Figure 3. The priority ranking of the areas likely to be developed under the Important Agricultural Lands scenario. The top priority conservation areas (coloured red to cyan) represent sites of high conservation value where development should be avoided if possible. Areas in dark grey have lower conservation value across the pool of biodiversity features included in this assessment, while grey areas are already cleared. Figure 4. The priority ranking of the areas likely to be developed under the Cumulative development scenario. The top priority conservation areas (coloured red to cyan) represent sites of high conservation value where development should be avoided if possible. Areas in dark grey have lower conservation value across the pool of biodiversity features included in this assessment, while grey areas are already cleared. Figure 5. The priority ranking of the areas likely to be developed under the Mining scenario.
Figure 3. The priority ranking of the areas likely to be developed under the Important Agricultural Lands scenario. The top priority conservation areas (coloured red to cyan) represent sites of high conservation value where development should be avoided if possible. Areas in dark grey have lower conservation value across the pool of biodiversity features included in this assessment, while grey areas are already cleared. Figure 4. The priority ranking of the areas likely to be developed under the Cumulative development scenario. The top priority conservation areas (coloured red to cyan) represent sites of high conservation value where development should be avoided if possible. Areas in dark grey have lower conservation value across the pool of biodiversity features included in this assessment, while grey areas are already cleared. Figure 5. The priority ranking of the areas likely to be developed under the Mining scenario.
identifying-conservation-priorities-appendices.docx