Modeling population effects of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill on a long-lived species

The 2010 Deepwater Horizon (DWH) oil spill exposed common bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) in Barataria Bay, Louisiana to heavy oiling that caused increased mortality and chronic disease and impaired reproduction in surviving dolphins. We conducted photographic surveys and veterinary assessments in the decade following the spill. We assigned a prognostic score (good, fair, guarded, poor, or grave) for each dolphin to provide a single integrated indicator of overall health, and we examined temporal trends in prognostic scores. We used expert elicitation to quantify the implications of trends for the proportion of the dolphins that would recover within their lifetime. We integrated expert elicitation, along with other new information, in a population dynamics model to predict the effects of observed health trends on demography. We compared the resulting population trajectory with that predicted under baseline (no spill) conditions. Disease conditions persisted and have recently worsened in dolphins that were presumably exposed to DWH oil: 78% of those assessed in 2018 had a guarded, poor, or grave prognosis. Dolphins born after the spill were in better health. We estimated that the population declined by 45% (95% CI 14–74) relative to baseline and will take 35 years (95% CI 18–67) to recover to 95% of baseline numbers. The sum of annual differences between baseline and injured population sizes (i.e., the lost cetacean years) was 30,993 (95% CI 6607–94,148). The population is currently at a minimum point in its recovery trajectory and is vulnerable to emerging threats, including planned ecosystem restoration efforts that are likely to be detrimental to the dolphins’ survival. Our modeling framework demonstrates an approach for integrating different sources and types of data, highlights the utility of expert elicitation for indeterminable input parameters, and emphasizes the importance of considering and monitoring long-term health of long-lived species subject to environmental disasters. Article impact statement: Oil spills can have long-term consequences for the health of long-lived species; thus, effective restoration and monitoring are needed.     

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.