Choosing the appropriate scale of reserves for conservation

Over the past ten years the scientific basis for reserve selection and desi gn have rapidly developed. This period has also been characterized by a shi ft in emphasis toward large spatial and organizational scales of conservati on efforts. I discuss the evidence in support of this shift toward larger s cale conservation by contrasting the success of fine-filter (genes, populat ions, species) conservation and coarse-filter (communities, habitats, ecosy stems, landscapes) conservation. Conservation at both organizational scales has been successful and merits continued support, although fine-filter con servation is more straightforward. Ecological theory suggests that conserva tion at large scales is preferred. Despite this preference, both fine- and coarse-filter conservation objectives have been met by small reserves. In m any landscapes there are no opportunities for the conservation of native sp ecies diversity that encompass a large spatial scale. Thus, reserve selecti on at any organizational scale may include conservation at a variety of spa tial scales. A variety of methods have been suggested that integrate across scales of conservation. Some, such as umbrella, flagship, and indicator sp ecies, remain very problematic. Reserve selection algorithms and gap analys es, in contrast, offer promising opportunities to increase the efficiency o f conservation at all scales.