Dear SCP colleagues,

Based on the Conservation Target nominations received thus far:
The following 3 targets have unanimous agreement:

Target 1: Cave Communities
Target 2: Epiphyte Communities (Terrestrial and Arboreal)
Target 3: Landsnails

The following 5 Targets need further discussion:

1. Original proposal: Wet Limestone Forest

Respondents felt that target did not adequately capture the different ecological processes, vegetation composition, regeneration patterns, and, most important, different human activities (resource extraction and clearing). If others agree, we have two suggestions to split the target:

Wet Limestone Forest Slope and Hill Top
Wet Limestone Forest Valley

OR

Wet Limestone Forest
Terrestrial Herbaceous Vegetation

Please indicate if (a) you believe "Wet Limestone Forest" is not adequate and (b) how it should be split (also include your reasoning)

2. Bird Communities:

Nomination came in for forest-dwelling birds, with the recognition of their important ecological roles as pollinators, seed dispersers, insect-feeders, etc. This broad classification would capture sources of stress for multiple species (eg., hunting, poaching).

A second nomination was for the Jamaican Blackbird, a wet forest-dependent species. The specific concern arises over the potential for range-expansion of the Shiny Cowbird, a brood parasite, if forest is opened. Other birds, such as the Oriole, would also be vulnerable.

Please indicate whether you feel (a) birds should be a conservation target and (b) whether it would be preferable to target the community or an individual species

3. Freshwater Communities

Several felt that, because CC is defined by the absence of surface water, this target might not be relevant at our restricted landscape scale (i.e., perhaps, this Target requires its own SCP analysis by Kimberly John, TNC-Ja's Freshwater Ecologist). Further, it was noted that water flow rates, sedimentation, etc. may be Indicators of Forest health. Our target of Cave Communities would capture aquatic cave organisms.

This is perhaps our most important issue/target to resolve. Please indicate whether we should retain this target or remove.

4. Other single species targets nominated:
Yellow Boa: recognized for its ecological role as a top predator and also because of concern over direct, strong persecution by humans

Giant Swallowtail: IUCN Red-listed as "endangered"; concern also expressed because the low viability of the only other population in the Blue Mtns.

Are there other individual species of concern? Please remember that we are limited to a maximum of eight conservation targets!

I would like to receive your final comments on conservation target nominations by April 19th and then we may all proceed with the next stage of evaluation Target Viability (size & condition).

All the best,

I suggest that Freshwater Systems should be included as a conservation target. It is correct that CC is chararcterised by a scarcity of surface water, and there is considerable overlap between Freshwater and Cave communities. However Freshwater Communities of Cockpit Country extend beyond the cave systems.

The very scarcity of surface freshwater in Cockpit Country is a good reason for focussing on the conservation of the aquatic communities which have colonised them. Firstly, these systems (short surface reaches before the streams disappear underground, ephemeral pools during the rainy season and springs especially in the lower elevations where the water table cuts the surface) are limited in extent but are inhabited by aquatic species yet to be examined. Conservation of FW systems in CC is also important for some downstream connections. I found two species in surface reaches; Atya and Macrobrachium which are known to migrate between estuarine and headwater regions.

It is tempting to nest FW communities with cave communities and I would have supported such a move if we had too many targets to manage. However, I am not sure if if all subterranean aquatic communities can be included with the caves. I also think that when it comes to analysing the stresses faced by FW communities, stresses such as groundwater contamination, sedimentation, invasive aquatic species and the clogging of underground and surface rivers may not be addressed adequately if FW communities are not a separate target.

As the SCP process progresses, we can revise our targets. If in the future FW communities are seen to be inviable or less of a priority, then it can be removed as a target. However in our initial analysis I strongly suggest that we include it. I will do my best to provide the necessary information and answer any queries.

Kimberly John