Past and present effectiveness of protected areas for conservation of naturally and anthropogenically rare plant species

Abstract

The Global Strategy of Plant Conservation states that at least 60% of threatened plant species should be within protected areas. This goal has been met in some regions with long traditions of plant protection. We used gap analysis to explore how particular groups of species of conservation interest, representing different types of natural or anthropogenic rarity, have been covered by protected areas on a national scale in Estonia during the last 100 years. Species-accumulation curves indicated that plant species that are naturally rare (restricted global or local distribution, always small populations, or very rare habitat requirements) needed almost twice as many protected areas to reach the 60% target as plant species that are rare owing to lack of suitable management (species depending on grassland management, moderate forest disturbances, extensive traditional agriculture, or species potentially threatened by collecting). Temporal analysis of the establishment of protected areas suggested that grouping plant species according to the predominant cause of rarity accurately reflected the history of conservation decision making. Species found in very rare habitats have previously received special conservation attention; species dependent on traditional extensive agriculture have been largely ignored until recently. Legislative initiative and new nature-protection schemes (e.g., Natura 2000, network of protected areas in the European Union) have had a positive influence on all species groups. Consequently, the species groups needing similar action for their conservation are sensitive indicators of the effectiveness of protected-area networks. Different species groups, however, may not be uniformly conserved within protected areas, and all species groups should fulfill the target of 60% coverage within protected areas.