There are two main ways. The first one is in situ conservation- the conservation of ecosystem and natural habitats and the protection of flora or fauna in their natural surroundings. The convention on biological diversity defines it as the conservation of ecosystems and natural habitats and the maintenance and recovery of viable populations of species in their natural surroundings. In the case of domesticated or cultivated species, in the surroundings where they have developed their distinctive properties. An example is the establishment of game and wildlife.
This is different from where the species are carried from their natural habitat which is ex situ conservation. Some techniques of ex situ conservation are the establishment of gene banks such as seed banks, field banks and sperm
and ova banks; in-vitro plant tissue and microbial culture collections; captive breeding of animals and artificial propagation of plants, with possible re-introduction into the wild; and collecting living organisms for zoos, aquaria and
botanic gardens for research and public education and awareness.
In situ conservation
Article 8 of the convention on biological diversity recognizes in situ conservation as the primary approach for biodiversity conservation. Article 8 lists the wide range of measures required to protect the diffuse elements which collectively constitute the essential elements of in situ biodiversity. The convention state that each Contracting Party shall, as far as possible and as appropriate:
(a) Establish a system of protected areas or areas where special measures need to be taken to conserve biological diversity; this can be for plant and animal species. The establishment of protected areas is among the most widely and long-used conservation techniques. The World Database on Protected Areas had recorded over 114,000 sites by the end of 2005, covering 19 million square kilometres. Many cultures have traditions in which local communities establish protected areas, such as the sacred groves in India and Africa. Maintaining such traditions can make a great contribution to conserving biodiversity and ensures that management is done where it matters most—at the local level.
A Party needs a mixture of types of protected areas managed for different objectives, though the right mix will be different for each Party. In addition, a mixture of large and small areas is needed: a few large areas are easier to protect and have greater ecological integrity, but many smaller areas may often contain a greater number of species and ecosystems, and may be better able to meet the needs of local communities.
Limitations
While protected areas are acknowledged as critical components of conservation and sustainable use policy, a number of factors need to be taken into account to ensure positive impacts. Traditionally, boundaries of protected areas often follow a political rather than an ecological course;
many such areas are too small to be effective; and conflicts may arise with competing uses of the area and its resources by local communities.
Other factors limiting the effectiveness of protected areas include the effects of activities taking place outside the protected areas, ineffective management and insufficient funding. The relative failure of international efforts in this regard has spurred new approaches, including the establishment of ‘buffer zones’ around protected areas, which may be subject to special regulation, and efforts to establish networks of protected areas and transboundary protected areas.
(c) Regulate or manage biological resources important for the conservation of biological diversity whether within or outside protected areas, with a view to ensuring their conservation and sustainable use; this obliges each Party to ensure that biological resources important for the conservation of biological diversity are conserved and sustainably used by regulating or managing them. This obligation is independent of location and therefore applies to all areas within a Party’s jurisdiction, not only within protected areas. “Regulate or manage” implies control of all activities which could affect the biological resources concerned. Therefore, the scope of the obligation is potentially broad. Direct use or taking such as hunting and harvesting is obviously included, but so are activities which have indirect effects or other impacts on the biological resources considered, such as those from pollution or tourism. Examples of measures a Party could implement to regulate or manage biological resources include subjecting biological resource users to off-take or harvesting controls; instituting trade controls, where appropriate, to accompany taking controls; controlling air or water pollution; and controlling tourism and related industries.
(d) Promote the protection of ecosystems and natural habitats and the maintenance of viable populations of species in natural surroundings; Species’ populations should be protected in nature (“natural surroundings”). By implication, the obligation extends to genetic resources since in nature they exist as “viable populations”. In contrast to paragraph (a) of this article, under which Parties are obliged to set up a system of protected areas for biodiversity conservation, paragraph (d) refers to all areas: those within and outside protected areas, on both public and private land. Some of the most threatened ecosystems and habitat types include: fresh waters, such as rivers and lakes; coastal areas; wetlands;
coral reefs; oceanic islands; temperate moist forests; temperate grasslands; tropical moist forests. One way to protect ecosystems and habitats outside traditional protected areas is through legislatively based planning controls. In Denmark, for example, a permit is required for any significant alteration to certain defined habitat types, such as marshes or peat bogs, whether or not the habitat site is on private land. In Sweden, legislation identifies certain habitat types protected throughout the country. Many types of activities which may harm the habitats so protected are prohibited. There are no exceptions and, as a result, there is no permit system. If a land use is considerably restricted as a result of these prohibitions, the landowner must be compensated. In these examples the habitats protected are not protected areas as there is no specific site designation.
The viability of a population depends partly on population genetics (the variability in the population’s gene pool) and partly on population demographics (its size). When a population is below a certain size, it can no longer adapt to selective pressures. Once it is below the so-called Minimum Viable Population (MVP), evolution stops and the risk of short-term extinction greatly increases. Even if the population is protected from harmful external impacts, if it is below MVP size extinction is still likely. In these cases, the way to avoid extinction is to increase the population rapidly above MVP size. Maintaining viable populations is not only necessary outside protected areas but also within them. In both
cases, special management measures may be required to ensure the survival of the species or the continued existence of habitat critical to the species’ survival. To be most effective these may have to be anchored in legislation
(e) Promote environmentally sound and sustainable development in areas adjacent to protected areas; protected areas can be found in a wide variety of settings relative to human beings. Sometimes they are in remote areas with low human population density. At the other end of the spectrum they could be situated close to major urban areas or in areas where population is growing rapidly. In the latter cases, the activities of the human population could well determine the protected area’s viability and effectiveness, especially if, in adjacent areas, human population is rising, poverty may predominate, resources are being overused, industry exists or urbanization is expanding. One reason for this is that adjacent communities ultimately control the protected area’s fate. In theory, if the local population is negatively affected by the protected area, then the protected area may be destined to fail because its establishment does not benefit the affected communities. For example, in some instances local people have lost traditional rights to gather products or graze animals or the ability to develop properties. However, if that which local people have lost is replaced where possible, and other forms of development compatible with the goals of the protected area are promoted in adjacent areas, then the protected area may be successful. Parties are to promote development in these adjacent areas without compromising the conservation in the protected areas. To achieve this, development must be environmentally sound and sustainable.
To ensure that development is environmentally sound, is sustainable and supports the objectives of the protected
area, adjacent areas must be subject to a legal regime which requires land use planning and control. This should take into consideration the levels of biodiversity in both the protected area and the adjacent area, local population densities as well as existing land uses. Environmental impact assessment for proposed projects and development programs should be required as part of the review and approval process to ensure that the goals of the protected area are not contravened and biological diversity is conserved
(f) Rehabilitate and restore degraded ecosystems and promote the recovery of threatened species, inter alia, through the development and implementation of plans or other management strategies. Reflected here is the belief that the conservation of biological diversity is not only about looking after famous wildlife sites and other remote and relatively
untouched areas. It is also about revitalizing degraded ecosystems and restoring flora and fauna. This can be on
a small scale, such as re-vegetating derelict factory sites on the edge of cities in post-industrial societies, it can be about restoring a polluted river or the productivity of a fishery or it can cover large plans to re-establish trees in land converted to pasture or desert. Rehabilitating and restoring ecosystems (sometimes called restoration ecology) is a fairly new discipline which relies on natural succession and, in some cases, active human intervention, such as planting trees, removing introduced species, using controlled burns and re-introducing predators, to bring degraded areas back to
productivity and to secure biodiversity. It has typically been accomplished on a small-scale for mines, temperate
forests and wetlands such as salt marshes and mangrove swamps. Larger scale applications are fewer in number,
with perhaps the best known example being the on-going restoration of dry tropical forest in Costa Rica’s Guanacaste National Park.
While Parties cannot guarantee the recovery of threatened species, because that is beyond human control or in
some cases may be prohibitively expensive, the commitment to promote recovery is an important one. Of course,
species recovery measures will be aided by measures to protect ecosystems and natural habitats as well as measures taken to restore and rehabilitate degraded ecosystems, since most species extinctions are due to habitat destruction. Other measures such as rapid increase of population to minimize inbreeding, captive breeding for animals and artificial propagation for plants are also useful.
(g) Establish or maintain means to regulate, manage or control the risks associated with the use and release of living modified organisms resulting from biotechnology which are likely to have adverse environmental impacts that could affect the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking also into account the risks to human health.
There are two distinct categories of LMOs. The first category includes organisms whose genetic material has been modified by traditional or conventional techniques, such as plant breeding or artificial insemination. LMOs also include organisms whose genetic material is more directly modified through, for example, recombinant DNA technology. These are the organisms that are generally associated with the term “genetically modified organisms” (GMOs). A general concern which applies to all LMOs used in agriculture, for example, is displacement of traditional animal breeds and plant varieties resulting from the use of modern breeds and varieties. This in turn could cause genetic erosion, land degradation, increased need for and use of external inputs such as fertilizers, biocides and antibiotics, as well as socio-economic dislocations, all of which could affect biodiversity and human health. The intent of the obligation is for Contracting Parties to approach the potential environmental and health risks of LMOs, not only GMOs, in a rational, precautionary manner based on the assessment and subsequent regulation, management or control of the risks. Controls should be premised on the likelihood an organism will have adverse environmental impacts that could affect biological diversity or present a risk to human health. Assessing the likelihood of risk could be guided by three primary criteria: familiarity with the organism and its characteristics; the organism’s contemplated application; and the environment into which the organism will or could be released.
(h) Prevent the introduction of, control or eradicate those alien species which threaten ecosystems, habitats or species; this includes the restriction or prohibition regarding the introduction of alien species. Some species when introduced into an area where they are not native compete with other species for space and food, become predators of other species, destroy or degrade habitat and transmit diseases and parasites. The introduction of these kinds of animals, both accidentally and intentionally, can cause severe ecological disruption and in some instances (such as on Philip Island, off Australia) have even turned native forested land into desert. European colonizers in the 18th and 19th centuries introduced land mammals, such as goats, sheep, pigs and cats to many oceanic islands, with devastating ecological consequences, while the inadvertent introduction of rats and mice also had a severe impact on ground-nesting birds. Once an invasive species has taken hold, eradication can be very expensive or even impossible using current methods. For example, the accidental introduction of the zebra mussel from the discharge of a ship’s ballast water into the North American Great Lakes, and its subsequent population explosion, will annually cost hundreds of
millions of dollars to manage. Prevention is therefore better than cure and so there is a need for states to address both voluntary introductions and accidental introductions. A regulatory program to control voluntary introductions must be based on a permit system. The general philosophy of such a system is to grant a permit only when there is reasonable certainty that the introduction will not cause significant harm to ecosystems, habitats or species of the country or regions in which the introduction is contemplated. Accidental introductions of organisms are more difficult to prevent through a regulatory program. Australia, however, is contemplating national legislation to regulate the discharge of ship ballast water into its coastal waters. If a damaging introduction does occur, quick action is vital to control it. There is also a great need for all Parties to highlight to the general public the possible dangers of alien species.
(m) Cooperate in providing financial and other support for in-situ conservation outlined in subparagraphs (a) to (l) above, particularly to developing countries. The phrase “financial and other support” means that cooperation could be in cash or in-kind. Many developed countries already supply bilateral development assistance to developing countries.
Limitation
One unfortunate aspect of assistance is that it has tended to create long term needs for operational and other kinds of
support in countries whose budgets cannot afford a sustained effort after the aid terminates. A critical goal of bilateral aid therefore should be to develop local capacity which can be maintained on a sustained basis. Furthermore, there has to be better communication between the donor and the recipient country to ensure that the aid truly meets the recipient’s priorities and needs.
Other measures
- The establishment of season or other periods during which particular species cannot be exploited.
- The prohibition or restrictions in the use of particular instrument or methods of exploitations.
- Prohibitions or regulation of international trade in species. Example the CITES placed restrictions on the trade in ivory.
- Through the establishment of quotas for the exploitation of a particular species. This works well in areas that keep accurate data as the quantity of a particular species.
Ex situ conservation
This refers to conservation of components of biodiversity outside their natural habitats , e.g. zoos, museums, gene banks, botanic gardens/arboretums; it is used for threatened and endangered species to avoid their extinction; also known as captive conservation.
Article 9 of the Convention of biological diversity article deals with ex-situ conservation. Its chapeau makes it very clear that ex-situ conservation measures should predominately complement in-situ approaches. Ex-situ measures have been, perhaps, most extensively applied to conserve cultivated and domesticated species of plants and animals. Broadly, ex situ conservation includes a variety of activities, from managing captive populations, education and raising awareness, supporting research initiatives and collaborating with in situ efforts. It is used as valuable tools in studying and conserving biological resources (plants, animals, and microorganisms) for different purposes through different techniques such as zoos, captive breeding, aquarium, botanical gardens, and gene banks. Article 9(c) enjoins contracting parties to adopt measures for the recovery and rehabilitation of threatened species and for their reintroduction into their natural habitats under appropriate conditions. This has helped save a number of species such as the Arabian oryx was saved by captive breeding as well as the prewalski horse.