Conserving the birds of Uganda's banana-coffee arc: land sparing and land sharing compared.

Reconciling the aims of feeding an ever more demanding human population and conserving biodiversity is a difficult challenge. Here, we explore potential solutions by assessing whether land sparing (farming for high yield, potentially enabling the protection of non-farmland habitat), land sharing (lower yielding farming with more biodiversity within farmland) or a mixed strategy would result in better bird conservation outcomes for a specified level of agricultural production. We surveyed forest and farmland study areas in southern Uganda, measuring the population density of 256 bird species and agricultural yield: food energy and gross income. Parametric non-linear functions relating density to yield were fitted. Species were identified as "winners" (total population size always at least as great with agriculture present as without it) or "losers" (total population sometimes or always reduced with agriculture present) for a range of targets for total agricultural production. For each target we determined whether each species would be predicted to have a higher total population with land sparing, land sharing or with any intermediate level of sparing at an intermediate yield. We found that most species were expected to have their highest total populations with land sparing, particularly loser species and species with small global range sizes. Hence, more species would benefit from high-yield farming if used as part of a strategy to reduce forest loss than from low-yield farming and land sharing, as has been found in Ghana and India in a previous study. We caution against advocacy for high-yield farming alone as a means to deliver land sparing if it is done without strong protection for natural habitats, other ecosystem services and social welfare. Instead, we suggest that conservationists explore how conservation and agricultural policies can be better integrated to deliver land sparing by, for example, combining land-use planning and agronomic support for small farmers.

A nationwide assessment of the biodiversity value of Uganda's important bird areas network.

BirdLife International's Important Bird Areas (IBA) program is the most developed global system for identifying sites of conservation priority There have been few assessments, however, of the conservation value of IBAs for nonavian taxa. We combined past data with extensive new survey results for Uganda's IBAs in the most comprehensive assessment to date of the wider biodiversity value of a tropical country's IBA network. The combined data set included more than 35,000 site x species records for birds, butterflies, and woody plants at 86 Ugandan sites (23,400 km2), including 29 of the country's 30 IBAs, with data on additional taxa for many sites. Uganda's IBAs contained at least 70% of the country's butterfly and woody plant species, 86% of its dragonflies and 97% of its birds. They also included 21 of Uganda's 22 major vegetation types. For butterflies, dragonflies, and some families of plants assessed, species of high conservation concern were w'ell represented (less so for the latter). The IBAs successfully represented wider biodiversity largely because many have distinctive avifaunas and, as shown by high cross-taxon congruence in complementarity, such sites tended to be distinctive for other groups too. Cross-taxon congruence in overall species richness was weaker and mainly associated with differences in site size. When compared with alternative sets of sites selected using complementarity-based, area-based, or random site-selection algorithms, the IBA network was efficient in terms of the number of sites required to represent species but inefficient in terms of total area. This was mainly because IBA selection considers factors other than area, however which probably improves both the cost-effectiveness of the network and the persistence of represented species.