Optimizing protected area expansion and enforcement to conserve exploited species

Liam Timms,Matthew H. Holden
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110463
IF: 7.499
2024-02-01
Biological Conservation
Abstract:Illegal harvest (poaching) and habitat loss are two of the greatest threats to wildlife. While, in theory, protected areas can alleviate populations from these threats, they must be managed to achieve conservation goals. When faced with limited budgets, there is an inherent trade-off between acquiring property to protect against habitat loss versus spending that money to better manage the existing area. This trade-off is exacerbated by management being spread thinner, spatially, as area is acquired. To aid investment decisions between expanding versus better enforcing protected areas, we developed a general model of poaching effort and the population it threatens within a protected area (PA). From the model, we show there is a simple formula for the optimal funding ratio between expanding and better enforcing PAs. The optimal funding ratio strongly favours enforcement because it corresponds to eliminating poaching in the existing PA before expanding. The model shows that this result is general across systems. A case study parameterising the model for elephant poaching in Zambia, suggests that initial investments in reducing poaching would be more beneficial to elephant populations compared to PA expansion. The methods developed here provide useful tools for conservation managers to aid the allocation of limited conservation resources to protect populations threatened by poaching and habitat loss. Calls for expansion often assume that the PA will be managed effectively, however, this must be explicitly planned for when the target species is threatened by poaching. Funding anti-poaching efforts in the PA is at least equally important as expansion.
environmental sciences,biodiversity conservation,ecology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?