Region-wide retreats from lower elevations of range-restricted birds across the Northern Andes

Local studies show upslope shifts in the distribution of tropical birds in response to warming temperatures. Unanswered is whether these upward shifts occur regionally across many species. We considered a nearly 2000-km length of the Northern Andes, where deforestation, temperature, and extreme weather events have increased during the past decades. Range-restricted bird species are particularly vulnerable to such events and occur in exceptionally high numbers in this region. Using abundant crowd-sourced data from the Cornell Lab of Ornithology database, eBird, and the Global Biodiversity Information Facility, we documented distributions of nearly 200 such species. We examined whether species shifted their elevational ranges over time by comparing observed versus expected occurrences below a low elevational threshold and above a high elevational threshold for 2 periods: before and after 2005. We predicted fewer observations at lower elevations (those below the threshold) and more at upper elevations (those above the threshold) after 2005. We also tested for deforestation effects at lower elevations within each species’ distribution ranges. We compared relative forest loss with the differences between observed and expected occurrences across the elevational range. Species’ retreats from lower elevations were ubiquitous and involved a 23–40% decline in prevalence at the lowest elevations. Increases at higher elevations were not consistent. The retreats occurred across a broad spectrum of species, from predominantly lowland to predominantly highland. Because deforestation showed no relationship with species retreats, we contend that a warming climate is the most parsimonious explanation for such shifts.     

Random forest models to estimate bankfull and low flow channel widths and depths across the conterminous United States

Channel dimensions (width and depth) at varying flows influence a host of instream ecological processes, as well as habitat and biotic features; they are a major consideration in stream habitat restoration and instream flow assessments. Models of widths and depths are often used to assess climate change vulnerability, develop endangered species recovery plans, and model water quality. However, development and application of such models require specific skillsets and resources. To facilitate acquisition of such estimates, we created a dataset of modeled channel dimensions for perennial stream segments across the conterminous United States. We used random forest models to predict wetted width, thalweg depth, bankfull width, and bankfull depth from several thousand field measurements of the National Rivers and Streams Assessment. Observed channel widths varied from <5 to >2000 m and depths varied from <2 to >125 m. Metrics of watershed area, runoff, slope, land use, and more were used as model predictors. The models had high pseudo R² values (0.70–0.91) and median absolute errors within ±6% to ±21% of the interquartile range of measured values across 10 stream orders. Predicted channel dimensions can be joined to 1.1 million stream segments of the 1:100 K resolution National Hydrography Dataset Plus (version 2.1). These predictions, combined with a rapidly growing body of nationally available data, will further enhance our ability to study and protect aquatic resources.     

A mixed methodology for evaluating use of evidence in conservation planning

Conservation practitioners widely recognize the importance of making decisions based on the best available evidence. However, the effectiveness of evidence use in conservation planning is rarely assessed, which limits opportunities to improve evidence-based practice. We devised a mixed methodology for empirically evaluating use of evidence that applies social science tools to systematically appraise what kinds of evidence are used in conservation planning, to what effect, and under what limitations. We applied our approach in a case study of the Nature Conservancy of Canada (NCC), a leading land conservation organization. We conducted qualitative and quantitative analyses of 65 NCC planning documents (n = 13 in-depth) to identify patterns in evidence use, and surveyed 35 conservation planners to examine experiences of and barriers to using evidence. Although claims in plans contained a wide range of evidence types, 26% of claims were not referenced or associated with an identifiable source. Lack of evidence use was particularly apparent in claims associated with direct threats, particularly those identified as low (71% coded as insufficient or lacking evidence) or medium (45%) threats. Survey participants described relying heavily on practitioner experience and highlighted capacity limitations and disciplinary gaps in expertise among planning teams as barriers to using evidence effectively. We found that although time-intensive, this approach yielded actionable recommendations for improving evidence use in NCC conservation plans. Similar mixed-method assessments may streamline the process by including interviews and refining the document analysis frames to target issues or sections of concern. We suggest our method provides an accessible and robust point of departure for conservation practitioners to evaluate whether the use of conservation planning reflects in-house standards and more broadly recognized best practices.