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.     

Enhancing synergies between action on ocean acidification and the post-2020 global biodiversity framework

Ocean acidification is a substantial emergent threat to marine biodiversity and the goods and services it provides. Although efforts to address ocean acidification have been taken under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), a far greater potential to do so exists by finding synergies between biodiversity conservation efforts and ocean acidification action. The ongoing process to develop a post-2020 global biodiversity framework offers an opportunity to ensure that opportunities for addressing ocean acidification are capitalized on and not overlooked. I argue that to achieve this, the following are needed: a technical integration of ocean acidification across the targets to be included in the post-2020 framework and a reframing of the issue as a biodiversity problem so as to highlight the synergies between existing biodiversity work and action needed to address ocean acidification. Given that the post-2020 framework is intended to establish the global biodiversity agenda for the coming decades, integration of ocean acidification will set a precedent for the other biodiversity-related conventions and encourage greater uptake of the issue across the wider international community. My approach is of direct relevance to those participating in the negotiations, both from a CBD Party perspective and the perspective of those advocating for a strong outcome to protect marine biodiversity and marine socioecological systems. My discussion of framing is relevant to those working beyond the CBD within other biodiversity-related conventions in which goals to address ocean acidification are sorely lacking.     

Effects of past and present livestock grazing on herpetofauna in a landscape‐scale experiment

Livestock grazing is the most widespread land use on Earth and can have negative effects on biodiversity. Yet, many of the mechanisms by which grazing leads to changes in biodiversity remain unresolved. One reason is that conventional grazing studies often target broad treatments rather than specific parameters of grazing (e.g., intensity, duration, and frequency) or fail to account for historical grazing effects. We conducted a landscape‐scale replicated grazing experiment (15,000 km², 97 sites) to examine the impact of past grazing management and current grazing regimes (intensity, duration, and frequency) on a community of ground‐dwelling herpetofauna (39 species). We analyzed community variables (species richness and composition) for all species and built multiseason patch‐occupancy models to predict local colonization and extinction for the 7 most abundant species. Past grazing practices did not influence community richness but did affect community composition and patch colonization and extinction for 4 of 7 species. Present grazing parameters did not influence community richness or composition, but 6 of the 7 target species were affected by at least one grazing parameter. Grazing frequency had the most consistent influence, positively affecting 3 of 7 species (increased colonization or decreased extinction). Past grazing practice affected community composition and population dynamics in some species in different ways, which suggests that conservation planners should examine the different grazing histories of an area. Species responded differently to specific current grazing practices; thus, incentive programs that apply a diversity of approaches rather than focusing on a change such as reduced grazing intensity should be considered. Based on our findings, we suggest that determining fine‐scale grazing attributes is essential for advancing grazing as a conservation strategy.     

Untangling outcomes of de jure and de facto community‐based management of natural resources

We systematically reviewed the literature on the tragedy of the commons and common‐property resources. We segregated studies by legal management regimes (de jure regimes) and management that develops in practice (de facto regimes) to understand how the structure of regime formation affects the outcome of community management on sustainability of resource use. De facto regimes, developed within the community, are more likely to have positive impacts on the resource. However, de facto regimes are fragile and not resilient in the face of increased population pressure and unregulated markets, and de facto management regimes are less successful where physical exclusion of external agents from resources is more difficult. Yet, formalization or imposition of de jure management regimes can have complicated impacts on sustainability. The imposition of de jure regimes usually has a negative outcome when existing de facto regimes operate at larger scales than the imposed de jure regime. In contrast, de jure regimes have largely positive impacts when the de facto regimes operate at scales smaller than the overlying de jure regimes. Formalization may also be counterproductive because of elite capture and the resulting de facto privatization (that allows elites to effectively exclude others) or de facto open access (where the disenfranchised may resort to theft and elites cannot effectively exclude them). This underscores that although the global movement to formalize community‐management regimes may address some forms of inequity and may produce better outcomes, it does not ensure resource sustainability and may lead to greater marginalization of users. Comparison of governance systems that differentiate between initiatives that legitimize existing de facto regimes and systems that create new de facto regimes, investigations of new top‐down de jure regimes, and studies that further examine different approaches to changing de jure regimes to de facto regimes are avenues for further inquiry.     

Redistribution of benefits but not detection in a fisheries bycatch‐reduction management initiative

Reducing the capture of small fish, discarded fish, and bycatch is a primary concern of fisheries managers who propose to maintain high yields, species diversity, and ecosystem functions. Modified fishing gear is one of the primary ways to reduce by‐catch and capture of small fish. The outcomes of gear modification may depend on c ompetition among fishers using other similar resources and other gears in the same fishing grounds and the subsequent adoption or abandonment of modified gears by fishers. We evaluated adoption of modified gear, catch size, catch per unit effort (CPUE), yield, and fisher incomes in a coral reef fishery in which a 3‐cm escape gap was introduced into traditional traps. There were 26.1 (SD 4.9) fishers who used the experimental landing sites and 228(SD 15.7) fishers who used the control landing sites annually over 7 years. The size of fish increased by 10.6% in the modified traps, but the catch of smaller fish increased by 11.2% among the other gears. There was no change in the overall CPUE, yields, or per area incomes; rather, yield benefits were redistributed in favor of the unmodified gears. For example, estimated incomes of fishers who adopted the modified traps remained unchanged but increased for net and spear fishers. Fishers using escape‐gap traps had a high proportion of income from larger fish, which may have led to a perception of benefits, high status, and no abandonment of the modified traps. The commensal rather than competitive outcome may explain the continued use of escape‐gap traps 3 years after their introduction. Trap fishers showed an interest in negotiating other management improvements, such as increased mesh sizes for nets, which could ultimately catalyze community‐level decisions and restrictions that could increase their profits.     

Knowledge coproduction on the impact of decisions for waterbird habitat in a changing climate

Scientists, resource managers, and decision makers increasingly use knowledge coproduction to guide the stewardship of future landscapes under climate change. This process was applied in the California Central Valley (USA) to solve complex conservation problems, where managed wetlands and croplands are flooded between fall and spring to support some of the largest concentrations of shorebirds and waterfowl in the world. We coproduced scenario narratives, spatially explicit flooded waterbird habitat models, data products, and new knowledge about climate adaptation potential. We documented our coproduction process, and using the coproduced models, we determined when and where management actions make a difference and when climate overrides these actions. The outcomes of this process provide lessons learned on how to cocreate usable information and how to increase climate adaptive capacity in a highly managed landscape. Actions to restore wetlands and prioritize their water supply created habitat outcomes resilient to climate change impacts particularly in March, when habitat was most limited; land protection combined with management can increase the ecosystem's resilience to climate change; and uptake and use of this information was influenced by the roles of different stakeholders, rapidly changing water policies, discrepancies in decision-making time frames, and immediate crises of extreme drought. Although a broad stakeholder group contributed knowledge to scenario narratives and model development, to coproduce usable information, data products were tailored to a small set of decision contexts, leading to fewer stakeholder participants over time. A boundary organization convened stakeholders across a large landscape, and early adopters helped build legitimacy. Yet, broadscale use of climate adaptation knowledge depends on state and local policies, engagement with decision makers that have legislative and budgetary authority, and the capacity to fit data products to specific decision needs.     

Hunting for common ground between wildlife governance and commons scholarship

Wildlife hunting is essential to livelihoods and food security in many parts of the world, yet present rates of extraction may threaten ecosystems and human communities. Thus, governing sustainable wildlife use is a major social dilemma and conservation challenge. Commons scholarship is well positioned to contribute theoretical insights and analytic tools to better understand the interface of social and ecological dimensions of wildlife governance, yet the intersection of wildlife studies and commons scholarship is not well studied. We reviewed existing wildlife-hunting scholarship, drawing on a database of 1,410 references, to examine the current overlap with commons scholarship through multiple methods, including social network analysis and deductive coding. We found that a very small proportion of wildlife scholarship incorporated commons theories and frameworks. The social network of wildlife scholarship was densely interconnected with several major publication clusters, whereas the wildlife commons scholarship was sparse and isolated. Despite the overarching gap between wildlife and commons scholarship, a few scholars are studying wildlife commons. The small body of scholarship that bridges these disconnected literatures provides valuable insights into the understudied relational dimensions of wildlife and other overlapping common-pool resources. We suggest increased engagement among wildlife and commons scholars and practitioners to improve the state of knowledge and practice of wildlife governance across regions, particularly for bushmeat hunting in the tropics, which is presently understudied through a common-pool resource lens. Our case study of the Republic of Congo showed how the historical context and interrelationships between hunting and forest rights are essential to understanding the current state of wildlife governance and potential for future interventions. A better understanding of the interconnections between wildlife and overlapping common-pool resource systems may be key to understanding present wildlife governance challenges and advancing the common-pool resource research agenda.     

Creating conservation strategies with value-focused thinking

Biodiversity and human well-being strategies are only as good as the set of ideas people think about. We evaluated value-focused thinking (VFT), a framework that emphasizes creating objectives and strategies that are responsive to the objectives. We performed a proof-of-concept study of VFT with 6 conservation planning teams at a global conservation organization. We developed a package of materials related to VFT, including meeting–session agendas, a virtual facilitation template, facilitator's guide, and evaluation questionnaires. We used these materials to test whether VFT applied in a group setting resulted in high-quality conservation strategies and participant satisfaction and whether our materials were scalable, meaning that someone newly trained in VFT could facilitate planning meetings that resulted in high-quality strategies and participant satisfaction, as compared with an experienced VFT facilitator. Net response indicated positive compelling, feasible, creative, and representative ratings for the conservation strategies per team. Participants indicated satisfaction overall, although satisfaction was greater for objectives than for strategies. Among the participants with previous conservation planning experience, all were at least as satisfied with their VFT strategies compared with previously developed strategies, and none were less satisfied (p = 0.001). Changes in participant satisfaction were not related to facilitator type (experienced or inexperienced with VFT) (p > 0.10). Some participants had a preconceived sense of shared understanding of important values and interests before participating in the study, which VFT strengthened. Our results highlight the advantages of structuring the development and evaluation of conservation planning frameworks around VFT.     

Prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use of wild species inferred from the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species

Unsustainable exploitation of wild species represents a serious threat to biodiversity and to the livelihoods of local communities and Indigenous peoples. However, managed, sustainable use has the potential to forestall extinctions, aid recovery, and meet human needs. We analyzed species-level data for 30,923 species from 13 taxonomic groups on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species to investigate patterns of intentional biological resource use. Forty percent of species (10,098 of 25,009 species from 10 data-sufficient taxonomic groups) were used. The main purposes of use were pets, display animals, horticulture, and human consumption. Intentional use is currently contributing to elevated extinction risk for 28–29% of threatened or near threatened (NT) species (2752–2848 of 9753 species). Intentional use also affected 16% of all species used (1597–1631 of 10,098). However, 72% of used species (7291 of 10,098) were least concern, of which nearly half (3469) also had stable or improving population trends. The remainder were not documented as threatened by biological resource use, including at least 172 threatened or NT species with stable or improving populations. About one-third of species that had use documented as a threat had no targeted species management actions to directly address this threat. To improve use-related red-list data, we suggest small amendments to the relevant classification schemes and required supporting documentation. Our findings on the prevalence of sustainable and unsustainable use, and variation across taxa, can inform international policy making, including the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species.     

An introduction to decision science for conservation

Biodiversity conservation decisions are difficult, especially when they involve differing values, complex multidimensional objectives, scarce resources, urgency, and considerable uncertainty. Decision science embodies a theory about how to make difficult decisions and an extensive array of frameworks and tools that make that theory practical. We sought to improve conceptual clarity and practical application of decision science to help decision makers apply decision science to conservation problems. We addressed barriers to the uptake of decision science, including a lack of training and awareness of decision science; confusion over common terminology and which tools and frameworks to apply; and the mistaken impression that applying decision science must be time consuming, expensive, and complex. To aid in navigating the extensive and disparate decision science literature, we clarify meaning of common terms: decision science, decision theory, decision analysis, structured decision-making, and decision-support tools. Applying decision science does not have to be complex or time consuming; rather, it begins with knowing how to think through the components of a decision utilizing decision analysis (i.e., define the problem, elicit objectives, develop alternatives, estimate consequences, and perform trade-offs). This is best achieved by applying a rapid-prototyping approach. At each step, decision-support tools can provide additional insight and clarity, whereas decision-support frameworks (e.g., priority threat management and systematic conservation planning) can aid navigation of multiple steps of a decision analysis for particular contexts. We summarize key decision-support frameworks and tools and describe to which step of a decision analysis, and to which contexts, each is most useful to apply. Our introduction to decision science will aid in contextualizing current approaches and new developments, and help decision makers begin to apply decision science to conservation problems.