DYLAN – Towards a new Framework for the Management of Cultural and Natural Heritage in Upland Landscape Conservation Areas

(LCA) in NorwayH. John B. Birks

University of BergenUniversity College London

University of Oxford

DYLAN – Trondheim 21 September 2010

DYLAN involves

• present-day monitoring of threatened and endangered species

• present-day vegetation and ecology

• vegetation re-sampling where possible

• repeat photography

• use of documentary and herbarium material

• dendrochronology

• land-use and cultural history

• long-term ecology (= ecological palaeoecology)

Unique in its breadth

Introduction

What is Conservation Biology?

Used here to mean the planned management of natural resources and processes and the retention of structure, diversity, and evolutionary change within a constantly changing environment. Protection management and/or maintenance of biodiversity in its many manifestations.

The concept of biodiversity covers many scales in space, time, and biological organisation, ranging from biomes and landscapes to species and genes. Biodiversity hotspots occur at global, continental, national, county, and local scales. All of value and importance at different spatial and temporal scales.

What is Long-Term Ecology?

Long-term ecology = ecological palaeoecology, namely using palaeoecology to resolve critical questions about long-term ecological change. Concerned primarily with the ecological impacts of environmental change (‘drivers’) on organisms, communities, ecosystems, and landscapes.

Uses the palaeoecological record of fossil pollen, spores, leaves, fruits, seeds, etc in lake and bog sediments as a long-term ecological laboratory or observatory.

Not primarily concerned with the reconstruction of past environments (e.g. climate) (as in geological palaeoecology) but with the responses of organisms in the past to environmental change.

Has Conservation Biology Changed in Focus in the last 20

years?

Major paradigm shifts in conservation biology in the late 1990s. This shift is reflected, in part, by long-term ecology’s contributions to conservation, and to the recognition of global change and the rapidity of change in our environment.

1. Descriptive and evaluation phase in the UK and elsewhere in temperate and tropical areas (hotspots). ‘Balance of nature’ paradigm

Derek A. Ratcliffe 1929-2005

First met in Borrowdale, September 1966. Became close friends. Stimulated my interests in conservation biology

1991-2000

1977

Anemone pulsatilla

Conservation evaluation – various criteria (Ratcliffe 1977)

(1) size and extent of site

(2) species diversity

(3) naturalness, i.e. degree of absence of human interference *

(4) nationally rare, endangered, and local species

(5) fragility *

(6) typicalness and unusualness *

(7) representative

(8) recorded history *

(9) potential value *

(10) research and educational value *

(11) intrinsic appeal (e.g. birds, orchids, butterflies)

(* long-term ecological contributions)

Current approach in Norway of nature types is mainly in the philosophy of this ‘balance of nature’ paradigm with its emphasis on description, documentation, and evaluation. Assumes a relatively ‘static’ environment.

2. Conservation in a rapidly changing world

Three key conclusions

1. Recognises that much progress has been made world-wide in the identification of priority areas for biodiversity conservation. Evaluation phase.

2. Must now build an understanding of biological processes into management and planning.

3. Conservation planners need to deal with the dynamic processes of species and their interactions with their environment.

Set a new agenda for conservation and management. Applicable to all spatial scales, including UK. 1998

Georgina Mace

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005 www.maweb.org

UN commissioned MEA concluded that

• There is little knowledge of how ecosystems respond to the interactive effects of different drivers in particular regions and across different scales

• There is a limited understanding of characteristics of ecosystems that lead to thresholds and irreversible changes

• Such information is critical in order to develop policies and conservation strategies to cope with current and future change

• Longest temporal data set used in MEA is 45 years (1960-2005)

Hal Mooney

Major shifts in approach of active conservationists

Sutherland et al. 2009

Sutherland et al.

Bill Sutherland

Current Picture

Ecology Long-term ecology

Conservation biology

Strong links and interactions

Medium links and interactions

Weak links and interactions

Very weak links and interactions

Current Picture of DYLAN

Ecology Long-term ecology

Conservation biology

Strong links and interactions

Medium links and interactions

Weak links and interactions

Very weak links and interactions

Cultural history

DYLAN is unique internationally in its clear and explicit inclusion of cultural history into an integrated view of achieving effective conservation policies for dynamic landscapes. Considers long-term ecology, cultural history, and modern ecology.

Key Drivers of Change in Upland Landscapes in UK and Norway

UK NorwayRecreation and tourism +++ +Recent cultural history ++ +++Recent land-use changes +++ +++Afforestation +++ +Acid deposition +++ ++Atmospheric N deposition ++ ++Economic change + +Long-term human impacts (>1 ka) +++ +Soil degradation ++ +Peat erosion ++ +Climate change ++ ++Introduced invasive species ++ +Habitat fragmentation ++ +

+++ large impact: ++ medium impact: + some impact

See common drivers but relative importance is different between UK and Norway. Also different between study areas within UK and within Norway. Findings of Work Package 3 key outcome from DYLAN

Key QuestionsKey questions of importance to the conservation of biodiversity globally, nationally, and locally that need answers from the past (long-term ecology)

1. What ecological processes are important for maintaining target ecosystems?

2. Which combinations of abiotic and biotic processes result in a given critical threshold being exceeded? Can we determine thresholds and predict responses to future changes?

3. Can we restore ecological processes on a degraded landscape? (Restoration or reconciliation ecology)

4. How can we identify regions important for evolutionary processes?

5. What will be the rates and nature of changes in ecological processes in response to climate change?

6. What processes bolster the resilience to climate change?

7. How can we manage the novel ecosystems that result from biotic responses to climate change?

See: Willis, K.J. & Bhagwat, S.A. 2010 Climate of the Past 6: 1139-1162

Willis, K.J., Bailey, R.M., Bhagwat, S.A. & Birks, H.J.B. 2010 Trends in Ecology & Evolution 10.1016/j.tree.2010.07.006

for answers to these questions

Note that the emphasis in on process (ecological and evolutionary) rather than on patterns (descriptions).

Reflects the shift in the paradigms in conservation biology brought about, in part, by the realisation of a dynamic world, global change, and continuous ecological variation in space and time over a very wide range of scales.

DYLAN is important in that it is considering the Landscape Conservation Areas as dynamic entities, drivers of change, and processes.

General Conclusions

1. Understanding long-term dynamics and processes in the past as a tool for predicting and managing biodiversity in the future needs a strong and effective interaction and collaboration between long-term ecology and management and conservation.

2. Much to learn from ‘lessons from the past’ and to understand ‘legacies from the past’.

3. We should not view modern ecology and long-term ecology as separate entities. View long-term ecology as a continuum in time - part of ecology.

4. Increasing emphasis on ecological and evolutionary processes in conservation biology.

5. Conservation biology has embraced the importance of different spatial scales but it has yet to do this with temporal scales.

6. Many major challenges ahead for all of us.

7. Do we know what we want to conserve in the future and how to conserve it?

Two competing conservation models: both based on long-term ecological records

Which one is going to get closer to maintaining a biodiverse, fully functioning ecosystem in the future?

Partial re-wilding

Cultural landscape

2010

Result of EU ALARM ProjectInvolving 68 partners in 35 countries

(but not Norway)

Impressive synthesis and predictions involving major drivers and pressures on biodiversity, including socio-economic changes, invasions, climate, and atmospheric nitrogen.

Starting point was ‘stable’ or ‘static’ communities. Studied change from one ‘stable’ state to another ‘stable’ state. No consideration of systems that today already have a strong historical legacy and are highly dynamic.