Invasion versus Isolation: Trade-Offs in Managing Native Salmonids with Barriers to Upstream Movement

Abstract: Conservation biologists often face the trade‐off that increasing connectivity in fragmented landscapes to reduce extinction risk of native species can foster invasion by non‐native species that enter via the corridors created, which can then increase extinction risk. This dilemma is acute for stream fishes, especially native salmonids, because their populations are frequently relegated to fragments of headwater habitat threatened by invasion from downstream by 3 cosmopolitan non‐native salmonids. Managers often block these upstream invasions with movement barriers, but isolation of native salmonids in small headwater streams can increase the threat of local extinction. We propose a conceptual framework to address this worldwide problem that focuses on 4 main questions. First, are populations of conservation value present (considering evolutionary legacies, ecological functions, and socioeconomic benefits as distinct values)? Second, are populations vulnerable to invasion and displacement by non‐native salmonids? Third, would these populations be threatened with local extinction if isolated with barriers? And, fourth, how should management be prioritized among multiple populations? We also developed a conceptual model of the joint trade‐off of invasion and isolation threats that considers the opportunities for managers to make strategic decisions. We illustrated use of this framework in an analysis of the invasion‐isolation trade‐off for native cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii) in 2 contrasting basins in western North America where invasion and isolation are either present and strong or farther away and apparently weak. These cases demonstrate that decisions to install or remove barriers to conserve native salmonids are often complex and depend on conservation values, environmental context (which influences the threat of invasion and isolation), and additional socioeconomic factors. Explicit analysis with tools such as those we propose can help managers make sound decisions in such complex circumstances.     

Nutritionally relevant elements in staple foods: influence of arable site versus choice of variety

Eighteen representative sites for the Austrian grain-growing and eight for the potato-growing zones (soils and crops) were investigated. On each site, total element contents (B, Ba, Ca, Cd, Co, Cu, Fe, K, Li, Mg, Mn, Mo, Na, P, Sr and Zn) were determined in 4–12 varieties of winter wheat (n = 136), 6 varieties of spring durum wheat (n = 30), 5 varieties of winter durum wheat (n = 15), 7 varieties of rye (n = 49), 5 varieties of spring barley (n = 30) and 5 varieties of potatoes (n = 40). Element accumulations in grain species and potato tubers varied significantly with site conditions, with the main exceptions for B in potatoes and wheat as well as for Zn, Cu and Co in durum wheat. On average, across all investigated sites, differences in varieties occurred concerning the elements Ca, Cd, Ba, Sr and Zn (except Zn in potatoes and winter durum). A rough estimation revealed that an average Austrian consumer of wheat, rye and potatoes meets more than 50% of the needs of daily element intake for K, P and Mg, between 36 and 72% for Fe, Zn and Cu, and more than 100% for Co, Mo and Mn. In particular, the elements Ca and Na have to be added from other sources.     

Framing of Geoengineering Affects Support for Climate Change Mitigation

The growing recognition that climate change mitigation alone will be inadequate has led scientists and policymakers to discuss climate geoengineering. An experiment with a US sample found, contrary to previous research, that reading about geoengineering did not reduce conservatives’ skepticism about the existence of anthropogenic climate change. Moreover, depending on how it is framed, geoengineering can reduce support for mitigation among both conservatives and non-conservatives. When geoengineering is framed as a major solution, people worry less about climate change, leading to reduced mitigation support. When framed as disastrous, people perceived geoengineering as riskier, also leading to a decrease in mitigation support. A more moderate framing of geoengineering as a partial solution is less susceptible to moral hazard effects. Overall, results suggest that geoengineering will not lessen political polarization over anthropogenic climate change, and could undercut support for mitigation efforts. Instead, framing geoengineering as a small piece to solving a big puzzle seems to be the best strategy to weaken this potential moral hazard.     

The Outcome of Northern Fur Seal Harvesting: The Results of Calibration of Mathematical Models Based on Observation Data (the Example of Tyulenii Island Population)

Tendencies in the dynamics of harvested northern fur seal (Callorhinus ursinus) population on the Tyulenii Island have been analyzed in detail. The results show that retardation of reproduction (decrease in the numbers of pups) and decline in the survival of young females (up to 3 years of age) by the late 1980s resulted in a reduction of the total number of females and a significant increase in the proportion of older females. This tendency changed during the later observation period (after 1988–1989) due to increase in the survival of young females: the female population has gradually recovered, with the proportion of young females increasing at the expense of old females (aged over 10 years). The age composition of males has also changed: the proportion of young animals has decreased, while that of large mature males (bulls) has increased. Moreover, the number of bulls continues to increase and has already exceeded the level that formerly provided for the well-being of the population. This, a paradoxical situation has arisen: the numbers of females and bulls are increasing, whereas pup production remains at a low level.