Session 2 threat ranking
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 31

Session 2 Threat Ranking PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 70 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Session 2 Threat Ranking. Session Objectives. By the end of this session, campaign managers should be able to:. Identify the components of Threat Ranking Evaluate and prioritize threats by Scope, Severity & Irreversibility Rank threats in Miradi

Download Presentation

Session 2 Threat Ranking

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Session 2 threat ranking

Session 2Threat Ranking


Session objectives

Session Objectives

By the end of this session, campaign managers should be able to:

  • Identify the components of Threat Ranking

  • Evaluate and prioritize threats by Scope, Severity & Irreversibility

  • Rank threats in Miradi

  • Create a draft Threat Ranking Assessment for Expert Validation for Campaign Site

Module 2, Unit 3, Session 2


Where are we now

Where are We Now?

Module 2, Unit 3, Session 2


Link to toc

Link to ToC

  • Concept model => CR & record of starting point

  • Threat ranking => Top threat

  • Factor chain => Target audience

  • Identify range of management options

  • Assess management options & finalize choice of threat

  • Results chain => BC & ToC

  • BR, PCRA => Revise ToC


Which is the greater threat

Which is the Greater Threat?

Logging or Firewood collection?

Module 2, Unit 3, Session 2


How to rank threats

How to Rank Threats

Consider these Factors:

  • Scope: Proportion of the overall area likely to be affected within given time frame by a given threat

  • Severity: The level of damage expected within the time frame

  • Irreversibility: The importance of taking immediate action to counter the threat

Module 2, Unit 3, Session 2


Session 2 threat ranking

Conservation target: 100 ha forest

Threat:

Logging vrs collection of firewood

Timeframe:

10 year

Scope: Proportion of the conservation target affected by the threat

Very High: 71-100% - High: 31-70% - Medium: 11-30% - Low: 1-10%


Session 2 threat ranking

Conservation target: 100 ha forest

Threat:

Logging vrs collection of firewood

Timeframe:

10 year

Severity: The degree to which the threat destroys or impairs the target

Very High: destroy or eliminate the target

High: seriously degrade/reduce

Medium: moderately degrade/reduce

Low: slightly degrade/reduce


Session 2 threat ranking

Conservation target: 100 ha forest

Threat:

Logging vrs collection of firewood

Timeframe:

10 year

Irreversibility: Degree to which the effects of the threat can be reversed

Very High: > 100 years - High: 21-100 years

Medium: 6-20 years - Low: 0-5 years


What if the conservation target is mobile

What if the conservation target is mobile ?

Module 2, Unit 3, Session 2


Session 2 threat ranking

Conservation target: Carnivorous reef fish MPA

Threat: Cyanide fishing vrs spear fishing

Timeframe:

10 year

Scope: Proportion of the conservation target affected by the threat

Where?

How often? How many fishermen ?

Very High: 71-100% - High: 31-70% - Medium: 11-30% - Low: 1-10%


Session 2 threat ranking

Conservation target: Carnivorous reef fish MPA

Threat: Cyanide fishing vrs spear fishing

Timeframe:

10 year

Severity: The degree to which the threat destroys or impairs the target

Impact of threat on population growth?

reproductive rate?

Very High: reduce its population by 71-100% within ten years or three generations.

High: reduce its population by 31-70% within ten years or three generations

Medium: reduce its population by 11-30% within ten years or three generations

Low: reduce its population by 1-10% within ten years or three generations


Session 2 threat ranking

Conservation target: Carnivorous reef fish MPA

Threat: Cyanide fishing vrs spear fishing

Timeframe:

10 year

Irreversibility: Degree to which the effects of the threat can be reversed

Fish stock recovery time?

Very High: > 100 years - High: 21-100 years

Medium: 6-20 years - Low: 0-5 years


Threat ranking in miradi

Threat ranking in Miradi


Session 2 threat ranking

Exercise in Miradi

Rank two threats – 20min

Conservation target: Carnivorous reef fish inside Pandan MPA (130Ha)

Threat: Cyanide fishing vrs spear fishing

Timeframe: 10 year

Cyanide fishing by 2 fishermen from neighboring community,

once a month, occurs in 20% of site only, kills all fish in radius of 10-15m, catch 30kg per trip

Spear fishing by 15-20 local fishermen across all of site, do not catch juvenile but catch fish >3 age, catch 10-190kg per trip

Napoleon wrasse become sexually mature age 6-7, some individuals become male at 9 years old, live 25-30 years

Males as big as 2m; weigh up to 190kg


Session 2 threat ranking

  • Identify

  • Highest threat and why

  • Assumptions

  • Questions / Additional information that would have been useful to have


Threat ranking in miradi1

Threat ranking in Miradi


Session 2 threat ranking

Exercise in Miradi on Lola

Looking at the Lola threat ranking answer the following questions 15minutes

How many threats are listed in the threat ranking?

And how many conservation targets?

Identify the threat that scored the lowest for each conservation target

Which threat scored the highest across all 4 conservation targets?

Compare the threat ranking for dynamite bombing and cyanide fishing for invertebrates and for coral reef. What is the difference according to the Lola threat ranking?


Session 2 threat ranking

Out of the 3 threats that scored “high” in the summary threat ranking, which one is the highest threat to coral reef?

What does the summary target rating tell you?

Is there a way in Miradi to change the order in which threats are displayed in the table? Play around and see if you can find out how

Imagine this was the ranking someone had done for your site. What 3 things would you agree with? What three things would you rank differently at you site?


Session 2 threat ranking

Review in reader what does good threat ranking look like

p24


Session 2 threat ranking

  • Threat ranking for your own site

  • Open your site concept models in Miradi from yesterday and rank the threats at your site

  • Make a list of:

  • All the assumptions you have made while ranking the threats

  • Any outstanding questions / issues you would like to double check or triangulate

  • List people already consulted during application process on threats

  • Any people you have in mind that you would like to triangulate the ranking with


Session 2 threat ranking

Threat ranking graded assignment – 40 points, due Sunday 3 October 11:30 pm

  • Using Miradi rank the biodiversity threats to your own campaign site by scope, severity and irreversibility.

  • Then:

  • Email your Miradi (MPZ) file to Annalisa & Ariela

  • Take a screen shot of your Threat ranking and post it on Rare Planet as a blog, listing assumptions, outstanding questions, any people you would like to validate the TR ranking with, anyone already consulted

  • send it & present it to your supervisor (aim to do this during the LAP call) and ask him/them for comments


Session objectives1

Session Objectives

Did we meet these objectives?

  • Identify the components of Threat Ranking

  • Evaluate and prioritize threats by Scope, Severity & Irreversibility

  • Rank threats in Miradi

  • Create a draft Threat Ranking Assessment for Expert Validation for Campaign Site

Module 2, Unit 3, Session 2


  • Login