Options for National Parks and Reserves for Adapting to Climate Change. U.S.A: Colorado State University. 44:1033–1042.
Meir, E., Andelman, S., & Hugh, P. 2004. Eulogy Letters: Does Conservation Planning Matter in a Dynamic and Uncertain World. U.S.A: NY. 7: 615–622.
Margules, R., & Pressey, L. 2000. Nature: Systematic Conservation Planning. 45: 243-253.