Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 16, Issue 13, pp 3719–3736

Government targets for protected area management: will threatened butterflies benefit?

  • Harriet Davies
  • Tom M. Brereton
  • David B. Roy
  • Richard Fox
Original Paper

Abstract

The UK Government has set targets for biodiversity conservation in England based on several indicators, including the status of protected areas [e.g. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs)]. Specifically, the Government aims to achieve favourable condition [defined by Common Standards Monitoring (CSM)] on 95% by area of SSSIs by 2010. SSSIs are important for threatened butterflies and management to achieve favourable condition will play a key role in determining future population levels of these high-profile insects. Because only notified features of SSSIs are considered within CSM, we investigated the level of notification for three threatened butterflies. We found that these species were notified at only 15–33% of SSSIs where they occurred; though most site managers did manage for them under broader site conservation objectives. We investigated the relationship between SSSI condition status and population trend for eight butterfly species of conservation concern to assess the benefit to butterflies of sites attaining favourable condition status. The majority (80%) of population trends on SSSIs in favourable condition were positive, suggesting an overall beneficial impact of SSSI management. However, four of the eight species maintained lower populations at favourable condition SSSIs than at sites in one of the unfavourable condition categories. We suggest that current condition assessment based chiefly on notified vegetation communities lacks the sensitivity to identify the complex habitat conditions for these (mosaic) species. As butterflies are good indictors for a wide range of invertebrates, many species requiring fine-scale habitat heterogeneity may be at risk from the Government’s target.

Keywords

Butterflies Conservation Habitat condition Protected areas SSSIs 

References

  1. Adams W (1993) Places for nature: protected areas in British nature conservation. In: Goldsmith F, Warren A (eds) Conservation in progress. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  2. Alexander K, Drake C, Lott D, Webb J (2004) Invertebrate assemblages on English SSSIs. English nature report no. 618, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  3. Alonso I, Sherry J, Turner A, Farrell L, Corbett P, Strachan I (2003) Lowland heathland SSSIs: guidance on conservation objectives setting and condition monitoring. English nature research report no. 511, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  4. Anon (1995) UK Biodiversity Steering Group Report - Vol 2: Action Plans. HMSO, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Asher J, Warren M, Fox R, Harding P, Jeffcoate G, Jeffcoate S (2001) The millennium atlas of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Ausden M, Hirons G (2002) Grassland nature reserves for breeding wading birds in England and the implications for the ESA agri-environment scheme. Biol Conserv 106:279–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bealey C, Cox J (2004) Validation network project. Upland habitats covering: blanket bog, dry dwarf shrub heath, wet dwarf shrub heath and Ulex gallii dwarf shrub heath. English Nature, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown K (1991) Conservation of neotropical environments: insects as indicators. In: Collins N, Thomas J (eds) The conservation of insects and their habitats. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown K, Freitas A (2000) Atlantic forest butterflies: indicators for landscape conservation. Biotropica 32:934–956Google Scholar
  10. Bourn N, Thomas J (1993) The ecology and conservation of the Brown Argus Aricia agestis in Britain. Biol Conserv 63:67–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bourn N, Thomas J (2002) The challenge of conserving grassland insects at the margins of their range in Europe. Biol Conserv 104:285–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bourn N, Warren M (1998) Species action plan for the duke of Burgundy (Hamearis lucina). Butterfly Conservation. CEH and JNCC, WarehamGoogle Scholar
  13. Bourn N, Warren M (2000) Species action plan for the small blue (Cupido minimus). Butterfly Conservation. CEH and JNCC, WarehamGoogle Scholar
  14. Bourn N, Pearman G, Goodger B, Thomas J, Warren M (2000) Changes in the status of two endangered butterflies over two decades and the influence of grazing management. In: Rook A, Penning P (eds) Grazing management. ArrowheadGoogle Scholar
  15. Bourn N, McCracken M, Wigglesworth T, Brereton T, Fox R, Roy D, Warren M (2005) Proposed changes to the BAP priority species list: butterflies. Butterfly conservation report no. SO5–23, WarehamGoogle Scholar
  16. Brereton T, Warren M, Stewart K (2002) (BD1427) Developing a system for assessing the effect of agri-environment schemes on butterfly populations. Butterfly conservation final project report, DefraGoogle Scholar
  17. Brereton T, Brook S, Hobson R (2005) Habitat condition monitoring for butterflies: 2004 pilot study. Butterfly conservation report no. SO5–06, WarehamGoogle Scholar
  18. Butterflies Under Threat Team (BUTT) (1986) The management of chalk downland for butterflies. Nature Conservancy Council, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  19. Cowley M, Thomas C, Thomas J, Warren M (1999) Flight areas of British butterflies: assessing species status and decline. Proc R Soc B 266:1587–1592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Davies Z, Wilson R, Brereton T, Thomas C (2005) The re-expansion and improving status of the silver-spotted skipper butterfly (Hesperia comma) in Britain: a metapopulation success story. Biol Conserv 124:189–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Defra (2002) Working with the grain of nature—a biodiversity strategy for England. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Defra (2003a) A biodiversity strategy for England. Measuring progress: baseline assessment. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Defra (2003b) Technical notes for public service agreement targets 2003–2006. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Defra (2005) Working with the grain of nature: a biodiversity strategy for England, The England Biodiversity Group’s annual stocktake 2004–2005. Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Dennis R (2004) Butterfly habitats, broad-scale biotope affiliations, and structural exploitation of vegetation at finer scales: the matrix revisited. Ecol Entomol 29:744–752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dennis R, Eales H (1997) Patch occupancy in Coenonympha tullia (Müller 1764) (Lepidoptera: Satyrinae): habitat quality matters as much as patch size and isolation. J Insect Conserv 1:167–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dennis R, Hodgson J, Grenyer R, Shreeve T, Roy D (2004) Host plants and butterfly biology. Do host-plant strategies drive butterfly status? Ecol Entomol 29:12–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dennis R, Shreeve T, Arnold H, Roy D (2005) Does diet breadth control herbivorous insect distribution size? Life history and resource outlets for specialist butterflies. J Insect Conserv 9:187–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Dover J (1996) Factors affecting the distribution of satyrid butterflies on arable farmland. J Appl Ecol 33:723–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ellis S (2003) Habitat quality and management for the northern brown argus butterfly Aricia artaxerxes in North East England. Biol Conserv 113:285–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. English Nature (2005) Annual report 1 April 2004–31 March 2005. English Nature, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  32. English Nature (In Prep) English nature condition assessment methodologies for invertebrates. English Nature, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  33. Evans D (1997) A history of nature conservation in Britain, 2nd edn. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Feber R, Smith H, Macdonald D (1996) The effects on butterfly abundance of the management of uncropped edges of arable fields. J Appl Ecol 33:1191–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Fleishman E, Ray C, Sjögren-Gulve P, Boggs C, Murphy D (2002) Assessing the roles of patch quality, area, and isolation in predicting metapopulation dynamics. Conserv Biol 16:707–716Google Scholar
  36. Fleishman E, Thomson J, Mac Nally R, Murphy D, Fay J (2005) Using indicator species to predict richness of multiple taxonomic groups. Conserv Biol 19:125–1137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Fox R, Warren M, Harding P, McLean I, Asher J, Roy D, Brereton T (2001) The state of Britain’s butterflies. Butterfly Conservation. CEH and JNCC, WarehamGoogle Scholar
  38. Fox R, Green D, Parsons M, Brereton T, Warren M (2005) Surveillance and monitoring of invertebrates: Lepidoptera. Butterfly conservation report no SO5–18, WarehamGoogle Scholar
  39. Fox R, Asher J, Brereton T, Roy D, Warren M (2006) The state of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Pisces Publications, NewburyGoogle Scholar
  40. Grill A, Knoflach B, Cleary D, Kati V (2005) Butterfly, spider, and plant communities in different land-use types in Sardinia, Italy. Biodivers Conserv 14:1281–1300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Grossmueller D, Lederhouse R (1987) The role of nectar source distribution in habitat use and oviposition by the tiger swallowtail butterfly. J Lep Soc 41:159–165Google Scholar
  42. Heath J (1974) Lepidoptera. In: Steele R, Welch R (eds) Monks wood: a nature reserve record. Nature Conservancy, Monks WoodGoogle Scholar
  43. Heath J, Pollard E, Thomas J (1984) Atlas of butterflies in Britain and Ireland. Viking, HarmondsworthGoogle Scholar
  44. Hill J, Thomas C, Fox R, Telfer M, Willis S, Asher J, Huntley B (2002) Responses of butterflies to 20th century climate warming: implications for future ranges. Proc R Soc B 269:2163–2171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. JNCC (1998a) Statement on common standards monitoring. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  46. JNCC (1998b) Guidelines for selection of biological SSSIs. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  47. JNCC (2004) Common standards monitoring guidance for lowland grassland. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  48. JNCC (2005) Common standards monitoring guidance for invertebrates. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  49. Kirby P (1992) Habitat management for invertebrates: a practical handbook. RSPB, SandyGoogle Scholar
  50. Kleijn D, Sutherland W (2003) How effective are European agri-environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity? J Appl Ecol 40:947–969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Koh L, Sodhi N, Brook B (2004) Ecological correlates of extinction proneness in tropical butterflies. Conserv Biol 18:1571–1578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Konvicka M, Hula V, Fric Z (2003) Habitat of pre-hibernating larvae of the endangered butterfly Euphydryas aurinia (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae): What can be learned from vegetation composition and architecture? Eur J Entomol 100:313–322Google Scholar
  53. Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I, Tscharntke T (2004) Landscape occupancy and local population size depends on host plant distribution in the butterfly Cupido minimus. Biol Conserv 120:355–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Krauss J, Steffan-Dewenter I, Muller C, Tscharntke T (2005) Relative importance of resource quantity, isolation and habitat quality for landscape distribution of a monophagous butterfly. Ecography 28:465–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Kremen C, Lees D, Fay J (2003) Butterflies and conservation planning in Madagascar: from pattern to practice. In: Boggs C, Watt W, Ehrlich P (eds) Butterflies—ecology and evolution taking flight. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  56. Lambert D, Roeder K (1995) Overdispersion diagnostics for generalized linear models. J Am Stat Assoc 90:1225–1236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. León-Cortés J, Perez-Espinoza F, Marin L, Molina-Martinez A (2004) Complex habitat requirements and conservation needs of the only extant Baroniinae swallowtail butterfly. Anim Conserv 7:241–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Maes D, Van Dyck H (2005) Habitat quality and biodiversity indicator performances of a threatened butterfly versus a multispecies group for wet heathlands in Belgium. Biol Conserv 123:177–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Maes D, Bauwens D, de Bruyn L, Anselin A, Vermeersch G, van Landuyt W, de Knijf G, Gilbert M (2005) Species richness coincidence: conservation strategies based on predictive modelling. Biodivers Conserv 14:1345–1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Martin L, Pullin A (2004) Host-plant specialisation and habitat restriction in an endangered insect, Lycaena dispar batavus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) I. Larval feeding and oviposition preferences. Eur J Entomol 101:51–56Google Scholar
  61. Murphy D (1983) Nectar sources as constraints on the distribution of egg masses by the checkerspot butterfly: Euphydryas chalcedona (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae). Environ Entomol 12:463–466Google Scholar
  62. Nakonieczny M, Kedziorski K (2005) Feeding preferences of the apollo butterfly (Parnassius apollo ssp frankenbergeri) larvae inhabiting the Pieniny Mts (southern Poland). C R Biol 328:235–242PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Parmesan C (2003) Butterflies as bioindicators for climate change effects. In: Boggs C, Watt W, Ehrlich P (eds) Butterflies—ecology and evolution taking flight. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  64. Pollard E, Yates T (1993) Monitoring butterflies for ecology and conservation. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  65. Pollard E, Eversham B (1995) Butterfly monitoring 2—interpreting the changes. In: Pullin A (ed) Ecology and conservation of butterflies. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  66. Pywell R, Warman E, Sparks T, Greatorex-Davies J, Walker K, Meek W, Carvell C, Petit S, Firbank L (2004) Assessing habitat quality for butterflies on intensively managed arable farmland. Biol Conserv 118:313–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. R Development Core Team (2002) The R environment for statistical computing and graphics reference index, version 1.3.1. The R Development Core Team, http://www.r-project.orgGoogle Scholar
  68. Ravenscroft N (1994a) The ecology of the chequered skipper butterfly Carterocephalus palaemon Pallas in Scotland. I. Microhabitat. J Appl Ecol 31:613–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Ravenscroft N (1994b) The ecology of the chequered skipper butterfly Carterocephalus palaemon Pallas in Scotland. II. Foodplant quality and population range. J Appl Ecol 31:623–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Ravenscroft N, Warren M (1996) Species action plan for the silver-studded blue (Plebejus argus). Butterfly Conservation. CEH and JNCC, WarehamGoogle Scholar
  71. Rodwell J (ed) (1991) British plant communities, vol 1. Woodlands and scrub. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  72. Roy D, Thomas J (2003) Seasonal variation in the niche, habitat availability and population fluctuations of a bivoltine thermophilous insect near its range margin. Oecologia 134:439–444PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Roy D, Rothery P, Moss D, Pollard E, Thomas J (2001) Butterfly numbers and weather: predicting historical trends in abundance and the future effects of climate change. J Anim Ecol 70:201–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Sheail J (1998) Nature conservation in Britain: the formative years. Stationery Office, LondonGoogle Scholar
  75. Sparks T, Porter K, Greatorex-Davies J, Hall M, Marrs R (1994) The choice of oviposition sites in woodland by the Duke of Burgundy butterfly Hamearis lucina in England. Biol Conserv 70:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Thomas J (1983) The ecology and conservation of Lysandra bellargus (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) in Britain. J Appl Ecol 20:59–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Thomas J (1991) Rare species conservation: case studies of European butterflies. In: Spellerberg I, Goldsmith F, Morris M (eds) The scientific management of temperate communities for conservation. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  78. Thomas J (2005) Monitoring change in the abundance and distribution of insects using butterflies and other indicator groups. Philos Trans R Soc B 360:339–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Thomas J, Clarke R (2004) Extinction rates and butterflies. Science 305:1563–1564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Thomas J, Rose R, Clarke R, Thomas C, Webb N (1999) Intraspecific variation in habitat availability among ectothermic animals near their climatic limits and their centres of range. Funct Ecol 13:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Thomas C, Bodsworth E, Wilson R, Simmons A, Davies Z, Musche M, Conradt L (2001a) Ecological and evolutionary processes at expanding range margins. Nature 411:577–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Thomas J, Bourn N, Clarke R, Stewart K, Simcox D, Pearman G, Curtis R, Goodger B (2001b) The quality and isolation of habitat patches both determine where butterflies persist in fragmented landscapes. Proc R Soc B 268:1791–1796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Thomas J, Telfer M, Roy D, Preston C, Greenwood J, Asher J, Fox R, Clarke R, Lawton J (2004) Comparative losses of British butterflies, birds, and plants and the global extinction crisis. Science 303:1879–1881PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Townshend D, Stace H, Radley D (2004) State of nature: lowlands—future landscapes for wildlife. English Nature, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  85. UK Biodiversity Group (1998) Tranche 2 action plans. Volume 1—vertebrates and vascular plants. English Nature, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  86. van Swaay C, Warren M (1999) Red data book of European butterflies (Rhopalocera), Nature and environment no. 99. Council of Europe, StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
  87. Warren M (1992) The conservation of British butterflies. In: Dennis R (ed) The ecology of butterflies in Britain. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  88. Warren M (1993a) A review of butterfly conservation in central southern Britain: I. Protection, evaluation and extinction on prime sites. Biol Conserv 64:25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Warren M (1993b) A review of butterfly conservation in central southern Britain: II. Site management and habitat selection of key species. Biol Conserv 64:37–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Warren M, Thomas C, Thomas J (1984) The status of the heath fritillary butterfly Mellicta athalia in Britain. Biol Conserv 29:287–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Warren M, Barnett L, Gibbons D, Avery M (1997) Assessing national conservation priorities: an improved red list of British butterflies. Biol Conserv 82:317–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Warren M, Hill J, Thomas J, Asher J, Fox R, Huntley B, Roy D, Telfer M, Jeffcoate S, Harding P, Jeffcoate G, Willis S, Greatorex-Davies J, Moss D, Thomas C (2001) Rapid responses of British butterflies to opposing forces of climate and habitat change. Nature 414:65–69PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Wolf A, Howe R, Dana R (2005) Conservation of the northern blue butterfly Plebejus (Lycaeides) idas nabokovi in the western Great Lakes region. Nat Area J 25:77–85Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harriet Davies
    • 1
  • Tom M. Brereton
    • 2
  • David B. Roy
    • 3
  • Richard Fox
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Geography, Centre for the EnvironmentOxford UniversityOxfordUK
  2. 2.Butterfly ConservationManor YardWarehamUK
  3. 3.CEH Monks WoodHuntingdonUK

Personalised recommendations