Hydrological Information System & Amazon River Assessment HIS/ARA FY09 Final Report

Science & Monitoring Team Amazon Network Initiative

JC Riveros Salcedo1 Sidney Tadeu Rodrigues2 Csar Surez3 Magaly Oliveira2 Laura Secada1

November 27th, 2009

1 WWF Peru Program Office 2 WWF Brazil 3 WWI Colombia Program Office

Background
Between September 2006 and May 2008 an ad-hoc WWF conservation science team developed the first Amazon Ecological Vision using systematic conservation planning tools. This coarse scale prioritization analysis was based in the principles of representation, irreplaceability, functionality, flexibility, vulnerability and connectivity (Margules and Sarkar 2007, Scaramuzza et al. 2008) and it is a critical element of the WWF Amazon Network Initiative (ANI) strategy development. By the end of that exercise, also known as the Amazon NI Decision Support System (DSS), there was great interest into the refinement of the analysis by incorporating updated information and a stronger freshwater biodiversity emphasis. With that purpose a technical team was assembled to develop an Hydrological Information System (HIS) from which a first series of Amazon Rivers Assessments (ARA) could be generated. The HIS/ARA technical team includes WWF staff from four different National and Program Offices (US, BR, PE, CO) . This task force is lead by the Amazon NI Science and Monitoring Leader in close coordination with the ANI Strategy Leaders and the ANI Deputy Leader. This FY09 report summarizes the technical development of HIS/ARA, its preliminary results including the completion of the HIS/ARA physical databases, the calculation of the Ecological Risk Index (ERI) for the basin, the application of Systematic Conservation Planning tools for the identification of representation priorities, as well as, critical areas for some emblematic biodiversity features and a conservation design portfolio for freshwater biodiversity. Also, a list of actions for future implementation of conservation actions is presented at the end of this document.

Development of the Hydrological Information System

The Study Area

Figure 1. The Amazon Biome and the Amazon Basin The area selected for the analysis of freshwater biodiversity and hydrological processes, was the 2

Amazon Basin (Figure 1). This was defined based on the watershed analysis conducted during the Amazon NI DSS development. We decided not to include the Tocantins river basin because it is not a member of the hydrological hyerarchy of the Amazon River; despite the fact of its bio-ecological similarities with the neighbouring amazonian basins. For the purpose of this analysis, the estimated total area of the strictu sensu Amazon Basin for this study is 5,912,919 sq.km. The Physical Elements: The Amazon River Network & Basins The original microbasins layer derived from the HydroSHEDS dataset (Lehner et al. 2006) has been adapted as a basis for the HIS. These were developed from a 15 seconds (~ 450 m) digital elevation model (DEM) covering Central and North South America. The basin delineation was completed using the hydrological tools (an ArcView program extension) produced by the Conservation Science Program of WWF US. In order to accomplish the HIS/ARA technical goals, it was decided to work at three hierarchical scales: microbasins, the original planning units used in the Amazon NI DSS analysis but including only those belonging to the strictu sensu Amazon basin. mesobasins, delineated by using an ArcInfo script provided by TNC's Leo Sotomayor. Although our original expectation was to use two different grains for the mesobasins, we finally decide to lump two size classes to complete this layer (5 x 102 to 5 x 104sq km). macrobasins, similar to the original basins delineated in the WWF 2002 Amazon River and Flooded Forests Biological Vision. These roughly match the conventional perception of basin in the Amazon, e.g. Ucayali, Madeira, Xingu, etc.

The number of units obtained for each level and their size ranges are presented in the following table: Hierarchy Microbasin Mesobasin Macrobasin Number of Units 29 831 383 25 0.2 to 2,551 563 in the Maran Basin (Peru) 74,227 San Martn in the Madeira Basin (Bolivia) 16,673 Nanay (Peru) 1'492,000 Madeira (Brazil, Bolivia, Peru) Size Range (sq km)

This array of nested basins is interconnected by a hierarchical ID that allows for an easy identification of downstream and neighboring relationships. e.g. Rio Madeira MacroBasin ID = 3, Madre de Dios MesoBasin ID = 0353, Ro Los Amigos MicroBasin ID = 0353094 (see Figure 2). The accompanying stream network was also developed during the Amazon NI Ecological Vision development. For the purpose of HIS/ARA only a subset of the original stream attributes have been utilized: discharge, system type and water type. Further improvement of the basins physical delineation by using a better DEM layer (i.e. 90 m) has been delayed because of the lack of high resolution information that could be used with this level of detail. Also, this effort would be relevant for some focal macrobasins in future analysis.

Integration of water flow information to the HIS is currently being conducted using Large-Scale Biosphere - Atmosphere Experiment in Amazonia (LBA) data, but the absence of reliable information for certain areas requires a modeling and calibration exercise.

Figure 2. Hierarchical organization of the Hydrological Information System basins

A proxy for Freshwater Habitat Heterogeneity In the absence of reliable and wide-coverage information of biodiversity features and patterns we decided to use surrogates by selecting enduring bio-geo-physical parameters. For the Amazon Ecological Vision the terrestrial surrogate was the Ecological Systems dataset determined by NatureServe (Josse et al. 2003). The freshwater surrogate was developed by WWF using hydrogeomorphic characteristics (hydrology, altitude, vegetation and biogeography) as proposed by Thieme et al. (2007). Specifically, the categories included: basins with rivers > 500 m3/s draining through the basin (pass-through basins), and rivers and streams < 500 m3/s (primary drainage basins) that were calculated using WWF HydroSHEDS algorithms with data from the WATERGAP model developed at the Centre for Environmental Systems Research of the University of Kassel, Germany (Alcamo et al. 2003). Three elevation zones were defined to represent: Andean mountain regions (>800 m), mid-elevation areas (800-300 m) and lowlands plains (<300 m), according to the digital elevation model. Dominant vegetation types used for the analysis were: evergreen and deciduous forest, grasslandsshrub lands, and degraded areas, according to the GLC2000 land cover map (Eva et al. 2002). Finally, a biogeography layer derived from the Freshwater Ecoregions of the World (Abell et al 2008) was added. 4

This protocol produced 299 unique aquatic systems. These systems or aquascapes are the basis for the representation analysis to be conducted using the systematic conservation planning tools.

Application in the Amazon Ecological Vision

From 2006 to 2008, the ANI Working Group developed a coarse level conservation prioritization exercise for the Amazon biome based on the principles of representation, irreplaceability, functionality, flexibility, vulnerability and connectivity (Margules and Sarkar 2007, Scaramuzza et al. 2008), for freshwater and terrestrial biodiversity. This analysis was the spatial cornerstone of WWF's initiative to develop a cohesive strategy for the conservation of the Amazon biodiversity. For the purpose of the ANI Ecological Vision both terrestrial and freshwater heterogeneity models were employed (see previous Section). A cost layer using IPAM/WHRC/UMG (Soares-Filho et al. 2006) forest conversion model was used. The result of that exercise were the WWF Ecological Priority Areas (WEPAs), that if protected will guarantee a representativity of at least 30 percent of each conservation object (freshwater and terrestrial) with a minimum cost of implementation and maintenance. The complete process is outlined in figure 3 and the WEPAs of the Amazon Ecological Vision are presented in figure 4.

Figure 3. A simplified representation of the inputs, processes and outcomes of the Amazon Ecological Vision

Figure 4. The WWF Ecological Priority Areas of the Amazon Ecological Vision

The Amazon River Assessment (ARA)

The Ecological Risk Index (ERI) The technical team decided to use the conceptual approach of the Ecological Risk Index (ERI) (Mattson and Angermeier 2007) because it integrates biotic drivers as surrogates for ecological integrity of freshwater ecosystems. By integrating the frequency of several impacts with estimates of their potential effect on any biotic driver (flow regime, physical habitat, water quality, energy sources, and biotic interactions), the ERI provide us with a synthetic measure of the impact of human activities on freshwater ecosystems (Figure 5). Further information about ERI could be obtained in CONNECT: https://intranet.panda.org/documents/documents.cfm?uFolderId=92022

Figure 5. A schematic representation of the Ecological Integrity Proxies used in the Ecological Risk Index calculation

Also, a sensitivity score was introduced as a measure of the different responses of diverse landscapes and aquascapes to a similar threat. The calculation of the sensitivity scores was semiautomatized by splitting the severity impacts for dominant vegetation type, run off, altitude and hydrological features. However, due to the scale of the sensitivity score definition, it should be used only at the microbasin scale. The input tables for severity scores and the thresholds used in the definition of the threats classes (aka frequency scores) are included in the annexes. The overall sequence of steps for the calculation of ERI is presented in the figure 6.

Figure 6. Sequence of steps for the Ecological Risk Index calculation Threats datasets Spatial information for the different human activities that could be a threat for aquatic biodiversity and processes was collected and organized in the HIS. The table of data availability included in the Annexes describes the information used for this analysis. For the purpose of the ERI calculation only the active or current threats or occurrences were considered. Only in the case of dams, some of the instances correspond to projects being built or in the preliminary phases of implementation. The threats layers used for ERI calculation were: Agriculture & Cattle-ranching. Both datasets were obtained from CIAT-Colombia and they are based in FAO statistical information. Due to the way this data is collected and aggregated it could be biased toward administrative divisions and it could contain some artifacts as a consequence of the algorithms used during the smoothing. Population centers impact was derived from a population density layer that was calculated from the Gridded Populations of the World 2005 dataset (CIESIN 2005). The GPWv3 7

database was selected after a detailed comparison with the GRUMP and Landscan products. Road density, mining, oil drills and pipeline density, dams, waterways and ports datasets were assembled by the HIS/ARA team using the best information available for each country. Finished datasets were compared with some other region-wide available databases but in every case our products were more complete and updated. Deforestation was expected to be obtained from the MERIS/GLOBIO product. However, in the case of Brazil (67% of the basin area) we used a high quality deforestation database developed by INPE. The information from the Andean countries was derived from MERIS although a number of inconsistencies with the vegetation classes were detected along this process. Climate change was not included in this version of the analysis because of the recent availability of new improved Global Climate Models. It is expected this factor could be integrated in the current spatial databases and future versions of ERI.

Marxan & Zonation We decide to use two systematic conservation planning (SCP) tools for the identification of priority areas and delineation of conservation landscapes. Marxan (Ball and Possingham 2002) is widely used for the identification of reserve systems that meet representation targets and minimizing costs of implementation. Zonation (Moilanen and Kujala 2008) is a relatively new conservation planning framework and tool that supports the spatial prioritization process using a different approach than Marxan. It produces a hierarchical prioritization of the landscape based on the biological value of sites (cells, planning units), accounting for complementarity. A significant difference with other SCP tools is the native implementation of connectivity in Zonation. This allows for the modeling of hydrological connectivity critical for several freshwater ecological process such as the migratory movements of catfishes. The Composite Ecological Risk Index (ERI-C) obtained from the integration of the ERI-T (Ecological Risk Index calculated for each threat) will be used as a cost layer in the application of the SCP tools. Marxan will be used at the microbasin level for the identification of priority areas. Zonation will be applied at the mesobasin and microbasin scale to model hydroconnectivity requirements of the resulting priority blocks and some emblematic biodiversity groups.

Biological Proxies
So far, we have identified spatial priorities based on the representation targets for each land/aquascape feature. This coarse filter approach is based in the assumption that the identified environmental classes are good predictors (surrogates) of the natural biodiversity richness. As a consequence, different kinds of environments are assumed to hold different sets of species (Margules and Sarkar 2007). On the other hand, the fine grain filter approach analyzes the specific needs of some umbrella species that could be used as surrogates for the ecosystem health of a given region. By using these species as proxies of the conservation status or habitat condition, it is possible to identify active and potential threats for their long term persistence. Freshwater River Dolphins Freshwater dolphin species occurrences were collected by WWF Colombia from several sources but mainly from the freshwater mammals surveys (2006-2008) conducted by Fundacin Omacha in collaboration with WWF, WCS, WDCS among other partners (C. Suarez comm.pers., Fundacin Omacha & WWF Colombia 2008, WWF and IUCN 2009). Priority areas identification for three 8

species of dolphins (Sotalia fluviatilis, Inia geoffrensis and Inia boliviensis) was completed using Zonation. While the last species is still pending of final approval as a fully recognized separate species, its spatial restrictions were modeled through Zonation independently of its parent species I. geoffrensis. Specifically, the model was instructed to any requirements for downstream movement for I. boliviensis. The reported locations are presented in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Reported locations for three species of freshwater dolphins in the Amazon Basin Migratory Catfishes The Zonation analysis has been applied to the ecological needs of migratory catfishes of the Amazon. Data used for this exercise was obtained from Carolsfield et al (2004) and Galdino et al (2007), and it was geoprocessed into the HIS/ARA microbasins framework (Figure 8). Using this information a model for habitat requirements that includes connectivity along the different aquascapes required for these species along their life cycle could be developed.

Figure 8. Habitat use for migratory catfishes of the Amazon Basin 9

Results
Ecological Risk Index Maps for the Ecological Risk Index (ERI) calculated for each threat are included in Annex at the end of the report. According to these maps, the major contributor to the integrated ERI are agriculture, deforestation, mining (in the Andean ridge) and the road network. The calculated Composite Ecological Risk Index (ERI-C: the average contribution of the individual threats ERI-T) for the Amazon Basin at the microbasin scale is presented in Figure 9. This index integrates the information gathered for all the threats mentioned above. According to this picture the major threats to freshwater ecosystems in the region are in the Andean Region and its Piedmont, as well as the arc of deforestation in Brazil. Emerging threats along major highway projects and the Amazon mainstem are also evident. Due to the complexity of the ERI development and its importance as a baseline monitoring tool we are preparing a detailed technical report describing the input datasets, the procedures and decisions involved in its calculation. As mentioned above, the resulting ERI-C (Figure 9) was used as a cost layer for the application of Marxan and Zonation. The sustainable use areas and indigenous territories were used as opportunities that lower the cost of conservation implementation. Like in the Amazon Vision analysis we used similar targets (30% overall and 40% for more sensitive or heterogeneous aquascapes). Finally, the existing strict protection areas were declared as pre-selected for the model. In such a way the multiple solutions provided by Marxan have to include these pre-existing areas in their spatial arrangement.

Figure 9. Calculated Composite Ecological Risk Index (ERI-C) for the Amazon Basin

10

Figure 10 shows the map of frequency of selection, or the number of times that a planning unit (microbasin) is included in an acceptable solution (a solution that fulfill the targets and conditions defined by the operator) produced by Marxan. With a sufficient number of runs this will become a good estimator of irreplaceability (Scaramuzza et al. 2008) and in addition has the advantage of including spatial connectivity and cost-benefit relationships in the metrics. The best solution identified by Marxan is presented in figure 11. The resulting Freshwater Priority Areas are equivalent to the Ecological Priority Areas identified in the Amazon Ecological Vision but with more explicit and stronger connections with freshwater ecological processes.

Figure 10. Summed solution resulting from Marxan analysis. Darker areas are more
important for freshwater ecological representation

In figure 12 the WWF Amazon Ecological Priority (WEPAs) of the Amazon Vision have been overlaid on top of the Freshwater Priority Areas. In general there is a significant overlap between those two priority setting exercises, despite the fact that some further adjustments are still required. These are good news for our Program as the WEPAs have been already utilized for the delineation of the WWF Priority Conservation Landscapes at the end of the Amazon Ecological Vision development. As some refinements of the analysis are still pending (e.g. increase the number of runs, test different cost scenarios and planning units arrangements) these are not going to change in a significant way the current outcome of the analysis. The results of the application of Zonation to the modeling of the habitat needs for freshwater dolphins are presented in figures 13 and 14. The first one shows a clear pattern of aggregation around the Pastaza, Napo and Putumayo rivers and their connection with the mainstem of the Amazon river. This maps also shows the importance of the Lower Madeira River if hydrological connectivity was required for Inia boliviensis. In the figure 14 this requirement has been removed from the model to better reflect the natural isolation of I. boliviensis. Interesting the model highlighted the confluence area among rivers Abuna, Orton, Beni and Mamore in the proximity of 11

the future major hydroelectric projects of the Madeira Basin as a critical area for this species. This inconvenient coincidence will be reviewed in the near term.

Figure 11. Freshwater Conservation Priorities (Best Solution) for the Amazon Basin

Figure 12. Freshwater conservation priorities and WEPAs from the Amazon Vision 12

Figure 13. Priority areas for freshwater dolphins modeled with full connectivity

Figure 14. Priority areas for freshwater dolphins modeled preserving the isolation of Inia boliviensis 13

In the case of the migratory catfishes, the results (Figure 15) indicate that the some of the more critical areas for these species would be the Jurua and Caqueta Rivers and some portions of the upper basin of Madre de Dios, Mamor y Guapor rivers, tributaries of the Madeira River, as well as the Rio Branco basin. It should be noted the great importance of the mainstem for hydrological connectivity with the river mouth. According to this picture, the long term persistence of this group of freshwater fishes will depend largely on the protection of spawning areas in the upper parts of the critical watersheds identified by the analysis, as well as, a number of management policies that prevent the degradation of freshwater ecosystems along the Madeira, Caquet, Juru and the Amazon river itself. Even more important is the hydrological connectivity issue, specially if some of the major river courses of the Amazon become prime targets for hydroenergy developments.

Figure 15. Priority areas for migratory catfishes modeled with full connectivity

Next steps
The analysis conducted until today using HIS/ARA are very promising and the refinement of some of these results and the inclusion of new datasets will allow for more detailed and accurate modeling. Future steps for enhancement of the system itself are: Improved datasets for agriculture developments and cattle ranching expansion. Both datasets are prime candidates for a more detailed analysis in a future exercise with better resolution and updated information. However, this activity should be conducted once we defined macrobasins or priority conservation blocks in the region. 14

Complete a Technical Report about the ERI calculation to be submitted to a peer-review publication. Work and peer-review process with TNC US & Brazil Programs including the development of updated and detailed datasets and more integrated future work in conservation planning. Improve and refine the Zonation analysis including more biodiversity features.

At the same time HIS/ARA has to provide information for work more closely with the ANI Strategy Leaders in very specific tasks in FY10-FY11 as proposed in the Figure 16. Specific tasks for this period are: Complete a comparative assessment of two major hydroenergy projects in the basin in coordination with the Strategy V Leader. Also an spatially explicit suitability index for dams siting will be developed. The information generated along this process will be used for interaction with the private and governmental sectors. Support the Strategy Leader III for the development of a Pan-Amazonic Protected Area System by producing gap analysis that better reflect the freshwater biodiversity conservation requirements. Increase the outreach and dissemination of information and recent developments generated by HIS/ARA among local partners and through the ANI strategy leaders. Provide an extensive monitoring system based on ANI strategy indicators at the biome scale with emphasis in the WWF intervention areas.

Figure 16. The HIS/ARA role in the org chart of the ANI Core Team 15

Literature Cited
Abell, R., M. L. Thieme, et al. 2008. Freshwater ecoregions of the world: a new map of biogeographic units for freshwater biodiversity conservation. BioScience 58(5): 403-414. Alcamo, J., Doell, P., Henrichs, T., Kaspar, F., Lehner, B., Roesch, T. and Siebert, S., 2003. Development and testing of the WaterGAP 2 global model of water use and availability. Hydrological Sciences Journal/Journal des Sciences Hydrologiques, 48:317-337. Ball, I.R. and Possingham, H.P., 2002. MARXAN version 1.8. 6. The Ecology Centre, University of Queensland, Brisbane. Available at http://www. ecology. uq. edu. au/marxan.html. Carolsfield, J., Harvey, B., Ross, C., Baer, A. (Eds) 2004. Migratory fishes of South America. World Fisheries Trust/World Bank/IDRC. Victoria, Canada. 380 p. Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN), Columbia University; and Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), 2005. Gridded Population of the World (GPW), Version 3. Palisades, NY: CIESIN, Columbia University. Available at http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/gpw. Eva, H.D., De Miranda, E.E., Di Bella, C.M., Gond, V., Huber, O., Sgrenzaroli, M. and Jones, S., 2002. A Vegetation Map of South America, European Commission. Luxembourg, 34 pp. Fundacin Omacha and WWF Colombia. 2008. First evaluation of abundance of the three river dolphin species (Inia geoffrensis, I. boliviensis, and Sotalia fluviatilis) in the Orinoco and Amazon River Basins, South America Galdino, R.; Caas, C.; Forsberg, B.; Barthem, R.; Goulding, M. 2007. Larvas dos grandes bagres migradores. INPA, ACCA, Lima. 127 p. Josse, C., G. Navarro, P. Comer, R. Evans, D. Faber-Langendoen, M. Fellows, G. Kittel, S. Menard, M. Pyne, M. Reid, K. Schulz, K. Snow, and J. Teague. 2003. Ecological Systems of Latin America and the Caribbean: A Working Classification of Terrestrial Systems. NatureServe, Arlington, VA. http://www.natureserve.org/publications/lacEcologicalsystems.jsp Lehner, B.; Verdin, K.; Jarvis, A. 2006. HydroSHEDS. Technical documentation. Version 1.0 WWF-US, Washington, DC. http://www.worldwildlife.org/freshwater/hydrosheds.cfm Li, W., R. Fu, et al. 2006. Rainfall and its seasonality over the Amazon in the 21st century as assessed by the coupled models for the IPCC AR4. Journal of Geophysical Research 111. Margules, C. R. and S. Sarkar. 2007. Systematic conservation planning. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Mattson, K. and P. Angermeier. 2007. Integrating Human Impacts and Ecological Integrity into a Risk-Based Protocol for Conservation Planning. Environmental Management 39: 125-138. Ministerio de Ambiente, Vivienda y Desarrollo Territorial (MAVDT) Colombia, WWF Colombia. 2009. Plan Nacional de las especies migratorias: Diagnstico e identificacin de acciones para la conservacin y el manejo sostenible de las especies migratorias de la biodiversidad en Colombia. Mitchell, T.D., 2004. An improved method of constructing a database of monthly climate observations and associated high resolution grids. Moilanen, A. and H. Kujala. 2008. Zonation; Spatial conservation planning framework and 16

software. Version 2.0. Helsinski, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Helsinski. Scaramuzza, C. A., R. Machado, et al. (2008). reas prioritrias para conservaco da biodiversidade em Gois. A encruzilhada socioambiental; biodiversidade, economia e sustentabilidade no cerrado. L. G. Ferreira. Goinia, Universidade Federal de Gois: 13-66. Soares-Filho, B.S., Nepstad, D.C., Curran, L.M., Cerqueira, G.C., Garcia, R.A., Ramos, C.A., Voll, E., McDonald, A., Lefebvre, P. and Schlesinger, P., 2006. Modelling conservation in the Amazon basin. Nature, 440:520-523. Thieme, M., Lehner, B., Abell, R., Hamilton, S.K., Kellndorfer, J., Powell, G. and Riveros, J.C., 2007. Freshwater conservation planning in data-poor areas: An example from a remote Amazonian basin (Madre de Dios River, Peru and Bolivia). Biological Conservation, 135:484-501. WWF and IUCN, 2009. South American River Dolphins Action Plan 2009-2019. WWF IUCN. Occasional papers of the IUCN species survival commission. Further information: JC Riveros Salcedo jc.riveros@wwf.panda.org

Annexes
1. Data availability scores 2. Severity scores used for ERI calculation 3. Frequency scores used for ERI calculation 4. Maps of the Ecological Risk Index calculated for each threat 5. Marxan run parameters

17

Annex 1. Data Availability scores for HIS/ARA

ideal WWF office responsible for data recompilation Land des ignation Protected areas Indigenous territories Forestry (concessions/floes/flonas) Abiotic feature s River netw ork River Discharge Surface Run Off Basin delineation Biodiversity Terrestrial ecosystems Freshw ater ecosystems Species distribution Threats Agriculture Pasture/Cattle Ranching Dams Populated Centers Deforestation Mining sites Road/railroad density (km/km2) Waterw ays & Ports Hydrocarbon (pipelines + drills) Climate Change INFOPLAN IIRSA CIAT rew TNC oil drills CIAT LSD IGAC MERIS INGEOMINAS IGAC limpiar Mintransp +IRSA IIRSA SIPAM IBGE Pipeline? PRODES MERIS update update update update TNC WWF Heterogeneity Delfines peces ec co pe CIAT grid 5km CIAT grid 1km LSD CIAT br bo Hydrosheds Hydrosheds + WaterGap Hydrosheds AML(Cesar) o Bernhard (Sidney) only entias re gional WWF Colombia ec acceptable/needs attention WWF Colombia co update bad WWF Peru pe na WWF Brazil br update IBAMA WWF Peru bo

Annex 2. Severity scores used for the Ecological Risk Index (ERI) calculation
Threat
1

Deforestation

Dams

Agriculture

Cattle ranching

Populated centers

Hydrocarbons

Mining

Roads (railroads)

Climate change

Impact Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High

Water Quality 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 2

Physical Habitat Quality 2

Biotic Interactions

Flow Regime 2

Energy Severity Sources Score 12 3 14 1 2 3 Low medium High

3 2 3 2 2 3 2 1 2 1 3 3 2 3 1 3 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 3 2

3 12 3 12 3 2 8

10

2 1

12

6 1 7 1

10

Waterways and ports

2 3

10

Annex 3. Frequency scores used for the Ecological Risk Index (ERI) calculation

Threat
Deforestation Dams Agriculture

Variable
Percent Deforested Dam Superficie / agri_concent

Unit
Percent Event km2

Input data low value high value

scores
0-0 1 - <33% 2 - 33% 66% 3 >66% 0-1 1 - <10 2 - <25 3 >25 00 1 - <0.001 2 - <0.01 3 >0.1

0
<5 0

Frequency rank scores 1 2

5-37 1 <0.33 37-68 2o+ 0.33-0.66

3
>68

9000

>0.66

Cattle ranching

Res density

res/km2

1251

0-10

10-100

100-1000

>1000

Populated centers Hydrocarbons Mining Roads (railroads) Waterways ad ports

Population density Drill Centroids Road density Dam

person/km2 drills/km2 con/km2 road/km2 Event

8985

0-10 0 0 0 0

10-100 <0.0048 <0.25 <0.015 1

100-1000 0.00480-0.0112 0.25-1.2 0.015-0.35

>1000 >0.012 >1.2 >0.35

Annex 4. Maps of the Ecological Risk Index calculated for each threat

Annex 5. Marxan run parameters Number of Planning Units 27714 Number of Conservation Values 464 Starting proportion 0.35 Boundary length modifier 0.01 Clumping - default step function Algorithm Used :Annealing and Heuristic Heuristic type : Summation Irreplaceability Number of iterations 1000000 Initial temperature set adaptively Cooling factor set adaptively Number of temperature decreases 10000 Cost Threshold Disabled Threshold penalty factor A N/A Threshold penalty factor B N/A Random Seed -1 Number of runs 700