Presented by James Atherton Presented by James Atherton (Conservation Outcomes Manager,(Conservation Outcomes Manager,

CI Pacific Islands Program)CI Pacific Islands Program)

KBA Review and Lessons Learned KBA Review and Lessons Learned WorkshopWorkshop

Washington DCWashington DCJuly 25-28, 2006July 25-28, 2006

Presented by James Atherton Presented by James Atherton (Conservation Outcomes Manager,(Conservation Outcomes Manager,

CI Pacific Islands Program)CI Pacific Islands Program)

KBA Review and Lessons Learned KBA Review and Lessons Learned WorkshopWorkshop

Washington DCWashington DCJuly 25-28, 2006July 25-28, 2006

Overview of the KBA process in thePolynesia-Micronesia Hotspot

Key Features of the Polynesia-Micronesia Hotspot

• 20 countries and territories (14 eligible for CEPF funds)

• > 4,500 islands

• 40 million km2 of ocean

• Land area only 46,000 km2

• Wide diversity of island size, age, geologic type and biodiversity endowment

• Data very patchy and incomplete and often hard to obtain

• Largest number of species extinctions since 1600…

Current Status of KBA identification in Polynesia-Micronesia

• First iteration completed • Supported by CEPF as part of the Ecosystem Profile

development between February 2003 and September 2004• Developed by the CI Melanesia CBC in collaboration with

SPREP and with the technical support of the Bishop Museum, CABS, WCS, WWF, TNC and Manu

• First cut of KBAS were developed based on species location and threat information from the literature

• Draft list of KBAs was then refined using a stakeholder driven process via four sub-regional workshops and two “expert” workshops

• KBA List was prioritised based on twin criteria of irreplaceability and vulnerability

• KBA list and prioritised set needs refinement based on new methodologies and on new data and thresholds for site outcomes (eg restricted range species and congregations)

What previous site prioritization initiatives it builds from

• No site identification and prioritisation had been done on a Pacific wide basis before this work

• However, KBAs identification was informed by the following key studies:– UNEP’s Island Directory and ranking of islands by

conservation importance (1986 and 1998) – IUCN terrestrial ecosystem and biogeographic regions

(1974 and 1980)– TNC’s Ecoregional Planning for FSM (2003)– Birdlife International’s Endemic Bird Areas (2000)– WWF’s Global Terrestrial Ecoregions (2001)– Sub regional profile reports for W. Polynesia, Fiji,

Micronesia and French Polynesia

Threatened species and KBAs

• There are 476 Red Listed species in the hotspot• Of these 244 are in countries eligible for CEPF funding. • The taxonomic groups most highly threatened are plants, birds and

molluscs (land snails)• 99.6% of all eligible redlisted species have been assigned to KBAs

(only one turtle was not assigned and it doesn’t breed in the hotspot)

TERRESTRIAL SPECIES Critically CEPF Proportion of which

Vulnerable Endangered Endangered Total Eligible KBAs identified for

Plants 94 59 90 243 129 100Molluscs 7 31 68 106 42 100Birds 50 25 21 96 58 100Arthropods 13 2 0 15 0 100Mammals 2 3 4 9 8 100Reptiles 1 2 3 6 6 83Amphibians 0 1 0 1 1 100

Totals 167 123 186 476 244 99.6

Application of KBA irreplaceability criteria

• 162 KBA sites were identified• These sites were prioritised based on twin

criteria of irreplaceability and vulnerability• In the absence of good threat data for each site,

the IUCN species threat category was used as a proxy for vulnerability

• Process was:1. Identify KBAs containing CR and EN species restricted to

those sites only (33 sites)2. Identify KBAs not listed above, containing CR or EN

restricted to only 2 sites (14 additional sites)3. Identify KBAs not listed above, containing VU listed for

only one site (13 additional sites)

• A list of 60 priority KBAs was the result

Map of Identified KBAs

Key issues for whichguidance is sought

• Guidance on how to refine the selection of KBAs with:• New scientific information (eg IBAs, globally significant congregations, restricted range species and possibly a few landscape sites on larger islands)• New CABS processes (more data driven? record data sources? assess pressures? refine species- site relationships? select conservation responses?)

• Guidance needed on how to improve the prioritisation of KBAs (eg vulnerability and opportunity/cost criteria)

• Guidance on the definition of marine KBAs

• Guidance on how to develop an effective, practical and useful monitoring strategy for conservation outcomes

THANK YOU