4.6 Article

Spatial-explicit assessment of current and future conservation options for the endangered Corsican Red Deer (Cervus elaphus corsicanus) in Sardinia

期刊

BIODIVERSITY AND CONSERVATION
卷 18, 期 8, 页码 2001-2016

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10531-008-9569-z

关键词

Cervus elaphus corsicanus; Conservation; Desertification risk; ENFA; Land-use management; Potential suitability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Corsican red deer, a sub-species of the European red deer endemic to Sardinia and Corsica, was abundant on both islands at the beginning of 1900. It went extinct in Corsica and reached a minimum of 100 individuals in Sardinia by 1970. Numbers have recovered in Sardinia with more than 1,000 rutting males now present; in the 1980s the deer was reintroduced to Corsica, but the Sardinian population remains fragmented. We developed a potential distribution model in Sardinia using Ecological Niche Factor Analysis. To assess the deer's protection status we compared the model with the existing and proposed conservation areas and investigated different conservation scenarios in relation to the expansion of its current range and resilience to future changes in land use and predicted trends of desertification. According to our results over 70% of Sardinia is unsuitable to the deer, nevertheless high suitability areas (Mediterranean forests away from main roads) are available throughout the island, particularly in the south and in the central-eastern part. Existing protected areas do not provide for the conservation of the deer but public owned forests, where hunting is prohibited, extend some level of protection, and the protected areas proposed by the Regional administration, if implemented, will be increasing this protection. Three main areas have emerged as conservation priorities to guarantee adequate conservation potential in the future. Our approach provides valuable data to inform conservation policy, and could be easily replicated in other parts of the Mediterranean.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据