Description:    The emerging interest in the biological and conservation significance of locally rare species prompts a number of questions about their correspondence with other categories of biodiversity, especially global rarity. Here we present an analysis of the correspondence between the distributions of globally and locally rare plants. Using biological hotspots of rarity as our framework, we evaluate the extent to which conservation of globally rare plants will act as a surrogate for conservation of locally rare taxa. Subsequently, we aim to identify gaps between rarity hotspots and protected land to guide conservation planning. We compiled distribution data for globally and locally rare plants from botanically diverse Napa County, California into a geographic information system. We then generated richness maps highlighting hotspots of global and local rarity. Following this, we overlaid the distribution of these hotspots with the distribution of protected lands to identify conservation gaps. Based on occupancy of 1 km 2 grid cells, we found that over half of Napa County is occupied by at least one globally or locally rare plant. Hotspots of global and local rarity occurred in a substantially smaller portion of the county. Of these hotspots, less than 5% were classified as multi-scale hotspots, i.e. they were hotspots of global and local rarity. Although, several hotspots corresponded with the 483 km 2 of protected lands in Napa County, some of the richest areas did not. Thus, our results show that there are important conservation gaps in Napa County. Furthermore, if only hotspots of global rarity are preserved, only a subset of locally rare plants will be protected. Therefore, conservation of global, local, and multi-scale hotspots needs serious consideration if the goals are to protect a larger variety of biological attributes, prevent extinction, and limit extirpation in Napa County. Content Type Journal Article Category Original Paper Pages 1-12 DOI 10.1007/s10531-011-0137-6 Authors Benjamin J. Crain, Department of Biological Sciences, Humboldt State University, 1 Harpst Street, Arcata, CA 95521, USA Jeffrey W. White, Department of Biological Sciences, Humboldt State University, 1 Harpst Street, Arcata, CA 95521, USA Steven J. Steinberg, Department of Environmental Science and Management, Humboldt State University, 1 Harpst Street, Arcata, CA 95521, USA Journal Biodiversity and Conservation Online ISSN 1572-9710 Print ISSN 0960-3115

Description:    Land use change and human population growth are accelerating the fragmentation and insularization of wildlife habitats worldwide. The conservation and management of wildlife in the resultant ‘island’ ecosystems in the context of global warming is challenging due to the isolation and reduced size of the ecosystems and hence the scale over which ecosystem processes can operate. We analyzed trends in numbers of nine large herbivores in Kenya’s Lake Nakuru National Park to understand how rainfall and temperature variability, surrounding land use changes, and boundary fencing affected wildlife population dynamics inside the park during 1970–2011. Buffalo, zebra and Thomson’s gazelle numbers increased persistently. Grant’s gazelle and impala increased initially then gradually declined. Waterbuck and warthog numbers progressively declined to levels that potentially threatened their local population persistence. The total biomass of ungulates tripled from 1970 to 2011, with buffalo replacing waterbuck as the predominant species in biomass. Increased competition from buffalo and zebra, heightened predation and illicit human harvests probably all contributed to the declines by waterbuck and warthog. Density-dependent limitation of population growth within the park confines was evident for buffalo, impala, eland, giraffe, Grant’s and Thomson’s gazelles. Fluctuations in the lake level related to varying rainfall affected changes in animal abundance through expansion of the lake area and flooding of grasslands bordering the lake. Unusually, the most stressful conditions were associated with high water levels following high rainfall. There was also evidence of carry-over effects from prior habitat conditions affecting all species. The relatively stable populations of all species except warthog and waterbuck demonstrate the remarkable capacity of this small, insularized park to retain viable populations of most of the large herbivores, without much management intervention. Content Type Journal Article Category Original Paper Pages 1-21 DOI 10.1007/s10531-012-0239-9 Authors Joseph O. Ogutu, International Livestock Research Institute, P.O. Box 30709, Nairobi, 00100 Kenya Norman Owen-Smith, Centre for African Ecology, School of Animal, Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Wits, 2050 South Africa Hans-Peter Piepho, Bioinformatics Unit, Institute for Crop Science, University of Hohenheim, Fruwirthstrasse 23, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany Bernard Kuloba, Kenya Wildlife Service, Lake Nakuru National Park, P.O. Box 539, Nakuru, Kenya Joseph Edebe, Kenya Wildlife Service, Lake Nakuru National Park, P.O. Box 539, Nakuru, Kenya Journal Biodiversity and Conservation Online ISSN 1572-9710 Print ISSN 0960-3115

Description: The biodiversity of aquatic inland habitats currently faces unprecedented threats from human activities. At the same time, although much is known about the functioning of freshwater ecosystems the successful transfer of such knowledge to practical conservation has not been universal. Global awareness of aquatic conservation issues is also hampered by the fact that conditions under the water surface are largely hidden from the direct experience of most members of society. Connectivity, or lack of it, is another challenge to the conservation of freshwater habitats, while urban areas can play a perhaps unexpectedly important positive role. Freshwater habitats frequently enjoy benefits accruing from a sense of ownership or stewardship by local inhabitants, which has led to the development of conservation movements which commonly started life centred on the aquatic inland habitat itself but of which many have now matured into wider catchment-based conservation programmes. A demonstrable need for evidence-based conservation management in turn requires scientific assessments to be increasingly robust and standardised, while at the same time remaining open to the adoption of technological advances and welcoming the rapidly developing citizen science movement. There is evidence of real progress in this context and conservation scientists are now communicating their findings to environmental managers in a way and on a scale that was rarely seen a couple of decades ago. It is only in this way that scientific knowledge can be efficiently transferred to conservation planning, prioritisation and ultimately management in an increasingly scaled-up, joined-up and resource-limited world. The principle of ‘prevention is better than cure’ is particularly appropriate to most biological conservation issues in aquatic inland habitats and is inextricably linked to educating and/or nudging appropriate human behaviours. When prevention fails, some form of emergency rescue such as captive breeding or translocations may be justified for particularly important animal or plant populations. However, long-haul missions of habitat rehabilitation or restoration are generally to be preferred even if they usually take many years if not decades to reach fruition. Conservation researchers, managers and practitioners must be realistic in their objectives and timescales for such programmes and take positive steps to communicate such information to stakeholders. Now more than ever, people are interested in conservation and sustainability. There are substantial challenges ahead, but these are better days for the biological conservation of aquatic inland habitats.