Evolution of Nesting Height in an Endangered Hawaiian Forest Bird in Response to a Non‐Native Predator

Abstract: The majority of bird extinctions since 1800 have occurred on islands, and non‐native predators have been the greatest threat to the persistence of island birds. Island endemic species often lack life‐history traits and behaviors that reduce the probability of predation and they can become evolutionarily trapped if they are unable to adapt, but few studies have examined the ability of island species to respond to novel predators. The greatest threat to the persistence of the Oahu Elepaio (Chasiempis ibidis), an endangered Hawaiian forest bird, is nest predation by non‐native black rats (Rattus rattus). I examined whether Oahu Elepaio nest placement has changed at the individual and population levels in response to rat predation by measuring nest height and determining whether each nest produced offspring from 1996 to 2011. Average height of Oahu Elepaio nests increased 50% over this 16‐year period, from 7.9 m (SE 1.7) to 12.0 m (SE 1.1). There was no net change in height of sequential nests made by individual birds, which means individual elepaios have not learned to place nests higher. Nests ≤3 m off the ground produced offspring less often, and the proportion of such nests declined over time, which suggests that nest‐building behavior has evolved through natural selection by predation. Nest success increased over time, which may increase the probability of long‐term persistence of the species. Rat control may facilitate the evolution of nesting height by slowing the rate of population decline and providing time for this adaptive response to spread through the population.     

Using deep-belief networks to understand propensity for livelihood change in a rural coastal community to further conservation

Overharvesting of terrestrial and marine resources may be alleviated by encouraging an alternative configuration of livelihoods, particularly in rural communities in developing countries. Typical occupations in such areas include fishing and farming, and rural households often switch livelihood activities to suit climate and economic conditions. We used a machine-learning tool, deep-belief networks (DBN), and data from surveys of a rural Philippine coastal community to examine household desire to change livelihood. This desire is affected by a variety of factors, such as income, family needs, and feelings of work satisfaction, that are interrelated in complex ways. In farming households, livelihood changes often occur to diversify resources, increase income, and lessen economic risk. The DBN, given its multilayer perceptron structure, has a capacity to model nonlinear relationships among factors while providing an acceptable degree of accuracy. Relative to a set of 34 features (e.g., education, boat ownership, and work satisfaction), we examined the binary response variables desire to change work or not to change work. The best network had a test set accuracy of 97.5%. Among the features, 7 significantly affected desire to shift work: ethnicity, work satisfaction, number of persons in a household in ill health, number of fighting cocks owned, fishing engagement, buy-and-sell revenue, and educational level. A cross-correlation matrix of these 7 features indicated households less inclined to change work were those engaged in fishing and retail buying and selling. For fishing, provision of economic and other incentives should be considered to encourage changing from this occupation to allow recovery of fishery resources.     

Habitat-tree protection concepts over 200 years

The protection and sustainable management of habitat trees is an integral part of modern forest nature conservation concepts such as retention forestry. Bats, cavity-nesting birds, arboreal marsupials, and many different saproxylic species depend on habitat trees and their great variety of microhabitats and old-growth characteristics. With a focus on insights from temperate forests, we traced the development of habitat-tree protection over 200 years. The idea was first conceptualized by foresters and natural scientists in the early 19th century. At that time, utilitarian conservation aimed to protect cavity trees that provided roosts and nesting holes for insectivorous bats and birds. By the second half of the 19th century, habitat-tree protection was well known to foresters and was occasionally implemented. Knowledge of the protection of large old trees, a special kind of habitat tree, for sociocultural and aesthetic reasons developed similarly. But, many foresters of that time and in the following decades fundamentally rejected protection of habitat trees for economic reasons. Beginning in the 1970s, forest conservation and integrative forest management became increasingly important issues worldwide. Since then, the protection of habitat trees has been implemented on a large scale. Long-term views on the development of conservation concepts are important to inform the implementation of conservation today. In particular, historical analyses of conservation concepts allow the testing of long-term conservation outcomes and make it possible to study the resilience of conservation approaches to changing social or ecological conditions. We encourage all conservation ecologists to assess the practical and conceptual impact of the initial ideas that led to modern conservation concepts in terms of long-term biodiversity conservation.     

The need for ecocentrism in biodiversity conservation

Over the past 5 decades, scientists have been documenting negative anthropogenic environmental change, expressing increasing alarm, and urging dramatic socioecological transformation in response. A host of international meetings have been held, but the erosion of biological diversity continues to accelerate. Why, then, has no effective political action been taken? We contend that part of the answer may lie in the anthropocentric ethical premises and moral rhetoric typically deployed in the cause of conservation. We further argue that it is essential to advance moral arguments for biodiversity conservation that are not just based on perceived human interests but on ecocentric values, namely, convictions that species and ecosystems have value and interests that should be respected regardless of whether they serve human needs and aspirations. A broader array of moral rationales for biodiversity conservation, we conclude, would be more likely to lead to effective plans, adopted and enforced by governments, designed to conserve biological diversity. A good place to start in this regard would be to explicitly incorporate ecocentric values into the recommendations that will be made at the conclusion of the 15th meeting of the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, scheduled to be held in October 2020.     

Exploring nationality and social identity to explain attitudes toward conservation actions in the United States and Australia

Understanding human attitudes toward wildlife management is critical to implementing effective conservation action and policy. Understanding the factors that shape public attitudes toward different wildlife management actions is limited, however, which can result in unpredictable public responses to interventions. We drew on comparisons between residents of 2 countries on separate continents to explore differences in attitudes toward wildlife management and determine factors important in shaping these attitudes. We surveyed representative publics via market research panels in Australia (n = 881 respondents) and the United States (n = 1287). We applied a social-identity approach and demography to identify factors that explained variance between responses about wildlife management. We compared responses between countries overall and within subgroups of respondents who strongly identified as environmentalists, animal rights activists, wildlife conservation advocates, and farmers. We created aggregate scores for the management-related response items per respondent and used regression analyses to identify the relative importance of country, identity, age, and gender in explaining variance between responses. These factors accounted for 15.3% of variance among responses. Australians overall were generally more accepting of lethal wildlife management actions than U.S. respondents. Differences in national attitudes reflected differences between United States and Australian wildlife management and policy, highlighting the importance of understanding social attitudes in shaping conservation policy. Identifying as a farmer followed by identifying as an animal rights activist most shaped attitudes toward wildlife management. Identity-related conflicts could be initiated or exacerbated by conservation interventions that fail to consider identity-related processes.     

Evaluation of pay-for-release conservation incentives for unintentionally caught threatened species

In the developing world, the exploitation of threatened species jeopardizes their permanence in the wild. Because not all captures are intentional, for instance when capture methods have low selectivity, pressure on these species may be lessened by releasing living incidentally caught animals. However, it is often unrealistic to expect people to voluntarily do so because it means foregoing the benefits of resource extraction. Financial incentives for such animal release may foster conservation objectives. Reducing human–animal conflicts, protecting natural habitat, and conserving nests of threatened species are examples of conservation benefits that can be built on financial reward systems. However, incentives aiming to protect unintentionally captured threatened species are scarce. We considered pay for release, a type of ecosystem-service payment designed to foster the release of incidentally captured threatened species. We aimed to determine the best conditions to implement this scheme, its potential benefits (e.g., incentivizing the release of threatened species), and pitfalls and priority research needs (e.g., required conditions for pay for release to work) to show that its global applicability is possible. Given that approaches solely based on education and law enforcement may be ineffective under some circumstances, we argue that pay for release can protect incidentally captured endangered species if used under conditions conducive for its success. When local participants’ intrinsic motivation for conservation is weak, but the release of incidentally live-caught animals into their habitats is readily achievable, pay-for-release schemes could jump start urgently needed conservation efforts against indiscriminate animal harvesting.     

Testing the presence of marine protected areas against their ability to reduce pressures on biodiversity

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are the preferred tool for preventing marine biodiversity loss, as reflected in international protected area targets. Although the area covered by MPAs is expanding, there is a concern that opposition from resource users is driving them into already low-use locations, whereas high-pressure areas remain unprotected, which has serious implications for biodiversity conservation. We tested the spatial relationships between different human-induced pressures on marine biodiversity and global MPAs. We used global, modeled pressure data and the World Database on Protected Areas to calculate the levels of 15 different human-induced pressures inside and outside the world's MPAs. We fitted binomial generalized linear models to the data to determine whether each pressure had a positive or negative effect on the likelihood of an area being protected and whether this effect changed with different categories of protection. Pelagic and artisanal fishing, shipping, and introductions of invasive species by ships had a negative relationship with protection, and this relationship persisted under even the least restrictive categories of protection (e.g., protected areas classified as category VI under the International Union for Conservation of Nature, a category that permits sustainable use). In contrast, pressures from dispersed, diffusive sources (e.g., pollution and ocean acidification) had positive relationships with protection. Our results showed that MPAs are systematically established in areas where there is low political opposition, limiting the capacity of existing MPAs to manage key drivers of biodiversity loss. We suggest that conservation efforts focus on biodiversity outcomes and effective reduction of pressures rather than prescribing area-based targets, and that alternative approaches to conservation are needed in areas where protection is not feasible.     

A Landholder‐Based Approach to the Design of Private‐Land Conservation Programs

Abstract: Many ecosystems exist primarily, or solely, on privately owned (freehold) or managed (leasehold) land. In rural and semirural areas, local and regional government agencies are commonly responsible for encouraging landholders to conserve native vegetation and species on these private properties. Yet these agencies often lack the capacity to design and implement conservation programs tailored to rural and semirural landholdings and instead offer one program to all landholders. Landholders may elect not to participate because the program is irrelevant to their property or personal needs; consequently, vegetation–retention objectives may not be achieved. We differentiated landholders in Queensland, Australia, according to whether they derived income from the land (production landholders) or not (nonproduction landholders). We compared these two groups to identify similarities and differences that may inform the use of policy instruments (e.g., voluntary, economic, and regulatory) in conservation program design. We interviewed 45 landholders participating in three different conservation agreement programs (price‐based rate [property tax] rebate; market‐based tender; and voluntary, permanent covenant). Production landholders were more likely to participate in short‐term programs that offered large financial incentives that applied to <25% of their property. Nonproduction landholders were more likely to participate in long‐term programs that were voluntary or offered small financial incentives that applied to >75% of their property. These results may be explained by significant differences in the personal circumstances of production and nonproduction landholders (income, education, health) and differences in their norms (beliefs about how an individual is expected to act) and attitudes. Knowledge of these differences may allow for development of conservation programs that better meet the needs of landholders and thus increase participation in conservation programs and retention of native vegetation.     

Participatory Planning of Interventions to Mitigate Human–Wildlife Conflicts

Abstract: Conservation of wildlife is especially challenging when the targeted species damage crops or livestock, attack humans, or take fish or game. Affected communities may retaliate and destroy wildlife or their habitats. We summarize recommendations from the literature for 13 distinct types of interventions to mitigate these human–wildlife conflicts. We classified eight types as direct (reducing the severity or frequency of encounters with wildlife) and five as indirect (raising human tolerance for encounters with wildlife) interventions. We analyzed general cause‐and‐effect relationships underlying human–wildlife conflicts to clarify the focal point of intervention for each type. To organize the recommendations on interventions we used three standard criteria for feasibility: cost‐effective design, wildlife specificity and selectivity, and sociopolitical acceptability. The literature review and the feasibility criteria were integrated as decision support tools in three multistakeholder workshops. The workshops validated and refined our criteria and helped the participants select interventions. Our approach to planning interventions is systematic, uses standard criteria, and optimizes the participation of experts, policy makers, and affected communities. We argue that conservation action generally will be more effective if the relative merits of alternative interventions are evaluated in an explicit, systematic, and participatory manner.     

Optimal Marking of Threatened Species to Balance Benefits of Information with Impacts of Marking

Abstract: Marking animals so that they are uniquely identifiable provides information that may assist conservation efforts. Nevertheless, some methods used to mark animals can be harmful. We used mathematical methods to assess the trade‐off between the impact of marking threatened species and the value of the information gained. We considered the case where 2 management strategies, each aiming to improve a species' survival rate, are implemented in an experimental phase. The results of the experiment were applied in a postexperimental management phase. We expressed the expected number of survivors in both phases mathematically, accounting for any mortality caused by the experiment, and determined the proportion of animals to mark to maximize this number. The optimal number of animals to mark increased with the number of individuals available for the experiment and with the number of individuals to be managed in the future. The optimal solution was to mark only 25% of the animals when there were 1000 individuals available for the experiment, the results were used to manage 2000 individuals, and marking caused mortality of 1%. Fewer animals were marked when there were fewer animals in either phase or when marking caused higher mortality. In the case of the Helmeted Honeyeater (Lichenostomus melanops cassidix), the optimal proportion to mark was <1 if the mortality rate was >0.15%–1%, with the threshold depending on the number of animals in the experimental and postexperimental phases. The trade‐off between gaining more information about a species and possibly harming individuals of that species by marking them is difficult to assess subjectively. We show how to determine objectively the optimal proportion of animals to mark to enhance the management of threatened species.