Coexistence of Fisheries with River Dolphin Conservation

Abstract: Freshwater biodiversity conservation is generally perceived to conflict with human use and extraction (e.g., fisheries). Overexploited fisheries upset the balance between local economic needs and endangered species’ conservation. We investigated resource competition between fisheries and Ganges river dolphins (Platanista gangetica gangetica) in a human‐dominated river system in India to assess the potential for their coexistence. We surveyed a 65‐km stretch of the lower Ganga River to assess habitat use by dolphins (encounter rates) and fishing activity (habitat preferences of fishers, intensity of net and boat use). Dolphin abundance in the main channel increased from 179 (SE 7) (mid dry season) to 270 (SE 8) (peak dry season), probably as a result of immigration from upstream tributaries. Dolphins preferred river channels with muddy, rocky substrates, and deep midchannel waters. These areas overlapped considerably with fishing areas. Sites with 2–6 boats/km (moderately fished) were more preferred by dolphins than sites with 8–55 boats/km (heavily fished). Estimated spatial (85%) and prey–resource overlap (75%) between fisheries and dolphins (chiefly predators of small fish) suggests a high level of competition between the two groups. A decrease in abundance of larger fish, indicated by the fact that small fish comprised 74% of the total caught, may have intensified the present competition. Dolphins seem resilient to changes in fish community structure and may persist in overfished rivers. Regulated fishing in dolphin hotspots and maintenance of adequate dry season flows can sustain dolphins in tributaries and reduce competition in the main river. Fish‐stock restoration and management, effective monitoring, curbing destructive fishing practices, secure tenure rights, and provision of alternative livelihoods for fishers may help reconcile conservation and local needs in overexploited river systems.     

Status Assessment of New Zealand's Naturally Uncommon Ecosystems

Abstract: Globally, ecosystems are under increasing anthropogenic pressure; thus, many are at risk of elimination. This situation has led the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) to propose a quantitative approach to ecosystem‐risk assessment. However, there is a need for their proposed criteria to be evaluated through practical examples spanning a diverse range of ecosystems and scales. We applied the IUCN's ecosystem red‐list criteria, which are based on changes in extent of ecosystems and reductions in ecosystem processes, to New Zealand's 72 naturally uncommon ecosystems. We aimed to test the applicability of the proposed criteria to ecosystems that are naturally uncommon (i.e., those that would naturally occur over a small area in the absence of human activity) and to provide information on the probability of ecosystem elimination so that conservation priorities might be set. We also tested the hypothesis that naturally uncommon ecosystems classified as threatened on the basis of IUCN Red List criteria contain more threatened plant species than those classified as nonthreatened. We identified 18 critically endangered, 17 endangered, and 10 vulnerable ecosystems. We estimated that naturally uncommon ecosystems contained 145 (85%) of mainland New Zealand's taxonomically distinct nationally critical, nationally endangered, and nationally vulnerable plant species, 66 (46%) of which were endemic to naturally uncommon ecosystems. We estimated there was a greater number of threatened plant species (per unit area) in critically endangered ecosystems than in ecosystems classified as nonthreatened. With their high levels of endemism and rapid and relatively well‐documented history of anthropogenic change, New Zealand's naturally uncommon ecosystems provide an excellent case‐study for the ongoing development of international criteria for threatened ecosystems. We suggest that interactions and synergies among decline in area, decline in function, and the scale of application of the criteria be used to improve the IUCN criteria for threatened ecosystems.     

Adaptive social impact management for conservation and environmental management

Concerns about the social consequences of conservation have spurred increased attention the monitoring and evaluation of the social impacts of conservation projects. This has resulted in a growing body of research that demonstrates how conservation can produce both positive and negative social, economic, cultural, health, and governance consequences for local communities. Yet, the results of social monitoring efforts are seldom applied to adaptively manage conservation projects. Greater attention is needed to incorporating the results of social impact assessments in long‐term conservation management to minimize negative social consequences and maximize social benefits. We bring together insights from social impact assessment, adaptive management, social learning, knowledge coproduction, cross‐scale governance, and environmental planning to propose a definition and framework for adaptive social impact management (ASIM). We define ASIM as the cyclical process of monitoring and adaptively managing social impacts over the life‐span of an initiative through the 4 stages of profiling, learning, planning, and implementing. We outline 14 steps associated with the 4 stages of the ASIM cycle and provide guidance and potential methods for social‐indicator development, predictive assessments of social impacts, monitoring and evaluation, communication of results, and identification and prioritization of management responses. Successful ASIM will be aided by engaging with best practices – including local engagement and collaboration in the process, transparent communication of results to stakeholders, collective deliberation on and choice of interventions, documentation of shared learning at the site level, and the scaling up of insights to inform higher‐level conservation policies‐to increase accountability, trust, and perceived legitimacy among stakeholders. The ASIM process is broadly applicable to conservation, environmental management, and development initiatives at various scales and in different contexts.     

Estimating the footprint of pollution on coral reefs with models of species turnover

Ecological communities typically change along gradients of human impact, although it is difficult to estimate the footprint of impacts for diffuse threats such as pollution. We developed a joint model (i.e., one that includes multiple species and their interactions with each other and environmental covariates) of benthic habitats on lagoonal coral reefs and used it to infer change in benthic composition along a gradient of distance from logging operations. The model estimated both changes in abundances of benthic groups and their compositional turnover, a type of beta diversity. We used the model to predict the footprint of turbidity impacts from past and recent logging. Benthic communities far from logging were dominated by branching corals, whereas communities close to logging had higher cover of dead coral, massive corals, and soft sediment. Recent impacts were predicted to be small relative to the extensive impacts of past logging because recent logging has occurred far from lagoonal reefs. Our model can be used more generally to estimate the footprint of human impacts on ecosystems and evaluate the benefits of conservation actions for ecosystems.     

Conservation Development Practices,Extent, and Land‐Use Effects in the United States

Abstract: Conservation development projects combine real‐estate development with conservation of land and other natural resources. Thousands of such projects have been conducted in the United States and other countries through the involvement of private developers, landowners, land trusts, and government agencies. Previous research has demonstrated the potential value of conservation development for conserving species, ecological functions, and other resource values on private lands, especially when traditional sources of conservation funding are not available. Nevertheless, the aggregate extent and effects of conservation development were previously unknown. To address this gap, we estimated the extent and trends of conservation development in the United States and characterized its key attributes to understand its aggregate contribution to land‐conservation and growth‐management objectives. We interviewed representatives from land trusts, planning agencies, and development companies, searched the Internet for conservation development projects and programs, and compiled existing databases of conservation development projects. We collected data on 3884 projects encompassing 1.38 million ha. About 43% of the projects targeted the conservation of specific plant or animal species or ecological communities of conservation concern; 84% targeted the protection of native ecosystems representative of the project area; and 42% provided buffers to existing protected areas. The percentage of protected land in conservation development projects ranged from <40% to >99%, and the effects of these projects on natural resources differed widely. We estimate that conservation development projects have protected roughly 4 million ha of land in the United States and account for about 25% of private‐land conservation activity nationwide.