Threats to biodiversity from cumulative human impacts in one of North America's last wildlife frontiers

Land‐use change is the largest proximate threat to biodiversity yet remains one of the most complex to manage. In British Columbia (BC), where large mammals roam extensive tracts of intact habitat, continued land‐use development is of global concern. Extant mammal diversity in BC is unrivalled in North America owing, in part, to its unique position at the intersection of alpine, boreal, and temperate biomes. Despite high conservation values, understanding of cumulative ecological impacts from human development is limited. Using cumulative‐effects‐assessment (CEA) methods, we assessed the current human footprint over 16 regional ecosystems and 7 large mammal species. Using historical and current range estimates of the mammals, we investigated impacts of human land use on species’ persistence. For ecosystems, we found that bunchgrass, coastal Douglas fir, and ponderosa pine have been subjected to over 50% land‐use conversion, and over 85% of their spatial extent has undergone either direct or estimated indirect impacts. Of the mammals we considered, wolves were the least affected by land conversion, yet all species had reduced ranges compared with historical estimates. We found evidence of a hard trade‐off between development and conservation, most clearly for mammals with large distributions and ecosystems with high levels of conversion. Rather than serve as a platform to monitor species decline, we strongly advocate these data be used to inform land‐use planning and to assess current conservation efforts. More generally, CEAs offer a robust tool to inform wildlife and habitat conservation at scale.     

Effects of economics and demographics on global fisheries sustainability

A good understanding of social factors that lead to marine ecological change is important to developing sustainable global fisheries. We used balanced panel models and conducted cross‐national time‐series analyses (1970–2010) of 122 nations to examine how economic prosperity and population growth affected the sustainability of marine ecosystems. We used catches in economic exclusive zone (EEZ); mean trophic level of fishery landings (MTL); primary production required to sustain catches (expressed as percentage of local primary production [%PPR]); and an index of ecosystem overfishing (i.e., the loss in secondary production index [L index]) as indicators of ecological change in marine ecosystems. The EEZ catch, %PPR, and L index declined gradually after gross domestic product (GDP) per capita reached $15,000, $14,000, and $19,000, respectively, and MTL increased steadily once GDP per capita exceeded $20,000. These relationships suggest that economic growth and biodiversity conservation are compatible goals. However, increasing human populations would degrade marine ecosystems. Specifically, a doubling of human population caused an increase in the %PPR of 17.1% and in the L index of 0.0254 and a decline in the MTL of 0.176. A 1% increase in human population resulted in a 0.744% increase in EEZ catch. These results highlight the importance of considering social and economic factors in developing sustainable fisheries management policy.     

Understanding the Role of Representations of Human–Leopard Conflict in Mumbai through Media‐Content Analysis

Attempts to minimize the effects of human–wildlife conflict (HWC) on conservation goals require an understanding of the mechanisms by which such conflicts are caused and sustained. This necessitates looking beyond the natural sciences to the human dimensions of wildlife management. Public dissemination of information regarding HWC occurs largely through the mass media. We conducted a content analysis of print media articles on human–leopard conflict in Mumbai, India. We sought to understand the framing of HWC and the changes in media coverage over a 10‐year period (2001–2011) during which a large number of attacks on people prior to 2005 were followed by a program of trapping and relocation. After 2005, when there was a decrease in the level of conflict, the tone of English‐language media reports changed. The perpetrator framing was over 5 times more likely before 2005, whereas a neutral framing was twice as likely after 2005. English‐language and non‐English‐language print media differed significantly in their framing of HWC and in the kinds of solutions advocated. Our results also suggest the print mass media in Mumbai could be an influential conduit for content that diminishes HWC. These media outlets seem attentive to human–leopard conflict, capable of correcting erroneous perceptions and facilitating mitigation and effective management. We believe better contact and mutual understanding between conservation professionals and the mass media could be an important component of managing HWC. We further suggest that in such interactions conservation professionals need to be aware of cultural and linguistic differences in reporting within the country. Entendiendo el Papel de las Representaciones del Conflicto Humano–Leopardo en Mumbai A Través del Análisis de Contenido de Medios     

A test of the substitution–habitat hypothesis in amphibians

Most examples that support the substitution‐habitat hypothesis (human‐made habitats act as substitutes of original habitat) deal with birds and mammals. We tested this hypothesis in 14 amphibians by using percentage occupancy as a proxy of habitat quality (i.e., higher occupancy percentages indicate higher quality). We classified water body types as original habitat (no or little human influence) depending on anatomical, behavioral, or physiological adaptations of each amphibian species. Ten species had relatively high probabilities (0.16–0.28) of occurrence in original habitat, moderate probability of occurrence in substitution habitats (0.11–0.14), and low probability of occurrence in refuge habitats (0.05–0.08). Thus, the substitution–habitat hypothesis only partially applies to amphibians because the low occupancy of refuges could be due to the negligible human persecution of this group (indicating good conservation status). However, low occupancy of refuges could also be due to low tolerance of refuge conditions, which could have led to selective extinction or colonization problems due to poor dispersal capabilities. That original habitats had the highest probabilities of occupancy suggests amphibians have a good conservation status in the region. They also appeared highly adaptable to anthropogenic substitution habitats.