1.1 Conservation Targets

1. MCA Field Guide
2. MCA Field Guide Checklist
3. Phase 1: Feasibility Analysis Checklist
4. 1.1 Conservation targets are established
5. 1.2 Threats and strategies are determined
6. 1.3 Owners, managers, and users are known
7. 1.4 Laws and policies are supportive
8. 1.5 Organizational capacity is sufficient
9. 1.6 Stakeholders and their issues are identified
10. 1.7 Costs and financing are assessed
11. 1.8 Reporting has been completed

The first sub-step in the feasibility analysis phase of the Marine Conservation Agreement (MCA) field guide is to determine what the conservation targets are for the area in question. Is the biological importance of the area, resources or ecosystem services known? If so, how important are they? 

For the purposes of the MCA field guide, conservation targets represent, collectively:

• Species, habitat and ecosystem features
• Conservation goals for those features
• Priority sites where the features are represented

The features are what you aim to conserve, such as specific species, habitats, resources, ecosystems and their ecological processes and services. The conservation goals are the ways you wish to affect those features, such as maintaining current population levels, increasing habitat area by 30%, or protecting 100% of an existing habitat area. The priority sites are the specific locations where the features are best conserved. (See the overview of Targets for a more thorough discussion.)

The prioritization of specific sites will help determine if an MCA can achieve valuable and measurable conservation outcomes (i.e., species protected, number of hectares protected, number of hectares connected) and will aid in the development of conservation commitments. Conservation organizations should be able to clearly articulate what the conservation targets are for a particular area or resource before pursuing an MCA project. A goal to simply protect a site is decidedly different from a goal to restore impaired ecological functions. A goal to educate the public may require a very different MCA than undertaking scientific research. The statement of goals should also take into consideration how the current right-holders view the use and management of the area.

Methods to Identify Conservation Targets

Ecological justifications for protecting sites, resources or ecosystem services provide information on why projects are important for conservation (e.g., species diversity, endemism, representation) and describe the area’s characteristics (e.g., site condition, size, connectivity to other protected areas, threats to its conservation). Many conservation groups apply a scientific approach to identify regions where conservation is a priority (e.g., Conservation International’s Key Biodiversity Areas, Hot Spots, and Wilderness Areas; The Nature Conservancy’s Ecoregional Assessments), based on the presence of important ecosystems for conservation, quality of habitat, and level of threat. These prioritization schemes generally allow one to justify the importance of working within a particular region. Further work may be necessary to justify a specific site’s importance based on its local characteristics.

Other conservation organizations identify priority areas more opportunistically. Examples of existing or emergent opportunities that may lead to MCA projects include an offer from a willing donor or seller, funding availability, partnership interests, or unique niches that have not been filled. Conservation organizations may also be interested in testing MCA strategies and, as such, may first determine where an MCA can occur, then determine which areas are of conservation interest, and lastly determine what activities can be undertaken to protect the conservation interests.

Articulation of Conservation Targets

Ecuador Priority Areas. Image © The Nature Conservancy

Organizations should consider carefully how they articulate their conservation targets. MCAs are most frequently applied when conservation targets are place-based or affected by place-based management. Place-based targets include species, habitats, resources, or ecological processes and services that are more or less restricted to specific geographic locations. Place-based targets often include:

• Intertidal and subtidal sediments
• Flora and fauna attached to sediments
• Structures (historical, cultural, or habitat)

Generally, mobile conservation targets that include fish, water, and air require unique MCAs, such as the sale of fishing concessions in some Latin America countries, which give private entities exclusive rights to fish in specific geographic areas. In some circumstances, mobile priorities may be indirectly protected MCAs.

Having located a site, resources or ecosystem services that are prioritized for conservation, one should assess whether the actual area, habitat, resource or service is of sufficient size and condition to merit attention. This typically requires the assistance of an ecologist familiar with the region who can identify whether the site has been degraded (and its potential for restoration), whether it is representative of the ecosystems in the region prioritized for conservation, and if target species have ample habitat to prosper in the proposed conservation area.

Organizations should be strategic about maximizing the value of sites, resources or ecosystem services selected for an MCA in terms of present and future connectivity with other protected areas, or establishing areas of sufficient size to maintain habitat for viable populations of species. If the information regarding a site, resources or services is insufficient to determine their biological importance, further biological assessments may be necessary. When conducting further assessments, bear in mind the need for biological and socio-economic baselines for future monitoring.

Completing Boundary Surveys

At some point during the MCA process, practitioners may want to complete a boundary survey of the area that will be included within an MCA. While phase 1.1 Conservation Targets is the first opportunity to do so, phases 1.2 Threats and Strategies, 1.3 Ownership, Management and Use, and 3.1 Conservation Commitments are also appropriate times to do so. Project-specific circumstances will dictate if and when the physical boundaries for the MCA project area are determined. (See the overview of Boundaries for a more thorough discussion.)

Site-specific baseline inventories may have to be undertaken to establish conservation targets (see below). When this is the case, a boundary survey of the MCA project area may need to be conducted first to ensure the baseline inventory is completed in the correct area. In less formal settings, determining the boundaries of an MCA project may be as simple as sketching out an area on a map or identifying natural and cultural features on the landscape that form that perimeter of the project area. In more formal settings, in which properties rights are being transferred, a boundary survey conducted by a certified land surveyor with experience in aquatic environments will likely be required.

Ocean and Coastal Issues: Property boundaries that lie waterward of the high water line are often unclear and confusing. As such, it is often important to survey the boundaries of an MCA site if a survey has not already been completed. Landowners, especially government agencies, may require boundary surveys. Boundary surveys for areas that lie below the high water line can be complicated and more expensive than terrestrial surveys.

Completing Baseline Inventories

Prior to entering into an MCA, inventories of the flora and fauna at the site help document baseline biological conditions and inform the site's restoration and conservation planning.

Ocean and Coastal Issues: Biological inventories in ocean and coastal areas require special knowledge, skills, and equipment. In particular, boats and SCUBA will likely be required, both of which can create additional liability concerns.

Fee-simple Issues: While useful for planning purposes, baseline biological inventories are not always undertaken for MCA projects that result in a transfer of ownership. Although baselines may not be needed for performance monitoring or adjusting incentives, it is still a good idea to establish baselines to enable future measurement of conservation impact and management effectiveness.

Next Sub-step

Once the conservation targets have been established for a project area, an evaluation of threats and strategies should be undertaken. This latter evaluation will help determine if an MCA can abate the threats to the conservation targets identified as needing protection.

Proceed to 1.2 Threats and Strategies

Return to Top