Slow recovery of tropical old‐field rainforest regrowth and the value and limitations of active restoration

There is current debate about the potential for secondary regrowth to rescue tropical forests from an otherwise inevitable cascade of biodiversity loss due to land clearing and scant evidence to test how well active restoration may accelerate recovery. We used site chronosequences to compare developmental trajectories of vegetation between self‐organized (i.e., spontaneous) forest regrowth and biodiversity plantings (established for ecological restoration, with many locally native tree species at high density) in the Australian wet tropics uplands. Across 28 regrowth sites aged 1–59 years, some structural attributes reached reference rainforest levels within 40 years, whereas wood volume and most tested components of native plant species richness (classified by species’ origins, family, and ecological functions) reached less than 50% of reference rainforest values. Development of native tree and shrub richness was particularly slow among species that were wind dispersed or animal dispersed with large (>10 mm) seeds. Many species with animal‐dispersed seeds were from near‐basal evolutionary lineages that contribute to recognized World Heritage values of the study region. Faster recovery was recorded in 25 biodiversity plantings of 1–25 years in which wood volume developed more rapidly; native woody plant species richness reached values similar to reference rainforest and was better represented across all dispersal modes; and species from near‐basal plant families were better (although incompletely) represented. Plantings and regrowth showed slow recovery in species richness of vines and epiphytes and in overall resemblance to forest in species composition. Our results can inform decision making about when and where to invest in active restoration and provide strong evidence that protecting old‐growth forest is crucially important for sustaining tropical biodiversity.     

Generating spatially optimized habitat in a trade‐off between social optimality and budget efficiency

Auctions have been proposed as alternatives to payments for environmental services when spatial interactions and costs are better known to landowners than to the conservation agency (asymmetric information). Recently, an auction scheme was proposed that delivers optimal conservation in the sense that social welfare is maximized. I examined the social welfare and the budget efficiency delivered by this scheme, where social welfare represents the difference between the monetized ecological benefit and the conservation cost incurred to the landowners and budget efficiency is defined as maximizing the ecological benefit for a given conservation budget. For the analysis, I considered a stylized landscape with land patches that can be used for agriculture or conservation. The ecological benefit was measured by an objective function that increases with increasing number and spatial aggregation of conserved land patches. I compared the social welfare and the budget efficiency of the auction scheme with an agglomeration payment, a policy scheme that considers spatial interactions and that was proposed recently. The auction delivered a higher level of social welfare than the agglomeration payment. However, the agglomeration payment was more efficient budgetarily than the auction, so the comparative performances of the 2 schemes depended on the chosen policy criterion–social welfare or budget efficiency. Both policy criteria are relevant for conservation. Which one should be chosen depends on the problem at hand, for example, whether social preferences should be taken into account in the decision of how much money to invest in conservation or whether the available conservation budget is strictly limited.     

Insights from life history theory for an explicit treatment of trade‐offs in conservation biology

As economic and social contexts become more embedded within biodiversity conservation, it becomes obvious that resources are a limiting factor in conservation. This recognition is leading conservation scientists and practitioners to increasingly frame conservation decisions as trade‐offs between conflicting societal objectives. However, this framing is all too often done in an intuitive way, rather than by addressing trade‐offs explicitly. In contrast, the concept of trade‐off is a keystone in evolutionary biology, where it has been investigated extensively. I argue that insights from evolutionary theory can provide methodological and theoretical support to evaluating and quantifying trade‐offs in biodiversity conservation. I reviewed the diverse ways in which trade‐offs have emerged within the context of conservation and how advances from evolutionary theory can help avoid the main pitfalls of an implicit approach. When studying both evolutionary trade‐offs (e.g., reproduction vs. survival) and conservation trade‐offs (e.g., biodiversity conservation vs. agriculture), it is crucial to correctly identify the limiting resource, hold constant the amount of this resource when comparing different scenarios, and choose appropriate metrics to quantify the extent to which the objectives have been achieved. Insights from studies in evolutionary theory also reveal how an inadequate selection of conservation solutions may result from considering suboptimal rather than optional solutions when examining whether a trade‐off exits between 2 objectives. Furthermore, the shape of a trade‐off curve (i.e., whether the relationship between 2 objectives follows a concave, convex, or linear form) is known to affect crucially the definition of optimal solutions in evolutionary biology and very likely affects decisions in biodiversity conservation planning too. This interface between evolutionary biology and biodiversity conservation can therefore provide methodological guidance to support decision makers in the difficult task of choosing among conservation solutions. Percepciones de la Teoría de Historia de Vida para una Tratamiento Explícito de las Compensaciones en la Biología de la Conservación     

Combined effects of land use and hunting on distributions of tropical mammals

Land use and hunting are 2 major pressures on biodiversity in the tropics. Yet, their combined impacts have not been systematically quantified at a large scale. We estimated the effects of both pressures on the distributions of 1884 tropical mammal species by integrating species’ range maps, detailed land-use maps (1992 and 2015), species-specific habitat preference data, and a hunting pressure model. We further identified areas where the combined impacts were greatest (hotspots) and least (coolspots) to determine priority areas for mitigation or prevention of the pressures. Land use was the main driver of reduced distribution of all mammal species considered. Yet, hunting pressure caused additional reductions in large-bodied species’ distributions. Together, land use and hunting reduced distributions of species by 41% (SD 30) on average (year 2015). Overlap between impacts was only 2% on average. Land use contributed more to the loss of distribution (39% on average) than hunting (4% on average). However, hunting reduced the distribution of large mammals by 29% on average; hence, large mammals lost a disproportional amount of area due to the combination of both pressures. Gran Chaco, the Atlantic Forest, and Thailand had high levels of impact across the species (hotspots of area loss). In contrast, the Amazon and Congo Basins, the Guianas, and Borneo had relatively low levels of impact (coolspots of area loss). Overall, hunting pressure and human land use increased from 1992 to 2015 and corresponding losses in distribution increased from 38% to 41% on average across the species. To effectively protect tropical mammals, conservation policies should address both pressures simultaneously because their effects are highly complementary. Our spatially detailed and species-specific results may support future national and global conservation agendas, including the design of post-2020 protected area targets and strategies.     

Contribution of Urban Expansion and a Changing Climate to Decline of a Butterfly Fauna

Butterfly populations are naturally patchy and undergo extinctions and recolonizations. Analyses based on more than 2 decades of data on California's Central Valley butterfly fauna show a net loss in species richness through time. We analyzed 22 years of phenological and faunistic data for butterflies to investigate patterns of species richness over time. We then used 18–22 years of data on changes in regional land use and 37 years of seasonal climate data to develop an explanatory model. The model related the effects of changes in land‐use patterns, from working landscapes (farm and ranchland) to urban and suburban landscapes, and of a changing climate on butterfly species richness. Additionally, we investigated local trends in land use and climate. A decline in the area of farmland and ranchland, an increase in minimum temperatures during the summer and maximum temperatures in the fall negatively affected net species richness, whereas increased minimum temperatures in the spring and greater precipitation in the previous summer positively affected species richness. According to the model, there was a threshold between 30% and 40% working‐landscape area below which further loss of working‐landscape area had a proportionally greater effect on butterfly richness. Some of the isolated effects of a warming climate acted in opposition to affect butterfly richness. Three of the 4 climate variables that most affected richness showed systematic trends (spring and summer mean minimum and fall mean maximum temperatures). Higher spring minimum temperatures were associated with greater species richness, whereas higher summer temperatures in the previous year and lower rainfall were linked to lower richness. Patterns of land use contributed to declines in species richness (although the pattern was not linear), but the net effect of a changing climate on butterfly richness was more difficult to discern. Contribución de la Expansión Urbana y un Clima Cambiante a la Declinación de la Fauna de Mariposas     

A global assessment of the social and conservation outcomes of protected areas

Protected areas (PAs) are a key strategy for protecting biological resources, but they vary considerably in their effectiveness and are frequently reported as having negative impacts on local people. This has contributed to a divisive and unresolved debate concerning the compatibility of environmental and socioeconomic development goals. Elucidating the relationship between positive and negative social impacts and conservation outcomes of PAs is key for the development of more effective and socially just conservation. We conducted a global meta‐analysis on 165 PAs using data from 171 published studies. We assessed how PAs affect the well‐being of local people, the factors associated with these impacts, and crucially the relationship between PAs’ conservation and socioeconomic outcomes. Protected areas associated with positive socioeconomic outcomes were more likely to report positive conservation outcomes. Positive conservation and socioeconomic outcomes were more likely to occur when PAs adopted comanagement regimes, empowered local people, reduced economic inequalities, and maintained cultural and livelihood benefits. Whereas the strictest regimes of PA management attempted to exclude anthropogenic influences to achieve biological conservation objectives, PAs that explicitly integrated local people as stakeholders tended to be more effective at achieving joint biological conservation and socioeconomic development outcomes. Strict protection may be needed in some circumstances, yet our results demonstrate that conservation and development objectives can be synergistic and highlight management strategies that increase the probability of maximizing both conservation performance and development outcomes of PAs.     

Integrated Waste Management in a Zone of Northern Italy: Compost Production and Use,and Analytical Control of Compost,Soil, and Crop

Agricultural soils of two Italian maize farms were treated for five years with an industrially produced high-quality compost. Cattle manure and the usual mineral fertilizer were used for comparison purposes. The effects of the organic and mineral fertilizer treatments were studied by analyzing the compost and manure, cultured soils, and harvested material. The grain yield was also determined. Organic fertilization improved soil pH, CEC, content of organic matter and NPK. Soil respiration and N mineralization were found to be higher than in the purely mineral-treated soil. Plant K take-up was improved, whereas grain yield was not affected. It was confirmed that organic fertilization, particularly compost use, maintained and increased soil fertility. The study demonstrated the feasibility of using in loco analytical facilities to follow the entire recycling process—from waste to compost production—and the use of the final product in the field.     

Myths and assumptions about human-wildlife conflict and coexistence

Recent extinctions often resulted from humans retaliating against wildlife that threatened people's interests or were perceived to threaten current or future interests. Today's subfield of human-wildlife conflict and coexistence (HWCC) grew out of an original anthropocentric concern with such real or perceived threats and then, starting in the mid-1990s, with protecting valued species from people. Recent work in ethics and law has shifted priorities toward coexistence between people and wild animals. To spur scientific progress and more effective practice, we examined 4 widespread assumptions about HWCC that need to be tested rigorously: scientists are neutral and objective about HWCC; current participatory, consensus-based decisions provide just and fair means to overcome challenges in HWCC; wildlife threats to human interests are getting worse; and wildlife damage to human interests is additive to other sources of damage. The first 2 assumptions are clearly testable, but if they are entangled can become a wicked problem and may need debunking as myths if they cannot be disentangled. Some assumptions have seldom or never been tested and those that have been tested appear dubious, yet the use of the assumptions continues in the practice and scholarship of HWCC. We call for tests of assumptions and debunking of myths in the scholarship of HWCC. Adherence to the principles of scientific integrity and application of standards of evidence can help advance our call. We also call for practitioners and interest groups to improve the constitutive process prior to decision making about wildlife. We predict these steps will hasten scientific progress toward evidence-based interventions and improve the fairness, ethics, and legality of coexistence strategies.     

Offsetting the Impacts of Mining to Achieve No Net Loss of Native Vegetation

Offsets are a novel conservation tool, yet using them to achieve no net loss of biodiversity is challenging. This is especially true when using conservation offsets (i.e., protected areas) because achieving no net loss requires avoiding equivalent loss. Our objective was to determine if offsetting the impacts of mining achieves no net loss of native vegetation in Brazil's largest iron mining region. We used a land‐use change model to simulate deforestation by mining to 2020; developed a model to allocate conservation offsets to the landscape under 3 scenarios (baseline, no new offsets; current practice, like‐for‐like [by vegetation type] conservation offsetting near the impact site; and threat scenario, like‐for‐like conservation offsetting of highly threatened vegetation); and simulated nonmining deforestation to 2020 for each scenario to quantify avoided deforestation achieved with offsets. Mines cleared 3570 ha of native vegetation by 2020. Under a 1:4 offset ratio, mining companies would be required to conserve >14,200 ha of native vegetation, doubling the current extent of protected areas in the region. Allocating offsets under current practice avoided deforestation equivalent to 3% of that caused by mining, whereas allocating under the threat scenario avoided 9%. Current practice failed to achieve no net loss because offsets did not conserve threatened vegetation. Explicit allocation of offsets to threatened vegetation also failed because the most threatened vegetation was widely dispersed across the landscape, making conservation logistically difficult. To achieve no net loss with conservation offsets requires information on regional deforestation trajectories and the distribution of threatened vegetation. However, in some regions achieving no net loss through conservation may be impossible. In these cases, other offsetting activities, such as revegetation, will be required. Compensación de los Impactos de la Minería para Obtener Ninguna Pérdida Neta de la Vegetación Nativa     

Selection of Multiple Umbrella Species for Functional and Taxonomic Diversity to Represent Urban Biodiversity

Surrogates, such as umbrella species, are commonly used to reduce the complexity of quantifying biodiversity for conservation purposes. The presence of umbrella species is often indicative of high taxonomic diversity; however, functional diversity is now recognized as an important metric for biodiversity and thus should be considered when choosing umbrella species. We identified umbrella species associated with high taxonomic and functional biodiversity in urban areas in Switzerland. We analyzed 39,752 individuals of 574 animal species from 96 study plots and 1397 presences of 262 plant species from 58 plots. Thirty‐one biodiversity measures of 7 taxonomic groups (plants, spiders, bees, ground beetles, lady bugs, weevils and birds) were included in within‐ and across‐taxa analyses. Sixteen measures were taxonomical (species richness and species diversity), whereas 15 were functional (species traits including mobility, resource use, and reproduction). We used indicator value analysis to identify umbrella species associated with single or multiple biodiversity measures. Many umbrella species were indicators of high biodiversity within their own taxonomic group (from 33.3% in weevils to 93.8% in birds), to a lesser extent they were indicators across taxa. Principal component analysis revealed that umbrella species for multiple measures of biodiversity represented different aspects of biodiversity, especially with respect to measures of taxonomic and functional diversity. Thus, even umbrella species for multiple measures of biodiversity were complementary in the biodiversity aspects they represented. Thus, the choice of umbrella species based solely on taxonomic diversity is questionable and may not represent biodiversity comprehensively. Our results suggest that, depending on conservation priorities, managers should choose multiple and complementary umbrella species to assess the state of biodiversity. Selección de Múltiples Especies Paraguas para la Diversidad Funcional y Taxonómica para Representar la Biodiversidad Urbana