1. Heini Kujala Metapopulation Research Group University of Helsinki, Finland Introduction to ZONATION v1.0 © 2004 – 2007 Atte Moilanen

2. Zonation Produces a hierarchical zoning of a landscape by looking for priority sites for conservation aiming at species persistence using large grids

3. Zonation Features Species prioritization (weighting) Costs Species-specific connectivity Uncertainty analysis Replacement cost analysis for current or proposed conservation areas Direct link from GIS distribution modeling Zonation

4. The Zonation meta-algorithm 1.Start from full landscape 2.Determine cell that has least marginal value and remove it 3.Repeat (2) until no cells remain

5. Cell removal in Zonation

6. Map of landscape showing the cell removal ranking Basic output 1 Best 10% of the landscapeArea needed to achieve 30% of sp distributions

7. Proportion of cells removed 10% top fraction Basic output 2 Curves specifying performance of spp or spp groups at different levels of cell removal Proportion of species distribution protected

8. Eg. Comparison of different solutions Connected sets of sites with similar species compositions can be connected into management landscapes Basic output 3: Post-processing analyses

9. Zonation Data Large grids (ASCII files) - Species data: P/A, abundance etc. - Cost layer - Mask layer - Species-specific uncertainty maps Species-specific connectivity specification

10. Present Zonation Data limits 4000 grid maps Max. 16M elements per spp in map With 4 GB memory: 700 spp x 1M element map

11. Cell removal rule

12. Cell removal rules Determine how the value of a cell is calculated Three alternatives core-area Zonation additive benefit function targeting benefit function These alternatives have different aims value representations differently

13. Cell removal rules: Finnish breeding birds Additive benefit function Core-area Zonation

14. Cell removal rules additive benefit function target-based planning

15. Species prioritization

16. Proportion of cells removed Species weighting Best 10% of total area Endemic spp weighted higher All spp with equal weights Proportion of species distribution protected Proportion of cells removed

17. Connectivity

18. Qualitative: 1. Removal from edge 2. Boundary Length Penalty Species-specific: 3. Distribution smoothing 4. Boundary Quality Penalty Accounting for connectivity

19. Accounting for connectivity: Distribution smoothing original distribution smoothed distribution

20. Accounting for connectivity: Distribution smoothing No aggregation Top 20% (color) is scrappy Top 20% well connected Using distribution smoothing

21. Accounting for connectivity: Boundary Quality Penalty (BQP) Species-specific decrease in local quality due to proximity of reserve boundary –Forces connectivity only where needed. –Allows fragmentation where it does not hurt

22. Small effect of neighboring habitat loss large buffer Accounting for connectivity: Boundary Quality Penalty (BQP) Strong effect of neighboring habitat loss focal cell small buffer

23. Moilanen and Wintle 2006 7 species of interest Hierarchical priorities Hunter Valley, Australia Accounting for connectivity: Boundary Quality Penalty (BQP)

24. Distributions Accounting for connectivity: Boundary Quality Penalty (BQP)

25. Uncertainty

26. Uncertainty analysis important avoid negative surprises positive surprises certainty of information high conservation value high low robustness requirement opportunity low

27. Uncertainty analysis: Distribution discounting Distribution model Discounted distribution Error surface

28. Replacement cost analysis

29. Situation where areas need to be included to or excluded from the final solution –Eg. evaluation of existing and proposed reserves

30. Replacement cost analysis Optimal solutionForced solution Proposed reserves

31. Replacement cost analysis 1.Calculate biologically optimal solution 2.Force in areas that need to be protected or force out areas that cannot be protected 3. Reoptimize under constraint and calculate the difference in cost/benefit

32. Replacement cost analysis Proportion of species distribution protected Proportion of cells removed COST = loss in biological value Performance curve for ideal solution Curve for forced solution Leathwick et al. 2006

33. Replacement cost analysis: New Zealand EEZ Leathwick et al. 2006

34. Replacement cost analysis: New Zealand EEZ 122 fish species Data resolution 1 km 2 Cost layer: commercial trawl effort Cell removal rank 0 - 50% 50 - 75% 75 - 90% 90 - 100% (= 10% best) Leathwick et al. 2006

35. Network Cost loss for fishermen Benefit species protected Existing reserves18.1%29.8% Proposed by fisheries0.2%11.9% Zonation software no costs 19.9%31.1% Zonation software cost-adjusted 1.6%28.6% Replacement cost analysis: New Zealand EEZ Leathwick et al. 2006

36. New features to come

37. Zonation v1.1 Histograms of habitat quality Planning unit layer Species of special interest (SSI) - point location data Directed (freshwater) connectivity

38. Zonation www.helsinki.fi/bioscience/consplan Zonation program User manual Tutorial

39. Thank You! Acknowledgments: Atte Moilanen Mar Cabeza Evgeniy Meike John Leathwick Brendan Wintle Hunter Region Organization of Councils

40. Moilanen, A., Franco, A.M.A., Early, R., Fox, R., Wintle, B., and C.D. Thomas. 2005. Prioritising multiple-use landscapes for conservation: methods for large multi-species planning problems. Proc. Royal Society of London, Series B, 272: 1885-1891. Moilanen, A. 2005. Reserve selection using nonlinear species distribution models. American Naturalist 165: 695-706. Arponen, A., Heikkinen, R., Thomas, C.D. and A. Moilanen. 2005. The value of biodiversity in reserve selection: representation, species weighting and benefit functions. Conservation Biology 19: 2009-2014. Moilanen, A. and B.A. Wintle. 2006. Uncertainty analysis favours selection of spatially aggregated reserve structures. Biological Conservation, 129: 427-343. Moilanen, A., B.A. Wintle., J. Elith and M. Burgman. 2006a. Uncertainty analysis for regional-scale reserve selection. Conservation Biology, 20: 1688-1697. Moilanen, A., M. Runge, J. Elith, A. Tyre, Y. Carmel, E. Fegraus, B. Wintle, M. Burgman and Y. Ben-Haim. 2006b. Planning for robust reserve networks using uncertainty analysis. Ecological Modeling, 119: 115-124. Cabeza, M. and A. Moilanen. 2006. Replacement cost: a useful measure of site value for conservation planning. Biological Conservation, 132: 336-342. Moilanen, A. and H. Kujala. 2006. Zonation spatial conservation planning framework and software v1.0. User manual. Edita, Helsinki, Finland. Moilanen, A. 2007. Landscape zonation, benefit functions and target-based planning: Unifying reserve selection strategies. Biological Conservation 134: 571-579. Moilanen, A., and B. A. Wintle. 2007. The boundary-quality penalty: a quantitative method for approximating species responses to fragmentation in reserve selection. Conservation Biology, 21:355-364. Moilanen, A., J. Leathwick and J. Elith. 2008. A method for spatial freshwater conservation prioritization. Submitted manuscript. Relevant references