1) a) The lowest cost that I found to satisfy all environmental conditions was 2204
($100,000). I completed this by looking at all of the cheapest areas to protect and how
many of the desired species were contained within each unit. After completing this, I
looked to fill in the missing amounts of each species with cheaper units that contained 1
or 2 species in a single area. If I then had a surplus of species, I took the time to
deselect areas that provided surplus allowing for an efficient selection.
b)
c) The areas are layed out poorly in terms of conservation due to the large area between
them
2) a) The additional cost is 3,999 ($100,000). The additional money came from the difficulty
of finding highly populated areas that were close to each other. Additionally, it left you
very little room for choosing cheaper areas as they needed to be close together.
b)
c) System 1 has a much cheaper cost but scattered protected areas. System 2 has a
much higher cost but the protected areas are close together and can be grouped.
3) The Marxan score for the first units selected is (2204+3800)
4) The unclumped solution picks some squares that have a slightly higher cost but integrate
multiple species into the same square reducing the boundary.
5) My Marxan score was (5813+ 2400)
6) The Marxan solution for clumped picked two distinct linked groups where it was able to
reduce boundary, but also cost more than I was able to. My solution had squares that I
didn't need for species requirements in an attempt to reduce the boundary value.