Setting conservation priorities for migratory networks under uncertainty

Conserving migratory species requires protecting connected habitat along the pathways they travel. Despite recent improvements in tracking animal movements, migratory connectivity remains poorly resolved at a population level for the vast majority of species, thus conservation prioritization is hampered. To address this data limitation, we developed a novel approach to spatial prioritization based on a model of potential connectivity derived from empirical data on species abundance and distance traveled between sites during migration. We applied the approach to migratory shorebirds of the East Asian‐Australasian Flyway. Conservation strategies that prioritized sites based on connectivity and abundance metrics together maintained larger populations of birds than strategies that prioritized sites based only on abundance metrics. The conservation value of a site therefore depended on both its capacity to support migratory animals and its position within the migratory pathway; the loss of crucial sites led to partial or total population collapse. We suggest that conservation approaches that prioritize sites supporting large populations of migrants should, where possible, also include data on the spatial arrangement of sites.     

The role of habitat disturbance and recovery in metapopulation persistence

Classical metapopulation theory assumes a static landscape. However, empirical evidence indicates many metapopulations are driven by habitat succession and disturbance. We develop a stochastic metapopulation model, incorporating habitat disturbance and recovery, coupled with patch colonization and extinction, to investigate the effect of habitat dynamics on persistence. We discover that habitat dynamics play a fundamental role in metapopulation dynamics. The mean number of suitable habitat patches is not adequate for characterizing the dynamics of the metapopulation. For a fixed mean number of suitable patches, we discover that the details of how disturbance affects patches and how patches recover influences metapopulation dynamics in a fundamental way. Moreover, metapopulation persistence is dependent not only on the average lifetime of a patch, but also on the variance in patch lifetime and the synchrony in patch dynamics that results from disturbance. Finally, there is an interaction between the habitat and metapopulation dynamics, for instance declining metapopulations react differently to habitat dynamics than expanding metapopulations. We close, emphasizing the importance of using performance measures appropriate to stochastic systems when evaluating their behavior, such as the probability distribution of the state of the metapopulation, conditional on it being extant (i.e., the quasistationary distribution).     

Metapopulation persistence in a dynamic landscape: more habitat or better stewardship?

Habitat loss and fragmentation has created metapopulations where there were once continuous populations. Ecologists and conservation biologists have become interested in the optimal way to manage and conserve such metapopulations. Several authors have considered the effect of patch disturbance and recovery on metapopulation persistence, but almost all such studies assume that every patch is equally susceptible to disturbance. We investigated the influence of protecting patches from disturbance on metapopulation persistence, and used a stochastic metapopulation model to answer the question: How can we optimally trade off returns from protection of patches vs. creation of patches? We considered the problem of finding, under budgetary constraints, the optimal combination of increasing the number of patches in the metapopulation network vs. increasing the number of protected patches in the network. We discovered that the optimal trade-off is dependent upon all of the properties of the system: the species dynamics, the dynamics of the landscape, and the relative costs of each action. A stochastic model and accompanying methodology are provided allowing a manager to determine the optimal policy for small metapopulations. We also provide two approximations, including a rule of thumb, for determining the optimal policy for larger metapopulations. The method is illustrated with an example inspired by information for the greater bilby, Macrotis lagotis, inhabiting southwestern Queensland, Australia. We found that given realistic costs for each action, protection of patches should be prioritized over patch creation for improving the persistence of the greater bilby during the next 20 years.     

Towards a framework for assessment and management of cumulative human impacts on marine food webs

Effective ecosystem‐based management requires understanding ecosystem responses to multiple human threats, rather than focusing on single threats. To understand ecosystem responses to anthropogenic threats holistically, it is necessary to know how threats affect different components within ecosystems and ultimately alter ecosystem functioning. We used a case study of a Mediterranean seagrass (Posidonia oceanica) food web and expert knowledge elicitation in an application of the initial steps of a framework for assessment of cumulative human impacts on food webs. We produced a conceptual seagrass food web model, determined the main trophic relationships, identified the main threats to the food web components, and assessed the components’ vulnerability to those threats. Some threats had high (e.g., coastal infrastructure) or low impacts (e.g., agricultural runoff) on all food web components, whereas others (e.g., introduced carnivores) had very different impacts on each component. Partitioning the ecosystem into its components enabled us to identify threats previously overlooked and to reevaluate the importance of threats commonly perceived as major. By incorporating this understanding of system vulnerability with data on changes in the state of each threat (e.g., decreasing domestic pollution and increasing fishing) into a food web model, managers may be better able to estimate and predict cumulative human impacts on ecosystems and to prioritize conservation actions.     

Effects of threat management interactions on conservation priorities

Decisions need to be made about which biodiversity management actions are undertaken to mitigate threats and about where these actions are implemented. However, management actions can interact; that is, the cost, benefit, and feasibility of one action can change when another action is undertaken. There is little guidance on how to explicitly and efficiently prioritize management for multiple threats, including deciding where to act. Integrated management could focus on one management action to abate a dominant threat or on a strategy comprising multiple actions to abate multiple threats. Furthermore management could be undertaken at sites that are in close proximity to reduce costs. We used cost‐effectiveness analysis to prioritize investments in fire management, controlling invasive predators, and reducing grazing pressure in a bio‐diverse region of southeastern Queensland, Australia. We compared outcomes of 5 management approaches based on different assumptions about interactions and quantified how investment needed, benefits expected, and the locations prioritized for implementation differed when interactions were taken into account. Managing for interactions altered decisions about where to invest and in which actions to invest and had the potential to deliver increased investment efficiency. Differences in high priority locations and actions were greatest between the approaches when we made different assumptions about how management actions deliver benefits through threat abatement: either all threats must be managed to conserve species or only one management action may be required. Threatened species management that does not consider interactions between actions may result in misplaced investments or misguided expectations of the effort required to mitigate threats to species.     

Changes in seed dispersal processes and the potential for between-patch connectivity for an arid land daisy

Dispersal is a major and critical process in population biology that has been particularly challenging to study. Animals can have major roles in seed dispersal even in species that do not appear specifically adapted to animal-aided dispersal. This can occur by two processes: direct movement of diaspores by animals and modification of landscape characteristics by animals in ways that greatly influence dispersal. We exploited the production of large, persistent dispersal structures (seed heads, henceforth) by Erodiophyllum elderi (Asteraceae), a daisy from arid Australia, to further understand secondary dispersal. Seed head dispersal on and off animal tracks in eight E. elderi patches was monitored for 9.5 months by periodically recording the location of marked seed heads. Sites were located inside a reserve that excludes sheep but not kangaroos, and in a nearby area with both kangaroos and sheep. The distance moved and likelihood of seed head movement was higher in areas with sheep, and especially along animal tracks. There was clear evidence that seed heads were channeled down animal tracks during large rainfall events. Seed head dispersal away from patches occurred to a limited extent via their physical contact with sheep and potentially via wind dispersal. Thus, the advantages of this study system allowed us to demonstrate the two postulated effects of herbivores on dispersal via direct movement of seed heads, and two distinct indirect effects through landscape modification by herbivores from the creation of animal tracks and the denudation of vegetation.     

Forest conservation delivers highly variable coral reef conservation outcomes

Coral reefs are threatened by human activities on both the land (e.g., deforestation) and the sea (e.g., overfishing). Most conservation planning for coral reefs focuses on removing threats in the sea, neglecting management actions on the land. A more integrated approach to coral reef conservation, inclusive of land-sea connections, requires an understanding of how and where terrestrial conservation actions influence reefs. We address this by developing a land-sea planning approach to inform fine-scale spatial management decisions and test it in Fiji. Our aim is to determine where the protection of forest can deliver the greatest return on investment for coral reef ecosystems. To assess the benefits of conservation to coral reefs, we estimate their relative condition as influenced by watershed-based pollution and fishing. We calculate the cost-effectiveness of protecting forest and find that investments deliver rapidly diminishing returns for improvements to relative reef condition. For example, protecting 2% of forest in one area is almost 500 times more beneficial than protecting 2% in another area, making prioritization essential. For the scenarios evaluated, relative coral reef condition could be improved by 8-58% if all remnant forest in Fiji were protected rather than deforested. Finally, we determine the priority of each coral reef for implementing a marine protected area when all remnant forest is protected for conservation. The general results will support decisions made by the Fiji Protected Area Committee as they establish a national protected area network that aims to protect 20% of the land and 30% of the inshore waters by 2020. Although challenges remain, we can inform conservation decisions around the globe by tackling the complex issues relevant to integrated land-sea planning.     

A Method for Setting the Size of Plant Conservation Target Areas

Abstract: Realistic time frames in which management decisions are made often preclude the completion of the detailed analyses necessary for conservation planning. Under these circumstances, efficient alternatives may assist in approximating the results of more thorough studies that require extensive resources and time. We outline a set of concepts and formulas that may be used in lieu of detailed population viability analyses and habitat modeling exercises to estimate the protected areas required to provide desirable conservation outcomes for a suite of threatened plant species. We used expert judgment of parameters and assessment of a population size that results in a specified quasiextinction risk based on simple dynamic models. The area required to support a population of this size is adjusted to take into account deterministic and stochastic human influences, including small-scale disturbance, deterministic trends such as habitat loss, and changes in population density through processes such as predation and competition. We set targets for different disturbance regimes and geographic regions. We applied our methods to Banksia cuneata, Boronia keysii, and Parsonsia dorrigoensis, resulting in target areas for conservation of 1102, 733, and 1084 ha, respectively. These results provide guidance on target areas and priorities for conservation strategies.