direct human pressure around the reserve areas is still a major problem to deal with
for conservation in many places. A radical conservationist position (Franciscan)
might be useful in front of local and regional socio-economic influences. But it is
certainly useless when the change is driven at much larger scale, exceeding any
local or regional countermeasure. Conservation becomes a matter of stewardship of
the changes (Benedictines position) in agreement with goals at planetary scale
(Steffen et al. 2011). The first step is acknowledging the situation. Climate change is
indeed occurring and, whatever the final mitigation of the problem, significant local
changes in species distribution and ecosystem dynamics will occur.
A new primary goal of conservation is to handle a smoother transition as possible
to new states. This requires the projection of the potential changes and understanding
the dynamics leading to them. As we are immersed in the dynamics, this exercise has
to be permanently recursive. Migration and invasion would become current issues in
nature reserves, and decisions on how to handle them would be better if planned in
advance. The principles of nature reserve stewardship have to be developed keeping
in mind the multifaceted essence of global change and the mountain idiosyncrasy to
enhance some of them. Three basic strategies have been suggested to make the best
use of current understanding in an environment of inevitable uncertainty and likely
sudden change: reducing the magnitude of, and exposure and sensitivity to, known
stresses; focusing on proactive policies that shape change; and avoiding or escaping
unsustainable social-ecological traps (Chapin et al. 2010). Likely, all conservation
measures are vulnerable to projected changes, but also they should involve sources of
adaptive capacity and resilience that can sustain active stewardship of nature reserves.
Climate shift in mountains may result in an extinction debt to pay decades ahead
(Hanski 2013). Decisions would have to be taken to what extent it merits to fight
against species disappearance that sooner or later may occur (Dullinger et al. 2012).
Ecological knowledge here becomes critical, and there is an increasing demand for
assessments considering the details of the species distribution. Nature reserves can
be just a small portion of the territory occupied by a particular species, but within
which actions can be undertaken. As long as a species predicted to become extinct
still persists, there is time for conservation measures such as habitat restoration and
landscape management (Kuussaari et al. 2009). Standardised long-term monitoring
(Zamora et al. 2017), more high-quality empirical studies on key taxa (Fig. 1.7) and
ecosystems, and further development of analytical methods will help to quantify the
extinction debt better and to more successfully protect mountain biodiversity.
The water balance will certainly play a significant role in mountain reserves’
fate. Warming will increase growth temperature and thus water demand; drought
risk will increase even in areas with average positive water balance. Does it make
sense to undertake mitigation engineering measures? Climate has oscillated enormously during the last million years. Many mountains have been glaciated and
deglaciated several times. Fragmentation and refugia during harsh periods explain
the current distribution of many species and biogeographical paradoxes among
sister species (Schmitt 2017). Do we have the knowledge and tools to identify
potential refugia within nature reserves (Gavin et al. 2014)? This could be a
main task in conservation research for the near future (Birks and Willis 2008).
22
J. Catalan et al.
for conservation in many places. A radical conservationist position (Franciscan)
might be useful in front of local and regional socio-economic influences. But it is
certainly useless when the change is driven at much larger scale, exceeding any
local or regional countermeasure. Conservation becomes a matter of stewardship of
the changes (Benedictines position) in agreement with goals at planetary scale
(Steffen et al. 2011). The first step is acknowledging the situation. Climate change is
indeed occurring and, whatever the final mitigation of the problem, significant local
changes in species distribution and ecosystem dynamics will occur.
A new primary goal of conservation is to handle a smoother transition as possible
to new states. This requires the projection of the potential changes and understanding
the dynamics leading to them. As we are immersed in the dynamics, this exercise has
to be permanently recursive. Migration and invasion would become current issues in
nature reserves, and decisions on how to handle them would be better if planned in
advance. The principles of nature reserve stewardship have to be developed keeping
in mind the multifaceted essence of global change and the mountain idiosyncrasy to
enhance some of them. Three basic strategies have been suggested to make the best
use of current understanding in an environment of inevitable uncertainty and likely
sudden change: reducing the magnitude of, and exposure and sensitivity to, known
stresses; focusing on proactive policies that shape change; and avoiding or escaping
unsustainable social-ecological traps (Chapin et al. 2010). Likely, all conservation
measures are vulnerable to projected changes, but also they should involve sources of
adaptive capacity and resilience that can sustain active stewardship of nature reserves.
Climate shift in mountains may result in an extinction debt to pay decades ahead
(Hanski 2013). Decisions would have to be taken to what extent it merits to fight
against species disappearance that sooner or later may occur (Dullinger et al. 2012).
Ecological knowledge here becomes critical, and there is an increasing demand for
assessments considering the details of the species distribution. Nature reserves can
be just a small portion of the territory occupied by a particular species, but within
which actions can be undertaken. As long as a species predicted to become extinct
still persists, there is time for conservation measures such as habitat restoration and
landscape management (Kuussaari et al. 2009). Standardised long-term monitoring
(Zamora et al. 2017), more high-quality empirical studies on key taxa (Fig. 1.7) and
ecosystems, and further development of analytical methods will help to quantify the
extinction debt better and to more successfully protect mountain biodiversity.
The water balance will certainly play a significant role in mountain reserves’
fate. Warming will increase growth temperature and thus water demand; drought
risk will increase even in areas with average positive water balance. Does it make
sense to undertake mitigation engineering measures? Climate has oscillated enormously during the last million years. Many mountains have been glaciated and
deglaciated several times. Fragmentation and refugia during harsh periods explain
the current distribution of many species and biogeographical paradoxes among
sister species (Schmitt 2017). Do we have the knowledge and tools to identify
potential refugia within nature reserves (Gavin et al. 2014)? This could be a
main task in conservation research for the near future (Birks and Willis 2008).
22
J. Catalan et al.