Preferred conservation policies of shark researchers

There is increasing concern about the conservation status of sharks. However, the presence of numerous different (and potentially mutually exclusive) policies complicates management implementation and public understanding of the process. We distributed an online survey to members of the largest professional shark and ray research societies to assess member knowledge of and attitudes toward different conservation policies. Questions covered society member opinions on conservation and management policies, personal histories of involvement in advocacy and management, and perceptions of the approach of conservation nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to shark conservation. One hundred and two surveys were completed (overall response rate 21%). Respondents considered themselves knowledgeable about and actively involved in conservation and management policy; a majority believed scientists have a responsibility to advocate for conservation (75%), and majorities have sent formal public comments to policymakers (54%) and included policy suggestions in their papers (53%). They believe sustainable shark fisheries are possible, are currently happening today (in a few places), and should be the goal instead of banning fisheries. Respondents were generally less supportive of newer limit‐based (i.e., policies that ban exploitation entirely without a species‐specific focus) conservation policy tools, such as shark sanctuaries and bans on the sale of shark fins, than of target‐based fisheries management tools (i.e., policies that allow for sustainable harvest of species whose populations can withstand it), such as fishing quotas. Respondents were generally supportive of environmental NGO efforts to conserve sharks but raised concerns about some NGOs that they perceived as using incorrect information and focusing on the wrong problems. Our results show there is an ongoing debate in shark conservation and management circles relative to environmental policy on target‐based natural resources management tools versus limit‐based conservation tools. They also suggest that closer communication between the scientific and environmental NGO communities may be needed to recognize and reconcile differing values and objectives between these groups.     

Park Management of Exotic Plant Species: Problems and Issues

Abstract: Vegetation management policies in public parks in the United States call for the removal of exotic species to the extent feasible. The underlying goal is to preserve samples of wilderness by restoring plant communities to the "natural state" that existed prior to extensive human influence. With limited budgets, park managers are necessarily selective in targeting exotic species for control. If the focus is on the more readily controlled species, however, park landscapes may gradually become populated by more resistant exotics Further, because plants exhibit some redundancy in ecosystem function, exotic plant species can substitute in part for natives in performing a range of ecosystem functions, including wildlife support and soil binding. Consequently the removal of exotics can result in significant perturbations to certain ecosystem functions during the period of transition to native cover. The individualistic paradigm of plant distribution implies that the impact of exotic plant species on invaded communities will vary. Choosing which species to remove requires careful evaluation of the impact of the removal on ecosystem structure and function. The effective balancing of park management goals for wilderness maintenance and recreational use requires clearer recognition of the adaptive response of ecosystems to invasion and a rethinking of the bases for prioritizing which species are to be removed.     

Use of structured expert judgment to forecast invasions by bighead and silver carp in Lake Erie

Identifying which nonindigenous species will become invasive and forecasting the damage they will cause is difficult and presents a significant problem for natural resource management. Often, the data or resources necessary for ecological risk assessment are incomplete or absent, leaving environmental decision makers ill equipped to effectively manage valuable natural resources. Structured expert judgment (SEJ) is a mathematical and performance‐based method of eliciting, weighting, and aggregating expert judgments. In contrast to other methods of eliciting and aggregating expert judgments (where, for example, equal weights may be assigned to experts), SEJ weights each expert on the basis of his or her statistical accuracy and informativeness through performance measurement on a set of calibration variables. We used SEJ to forecast impacts of nonindigenous Asian carp (Hypophthalmichthys spp.) in Lake Erie, where it is believed not to be established. Experts quantified Asian carp biomass, production, and consumption and their impact on 4 fish species if Asian carp were to become established. According to experts, in Lake Erie Asian carp have the potential to achieve biomass levels that are similar to the sum of biomasses for several fishes that are harvested commercially or recreationally. However, the impact of Asian carp on the biomass of these fishes was estimated by experts to be small, relative to long term average biomasses, with little uncertainty. Impacts of Asian carp in tributaries and on recreational activities, water quality, or other species were not addressed. SEJ can be used to quantify key uncertainties of invasion biology and also provide a decision‐support tool when the necessary information for natural resource management and policy is not available. El Uso de Juicio Experto Estructurado para Predecir Invasiones de Carpas Asiáticas en el Lago Erie     

Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species

Decisions concerning the appropriate listing status of species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) can be controversial even among conservationists. These decisions may determine whether a species persists in the near term and have long‐lasting social and political ramifications. Given the ESA's mandate that such decisions be based on the best available science, it is important to examine what factors contribute to experts’ judgments concerning the listing of species. We examined how a variety of factors (such as risk perception, value orientations, and norms) influenced experts’ judgments concerning the appropriate listing status of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) population in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Experts were invited to complete an online survey examining their perceptions of the threats grizzly bears face and their listing recommendation. Although experts’ assessments of the threats to this species were strongly correlated with their recommendations for listing status, this relationship did not exist when other cognitive factors were included in the model. Specifically, values related to human use of wildlife and norms (i.e., a respondent's expectation of peers’ assessments) were most influential in listing status recommendations. These results suggest that experts’ decisions about listing, like all human decisions, are subject to the use of heuristics (i.e., decision shortcuts). An understanding of how heuristics and related biases affect decisions under uncertainty can help inform decision making about threatened and endangered species and may be useful in designing effective processes for protection of imperiled species.     

Regional policy models for forest biodiversity analysis: lessons from coastal Oregon.

The crisis in the early 1990s over conservation of biodiversity in the forests of the Pacific Northwest caused an upheaval in forest policies for public and private landowners. These events led to the development of the Coastal Landscape Assessment and Modeling Study (CLAMS) for the Coast Range Physiographic Province of Oregon, a province containing over two million hectares of forest with a complex mixture of public and private ownership. Over a decade, CLAMS scientists developed regional data bases and tools to enable assessments of the implications of current policies for biodiversity and have begun using these data and tools to test ideas for solving policy problems. We summarize here four main lessons from our work: (1) Regional ecosystem perspectives, while rewarding, are difficult to achieve. Helping policy makers and the public understand biodiversity policies for an entire province can assist in developing more reasoned policies. However, this result is difficult to achieve because needed scientific building blocks generally do not exist, few policy institutions address regional cross-ownership issues, people can find it difficult to take a regional view, and the appropriate region for analysis changes with the policy problem. (2) Interest in environmental policy analysis may come as much from a pursuit of power as a pursuit of understanding. Biodiversity policy analyses are often viewed as weapons in an ongoing political battle. Also, results that might destabilize existing policies generally will not be well received by those in power. (3) The relationship of regional analyses to civic processes remains challenging and unsettled. Communication between citizens and scientists takes real effort. Also, collaborative processes both inspire and constrain regional policy analysis, and scientific work often proceeds at a different pace than these processes. In the end, CLAMS's most important effect on the civic dialogue may be to change how people think about the Coast Range. (4) An important role exists for anticipatory assessments done independently by scientists. Independent review will be especially important as policy analyses shift to management of nonfederal forests. Our future efforts in CLAMS will focus on evaluating ideas for fundamental changes in forest management.     

Optimism and Challenge for Science‐Based Conservation of Migratory Species in and out of U.S. National Parks

Public agencies sometimes seek outside guidance when capacity to achieve their mission is limited. Through a cooperative agreement and collaborations with the U.S. National Park Service (NPS), we developed recommendations for a conservation program for migratory species. Although NPS manages ～36 million hectares of land and water in 401 units, there is no centralized program to conserve wild animals reliant on NPS units that also migrate hundreds to thousands of kilometers beyond parks. Migrations are imperiled by habitat destruction, unsustainable harvest, climate change, and other impediments. A successful program to counter these challenges requires public support, national and international outreach, and flourishing migrant populations. We recommended two initial steps. First, in the short term, launch or build on a suite of projects for high‐profile migratory species that can serve as proof to demonstrate the centrality of NPS units to conservation at different scales. Second, over the longer term, build new capacity to conserve migratory species. Capacity building will entail increasing the limited knowledge among park staff about how and where species or populations migrate, conditions that enable migration, and identifying species’ needs and resolving them both within and beyond parks. Building capacity will also require ensuring that park superintendents and staff at all levels support conservation beyond statutory borders. Until additional diverse stakeholders and a broader American public realize what can be lost and do more to protect it and engage more with land management agencies to implement actions that facilitate conservation, long distance migrations are increasingly likely to become phenomena of the past. Optimismo y Retos para la Conservación Científicamente Basada de Especies Migratorias Dentro y Fuera de Parques Nacionales de E.U.A.     

Public Preference for Endemism over Other Conservation-Related Species Attributes

Abstract:  Public preferences are likely to play an important role in prioritizing species at risk for conservation. We conducted a survey of British Columbians (Canada) ( n = 555 , r = 73 % ) to examine how the public ranks a species' attributes (rather than named species) with respect to conservation priority. Endemism, defined as species only or mainly occurring in British Columbia or species occurring in British Columbia and nowhere else in Canada, was considered the most important among the measured attributes. This preference was strongest among men and among respondents who had completed postsecondary education. The preference for endemism is generally consistent with science-based federal listings of British Columbian species. This congruence between listing and public opinion is welcome if such congruence is considered important. We suggest that investigating how much the public values species' attributes, as opposed to named species, provides a more efficient way of incorporating public opinion into policies on species at risk, especially if large numbers of species must be ranked for conservation priority .     

Inadvertent advocacy

Policy advocacy is an issue regularly debated among conservation scientists. These debates have focused on intentional policy advocacy by scientists, but advocacy can also be unintentional. I define inadvertent policy advocacy as the act of unintentionally expressing personal policy preferences or ethical judgments in a way that is nearly indistinguishable from scientific judgments. A scientist may be well intentioned and intellectually honest but still inadvertently engage in policy advocacy. There are two ways to inadvertently engage in policy advocacy. First, a scientist expresses an opinion that she or he believes is a scientific judgment but it is actually an ethical judgment or personal policy preference. Second, a scientist expresses an opinion that he or she knows is an ethical judgment or personal policy preference but inadvertently fails to effectively communicate the nature of the opinion to policy makers or the public. I illustrate inadvertent advocacy with three examples: recovery criteria in recovery plans for species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, a scientific peer review of a recovery plan for the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), and the International Union for Conservation of Nature's definition of threatened. In each example, scientists expressed ethical judgments or policy preferences, but their value judgments were not identified as such, and, hence, their value judgments were opaque to policy makers and the public. Circumstances suggest their advocacy was inadvertent. I believe conservation scientists must become acutely aware of the line between science and policy and avoid inadvertent policy advocacy because it is professional negligence, erodes trust in scientists and science, and perpetuates an ethical vacuum that undermines the rational political discourse necessary for the evolution of society's values. The principal remedy for inadvertent advocacy is education of conservation scientists in an effort to help them understand how science and values interact to fulfill the mission of conservation science.     

Quantifying the burden of managing wildlife diseases in multiple host species

Mitigation of infectious wildlife diseases is especially challenging where pathogens affect communities of multiple host species. Although most ecological studies recognize the challenge posed by multiple-species pathogens, the implications for management are typically assessed only qualitatively. Translating the intuitive understanding that multiple host species are important into practice requires a quantitative assessment of whether and how secondary host species should also be targeted by management and the effort this will require. Using a multiple-species compartmental model, we determined analytically whether and how intensively secondary host species should be managed to prevent outbreaks in focal hosts based on the reproduction number of individual host species and between-species transmission rates. We applied the model to the invasive pathogenic fungus Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans in a 2-host system in northern Europe. Avoiding a disease outbreak in the focal host (fire salamanders [Salamandra salamandra]) was impossible unless management also heavily targeted the secondary host (alpine newts [Ichthyosaura alpestris]). Preventing an outbreak in the community required targeted removal of at least 80% of each species. This proportion increased to 90% in the presence of an environmental reservoir of B. salamandrivorans and when the proportion of individuals removed could not be adjusted for different host species (e.g., when using traps that are not species specific). We recommend the focus of disease-mitigation plans should shift from focal species to the community level and calculate explicitly the management efforts required on secondary host species to move beyond the simple intuitive understanding that multiple host species may all influence the system. Failure to do so may lead to underestimating the magnitude of the effort required and ultimately to suboptimal or futile management attempts.     

Deconstructing compassionate conservation

Compassionate conservation focuses on 4 tenets: first, do no harm; individuals matter; inclusivity of individual animals; and peaceful coexistence between humans and animals. Recently, compassionate conservation has been promoted as an alternative to conventional conservation philosophy. We believe examples presented by compassionate conservationists are deliberately or arbitrarily chosen to focus on mammals; inherently not compassionate; and offer ineffective conservation solutions. Compassionate conservation arbitrarily focuses on charismatic species, notably large predators and megaherbivores. The philosophy is not compassionate when it leaves invasive predators in the environment to cause harm to vastly more individuals of native species or uses the fear of harm by apex predators to terrorize mesopredators. Hindering the control of exotic species (megafauna, predators) in situ will not improve the conservation condition of the majority of biodiversity. The positions taken by so-called compassionate conservationists on particular species and on conservation actions could be extended to hinder other forms of conservation, including translocations, conservation fencing, and fertility control. Animal welfare is incredibly important to conservation, but ironically compassionate conservation does not offer the best welfare outcomes to animals and is often ineffective in achieving conservation goals. Consequently, compassionate conservation may threaten public and governmental support for conservation because of the limited understanding of conservation problems by the general public.     

Metrics for quantifying how much different threats contribute to red lists of species and ecosystems

Red lists are a crucial tool for the management of threatened species and ecosystems. Among the information red lists provide, the threats affecting the listed species or ecosystem, such as pollution or hunting, are of special relevance. This information can be used to quantify the relative contribution of different threat factors to biodiversity loss by disaggregating the cumulative extinction risk across species into components that can be attributed to certain threats. We devised and compared 3 metrics that accomplish this and may be used as indicators. The first metric calculates the portion of the temporal change in red list index (RLI) values that is caused by each threat. The second metric attributes the deviation of an RLI value from its reference value to different threats. The third metric uses extinction probabilities that are inferred from red list categories to estimate the contribution of a threat to the expected loss of species or ecosystems within 50 years. We used data from Norwegian Red Lists to test and evaluate these metrics. The first metric captured only a minor portion of the biodiversity loss caused by threats because it ignores species whose red list category does not change. Management authorities will often be interested in the contribution of a given threat to the total deviation from the optimal state. This was measured by the remaining metrics. The second metric was best suited for comparisons across countries or taxonomic groups. The third metric conveyed the same information but uses numbers of species or ecosystem as its unit, which is likely more intuitive to lay people and may be preferred when communicating with stakeholders or the general public.     

Cumulative ecological and socioeconomic effects of forest policies in coastal Oregon.

Forest biodiversity policies in multi-ownership landscapes are typically developed in an uncoordinated fashion with little consideration of their interactions or possible unintended cumulative effects. We conducted an assessment of some of the ecological and socioeconomic effects of recently enacted forest management policies in the 2.3-million-ha Coast Range Physiographic Province of Oregon. This mountainous area of conifer and hardwood forests includes a mosaic of landowners with a wide range of goals, from wilderness protection to high-yield timber production. We projected forest changes over 100 years in response to logging and development using models that integrate land use change and forest stand and landscape processes. We then assessed responses to those management activities using GIS models of stand structure and composition, landscape structure, habitat models for focal terrestrial and aquatic species, timber production, employment, and willingness to pay for biodiversity protection. Many of the potential outcomes of recently enacted policies are consistent with intended goals. For example, we project the area of structurally diverse older conifer forest and habitat for late successional wildlife species to strongly increase. 'Other outcomes might not be consistent with current policies: for example, hardwoods and vegetation diversity strongly decline within and across owners. Some elements of biodiversity, including streams with high potential habitat for coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) and sites of potential oak woodland, occur predominately outside federal lands and thus were not affected by the strongest biodiversity policies. Except for federal lands, biodiversity policies were not generally characterized in sufficient detail to provide clear benchmarks against which to measure the progress or success. We conclude that land management institutions and policies are not well configured to deal effectively with ecological issues that span broad spatial and temporal scales and that alternative policies could be constructed that more effectively provide for a mix of forest values from this region.     

Current Practices and Future Opportunities for Policy on Climate Change and Invasive Species

Abstract:  Climate change and invasive species are often treated as important, but independent, issues. Nevertheless, they have strong connections: changes in climate and societal responses to climate change may exacerbate the impacts of invasive species, whereas invasive species may affect the magnitude, rate, and impact of climate change. We argue that the design and implementation of climate-change policy in the United States should specifically consider the implications for invasive species; conversely, invasive-species policy should address consequences for climate change. The development of such policies should be based on (1) characterization of interactions between invasive species and climate change, (2) identification of areas where climate-change policies could negatively affect invasive-species management, and (3) identification of areas where policies could benefit from synergies between climate change and invasive-species management.     

Science or Slaughter: Need for Lethal Sampling of Sharks

Abstract: General consensus among scientists, commercial interests, and the public regarding the status of shark populations is leading to an increasing need for the scientific community to provide information to help guide effective management and conservation actions. Experience from other marine vertebrate taxa suggests that public, political, and media pressures will play an increasingly important part in setting research, management, and conservation priorities. We examined the potential implications of nonscientific influences on shark research. In particular, we considered whether lethal research sampling of sharks is justified. Although lethal sampling comes at a cost to a population, especially for threatened species, the conservation benefits from well‐designed studies provide essential data that cannot be collected currently in any other way. Methods that enable nonlethal collection of life‐history data on sharks are being developed (e.g., use of blood samples to detect maturity), but in the near future they will not provide widespread or significant benefits. Development of these techniques needs to continue, as does the way in which scientists coordinate their use of material collected during lethal sampling. For almost half of the known shark species there are insufficient data to determine their population status; thus, there is an ongoing need for further collection of scientific data to ensure all shark populations have a future. Shark populations will benefit most when decisions about the use of lethal sampling are made on the basis of scientific evidence that is free from individual, political, public, and media pressures.     

From Population Viability Analysis to Coviability of Farmland Biodiversity and Agriculture

Substantial declines in farmland biodiversity have been reported in Europe for several decades. Agricultural changes have been identified as a main driver of these declines. Although different agrienvironmental schemes have been implemented, their positive effect on biodiversity is relatively unknown. This raises the question as to how to reconcile farming production and biodiversity conservation to operationalize a sustainable and multifunctional agriculture. We devised a bioeconomic model and conducted an analysis based on coviability of farmland biodiversity and agriculture. The coviability approach extended population viability analyses by including bioeconomic risk. Our model coupled stochastic dynamics of both biodiversity and farming land‐uses selected at the microlevel with public policies at the macrolevel on the basis of financial incentives (taxes or subsidies) for land uses. The coviability approach made it possible for us to evaluate bioeconomic risks of these public incentives through the probability of satisfying a mix of biodiversity and economic constraints over time. We calibrated the model and applied it to a community of 34 common birds in metropolitan France at the small agricultural regions scale. We identified different public policies and scenarios with tolerable (0–0%) agroecological risk and modeled their outcomes up to 2050. Budgetary, economic, and ecological (based on Farmland Bird Index) constraints were essential to understanding the set of viable public policies. Our results suggest that some combinations of taxes on cereals and subsidies on grasslands could be relevant to develop a multifunctional agriculture. Moreover, the flexibility and multicriteria viewpoint underlying the coviability approach may help in the implementation of adaptive management. Del Análisis de Viabilidad Poblacional a la Co‐Viabilidad de la Agricultura y la Biodiversidad de las Tierras de Cultivo     

Traditional Plant Harvesting in Contemporary Fragmented and Urban Landscapes

Abstract: Ecosystem fragmentation and destruction can lead to restrictive administration policies on traditional harvesting by indigenous peoples from remaining ecosystem tracts. In New Zealand, concerns about endangered species and governmental policies that focus on species and ecosystem preservation have resulted in severely curtailed traditional harvesting rights. Although provision has been made for limited gathering of traditional plants from government‐administered conservation lands, it is unclear how much harvesting is undertaken on these lands and elsewhere and what this harvest might consist of. We interviewed seven expert Maori elders from the Waikato, New Zealand, to identify plant species they currently harvested and from where. We compared these data with the data we collected on permits issued for plant collecting on conservation lands in the same region. We sought to gain information on indigenous plant harvesting to determine the extent of permitted harvesting from conservation lands in the Waikato and to identify issues that might affect plant harvesting and management. Elders identified 58 species they harvest regularly or consider culturally important; over 50% of these species are harvested for medicinal use. Permit data from 1996 to 2006 indicated no apparent relationship between species of reported cultural significance and the number of permits issued for each of these species. Currently, few plant species are harvested from conservation lands, although some unofficial harvesting occurs. Elders instead reported that medicinal plants are frequently collected from urban and other public areas. They reported that plant species used for dyeing, carving, and weaving are difficult to access. Elders also discussed concerns such as spraying of roadsides, which resulted in the death of medicinal species, and use of commercial hybrids in urban planning. Local government may have an increasingly important role in supporting native traditions through urban planning, which takes account of cultural harvesting needs while potentially reducing future harvesting pressure on conservation lands. We suggest that active participation by the Māori community in the development and management of urban harvesting resources will result in positive outcomes.     

Social values and biodiversity conservation in a dynamic world

Understanding what shape values (which ultimately shape human behavior) will help improve the effectiveness of conservation solutions that depend on public support. To contribute to this understanding, we investigated the influence of societal‐level changes, such as modernization, on values in a multilevel framework. We collected survey responses (n = 4183) to questionnaires mailed to a random selection of households within each county in Washington (U.S.A.) (response rate 32%). We used multilevel modeling to determine the relationship between modernization (e.g., county‐level urbanization, wealth, and education) and wildlife value orientations (values that shape thought about wildlife) while controlling for individual‐level sociodemographics. We then explored how values influence conservation support at different levels (e.g., individual and county) and how values explain conservation support in a case study of public responses to wolf (Canis lupis) recovery. We found positive associations between county‐level examples of modernization and mutualism (a wildlife value orientation that prioritizes the perceived needs of wildlife) independent of a respondent's sociodemographics, and negative associations between modernization and domination (a wildlife value orientation that prioritizes human needs). Our results suggest that context has an additive impact on one's values; certain locations exhibited domination values, whereas others exhibited a mix of value types. This finding is important because actions that restrict human interests to promote biodiversity were negatively associated with domination and positively associated with mutualism. In the wolf case study, mutualism was strongly correlated with less social conflict over wolf recovery in many, but not all, counties (e.g., Pearson's r correlation = 0.59 in one county and a nonsignificant correlation in another). Our findings suggest that modernization operates on values within a state with implications for biodiversity, but other factors in addition to values must be investigated to fully understand what leads to proconservation behavior.     

The need for spatially explicit quantification of benefits in invasive‐species management

Worldwide, invasive species are a leading driver of environmental change across terrestrial, marine, and freshwater environments and cost billions of dollars annually in ecological damages and economic losses. Resources limit invasive‐species control, and planning processes are needed to identify cost‐effective solutions. Thus, studies are increasingly considering spatially variable natural and socioeconomic assets (e.g., species persistence, recreational fishing) when planning the allocation of actions for invasive‐species management. There is a need to improve understanding of how such assets are considered in invasive‐species management. We reviewed over 1600 studies focused on management of invasive species, including flora and fauna. Eighty‐four of these studies were included in our final analysis because they focused on the prioritization of actions for invasive species management. Forty‐five percent (n = 38) of these studies were based on spatial optimization methods, and 35% (n = 13) accounted for spatially variable assets. Across all 84 optimization studies considered, 27% (n = 23) explicitly accounted for spatially variable assets. Based on our findings, we further explored the potential costs and benefits to invasive species management when spatially variable assets are explicitly considered or not. To include spatially variable assets in decision‐making processes that guide invasive‐species management there is a need to quantify environmental responses to invasive species and to enhance understanding of potential impacts of invasive species on different natural or socioeconomic assets. We suggest these gaps could be filled by systematic reviews, quantifying invasive species impacts on native species at different periods, and broadening sources and enhancing sharing of knowledge.