Optimization of capture–recapture monitoring of elusive species illustrated with a threatened grasshopper

Information on population sizes and trends of threatened species is essential for their conservation, but obtaining reliable estimates can be challenging. We devised a method to improve the precision of estimates of population size obtained from capture–recapture studies for species with low capture and recapture probabilities and short seasonal activity, illustrated with population data of an elusive grasshopper (Prionotropis rhodanica). We used data from 5 capture–recapture studies to identify methodological and environmental factors affecting capture and recapture probabilities and estimates of population size. In a simulation, we used the population size and capture and recapture probability estimates obtained from the field studies to identify the minimum number of sampling occasions needed to obtain unbiased and robust estimates of population size. Based on these results we optimized the capture–recapture design, implemented it in 2 additional studies, and compared their precision with those of the nonoptimized studies. Additionally, we simulated scenarios based on thresholds of population size in criteria C and D of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List to investigate whether estimates of population size for elusive species can reliably inform red-list assessments. Identifying parameters that affect capture and recapture probabilities (for the grasshopper time since emergence of first adults) and optimizing field protocols based on this information reduced study effort (−6% to −27% sampling occasions) and provided more precise estimates of population size (reduced coefficient of variation) compared with nonoptimized studies. Estimates of population size from the scenarios based on the IUCN thresholds were mostly unbiased and robust (only the combination of very small populations and little study effort produced unreliable estimates), suggesting capture–recapture can be considered reliable for informing red-list assessments. Although capture–recapture remains difficult and costly for elusive species, our optimization procedure can help determine efficient protocols to increase data quality and minimize monitoring effort.     

Protected areas as frontiers for human migration

Causes of human population growth near protected areas have been much debated. We conducted 821 interviews in 16 villages around Budongo Forest Reserve, Masindi district, Uganda, to explore the causes of human migration to protected areas and to identify differences in forest use between migrant and nonmigrant communities. We asked subjects for information about birthplace, migration, household assets, household activities, and forest use. Interview subjects were categorized as nonmigrants (born in one of the interview villages), socioeconomic migrants (chose to emigrate for economic or social reasons) from within Masindi district (i.e., local migrants) and from outside the Masindi district (i.e., regional migrants), or forced migrants (i.e., refugees or internally displaced individuals who emigrated as a result of conflict, human rights abuses, or natural disaster). Only 198 respondents were born in interview villages, indicating high rates of migration between 1998 and 2008. Migrants were drawn to Budongo Forest because they thought land was available (268 individuals) or had family in the area (161 individuals). A greater number of regional migrants settled in villages near Lake Albert than did forced and local migrants. Migration category was also associated with differences in sources of livelihood. Of forced migrants 40.5% earned wages through labor, whereas 25.5% of local and 14.5% of regional migrants engaged in wage labor. Migrant groups appeared to have different effects on the environment. Of respondents that hunted, 72.7% were regional migrants. Principal component analyses indicated households of regional migrants were more likely to be associated with deforestation. Our results revealed gaps in current models of human population growth around protected areas. By highlighting the importance of social networks and livelihood choices, our results contribute to a more nuanced understanding of causes of migration and of the environmental effects of different migrant groups.     

Temporal Analysis of Genetic Structure to Assess Population Dynamics of Reintroduced Swift Foxes

Reintroductions are increasingly used to reestablish species, but a paucity of long‐term postrelease monitoring has limited understanding of whether and when viable populations subsequently persist. We conducted temporal genetic analyses of reintroduced populations of swift foxes (Vulpes velox) in Canada (Alberta and Saskatchewan) and the United States (Montana). We used samples collected 4 years apart, 17 years from the initiation of the reintroduction, and 3 years after the conclusion of releases. To assess program success, we genotyped 304 hair samples, subsampled from the known range in 2000 and 2001, and 2005 and 2006, at 7 microsatellite loci. We compared diversity, effective population size, and genetic connectivity over time in each population. Diversity remained stable over time and there was evidence of increasing effective population size. We determined population structure in both periods after correcting for differences in sample sizes. The geographic distribution of these populations roughly corresponded with the original release locations, which suggests the release sites had residual effects on the population structure. However, given that both reintroduction sites had similar source populations, habitat fragmentation, due to cropland, may be associated with the population structure we found. Although our results indicate growing, stable populations, future connectivity analyses are warranted to ensure both populations are not subject to negative small‐population effects. Our results demonstrate the importance of multiple sampling years to fully capture population dynamics of reintroduced populations. Análisis Temporal de la Estructura Genética para Evaluar la Dinámica Poblacional de Zorros (Vulpes velox) Reintroducidos     

The Quagga Mussel Crisis at Lake Mead National Recreation Area,Nevada (U.S.A.)

Abstract: Parks are cornerstones of conservation; and non‐native invasive species drive extensive changes to biological diversity in parks. Knowing this, national park staff at Lake Mead National Recreation Area in the southwestern United States had a program in place for early detection of the non‐native, invasive quagga mussel (Dreissena rostriformis bugensis). Upon finding the mussel in January 2007, managers moved quickly to access funding and the best available science to implement a response. Managers considered four options—doing nothing, closing the park, restricting movement on the lakes, and educating and enforcing park visitors—and decided to focus on education and enforcing existing laws. Nonetheless, quagga spread throughout the park and soon began to appear throughout the western United States. I examined why efforts to control the expansion failed and determined the general lessons to be learned from this case. Concentrating human visitation on the lakes through land‐use zoning opened a pathway for invasion, reduced management options, and led to the rapid spread of quagga. To reconcile competing mandates to protect nature and provide recreation, zoning in parks has become a common practice worldwide. It reduces stress on some areas of a park by restricting and thus concentrating human activity in particular areas. Concentrating the human activity in one area does three things: cements pathways that repeatedly import and export vectors of non‐native invasive species; creates the disturbed area necessary to enable non‐native invasive species to gain a foothold; and, establishes a source of invasions that, without appropriate controls, can quickly spread to a park's wilderness areas.     

Demographic Consequences of Terrestrial Habitat Loss for Pool‐Breeding Amphibians: Predicting Extinction Risks Associated with Inadequate Size of Buffer Zones

Abstract: Much of the biodiversity associated with isolated wetlands requires aquatic and terrestrial habitat to maintain viable populations. Current federal wetland regulations in the United States do not protect isolated wetlands or extend protection to surrounding terrestrial habitat. Consequently, some land managers, city planners, and policy makers at the state and local levels are making an effort to protect these wetland and neighboring upland habitats. Balancing human land‐use and habitat conservation is challenging, and well‐informed land‐use policy is hindered by a lack of knowledge of the specific risks of varying amounts of habitat loss. Using projections of wood frog (Rana sylvatica) and spotted salamander (Ambystoma maculatum) populations, we related the amount of high‐quality terrestrial habitat surrounding isolated wetlands to the decline and risk of extinction of local amphibian populations. These simulations showed that current state‐level wetland regulations protecting 30 m or less of surrounding terrestrial habitat are inadequate to support viable populations of pool‐breeding amphibians. We also found that species with different life‐history strategies responded differently to the loss and degradation of terrestrial habitat. The wood frog, with a short life span and high fecundity, was most sensitive to habitat loss and isolation, whereas the longer‐lived spotted salamander with lower fecundity was most sensitive to habitat degradation that lowered adult survival rates. Our model results demonstrate that a high probability of local amphibian population persistence requires sufficient terrestrial habitat, the maintenance of habitat quality, and connectivity among local populations. Our results emphasize the essential role of adequate terrestrial habitat to the maintenance of wetland biodiversity and ecosystem function and offer a means of quantifying the risks associated with terrestrial habitat loss and degradation.     

Negative Off‐Site Impacts of Ecological Restoration: Understanding and Addressing the Conflict

Abstract: Ecological restoration is a key component of biological conservation. Nevertheless, unlike protection of existing areas, restoration changes existing land use and can therefore be more controversial. Some restoration projects negatively affect surrounding landowners, creating social constraints to restoration success. Just as negative off‐site impacts (i.e., negative externalities) flow from industrial areas to natural areas, restoration projects can generate negative externalities for commercial land uses, such as agriculture. Negative externalities from industry have led to government regulation to prevent human health and environmental impacts. Negative externalities from restoration projects have elicited similar legal constraint on at least one large‐scale conservation project, riparian restoration in the Sacramento River Conservation Area. The negative externalities of restoration that are perceived to be the direct result of specific goals, such as endangered species management, are likely to be more contentious than externalities arising from unintended phenomena such as weed invasion. Restoration planners should give equal consideration to off‐site characteristics as to on‐site characteristics when choosing sites for restoration and designing projects. Efforts to control externalities can lead to off‐site ecological benefits.     

Unexpected structural chromosome rearrangements in prenatal diagnosis

Among 5315 prenatal diagnoses performed for various indications (maternal age, neural tube defect, metabolic diseases, X-linked diseases, pathologic pregnancies) 29 unexpected structural chromosome rearrangements were found in fetal cells. Fourteen were de novo chromosome rearrangements, six unbalanced, and eight balanced. Fifteen were inherited and balanced rearrangements. This high frequency of structural anomalies is discussed.     

Quantifying biases in marine-protected-area placement relative to abatable threats

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a critical defense against biodiversity loss in the world's oceans, but to realize near-term conservation benefits, they must be established where major threats to biodiversity occur and can be mitigated. We quantified the degree to which MPA establishment has targeted stoppable threats (i.e., threats that can be abated through effectively managed MPAs alone) by combining spatially explicit marine biodiversity threat data in 2008 and 2013 and information on the location and potential of MPAs to halt threats. We calculated an impact metric to determine whether countries are protecting proportionally more high- or low-threat ecoregions and compared observed values with random protected-area allocation. We found that protection covered <2% of ecoregions in national waters with high levels of abatable threat in 2013, which is ∼59% less protection in high-threat areas than if MPAs had been placed randomly. Relatively low-threat ecoregions had 6.3 times more strict protection (International Union for Conservation of Nature categories I–II) than high-threat ecoregions. Thirty-one ecoregions had high levels of stoppable threat but very low protection, which presents opportunities for MPAs to yield more significant near-term conservation benefits. The extent of the global MPA estate has increased, but the establishment of MPAs where they can reduce threats that are driving biodiversity loss is now urgently needed.     

The potential for biodiversity offsetting to fund effective invasive species control

Compensating for biodiversity losses in 1 location by conserving or restoring biodiversity elsewhere (i.e., biodiversity offsetting) is being used increasingly to compensate for biodiversity losses resulting from development. We considered whether a form of biodiversity offsetting, enhancement offsetting (i.e., enhancing the quality of degraded natural habitats through intensive ecological management), can realistically secure additional funding to control biological invaders at a scale and duration that results in enhanced biodiversity outcomes. We suggest that biodiversity offsetting has the potential to enhance biodiversity values through funding of invasive species control, but it needs to meet 7 key conditions: be technically possible to reduce invasive species to levels that enhance native biodiversity; be affordable; be sufficiently large to compensate for the impact; be adaptable to accommodate new strategic and tactical developments while not compromising biodiversity outcomes; acknowledge uncertainties associated with managing pests; be based on an explicit risk assessment that identifies the cost of not achieving target outcomes; and include financial mechanisms to provide for in‐perpetuity funding. The challenge then for conservation practitioners, advocates, and policy makers is to develop frameworks that allow for durable and effective partnerships with developers to realize the full potential of enhancement offsets, which will require a shift away from traditional preservation‐focused approaches to biodiversity management. El Potencial de la Compensación de la Biodiversidad para Financiar Controles Efectivos de Especies Invasoras     

Estimating the normal background rate of species extinction

A key measure of humanity's global impact is by how much it has increased species extinction rates. Familiar statements are that these are 100–1000 times pre‐human or background extinction levels. Estimating recent rates is straightforward, but establishing a background rate for comparison is not. Previous researchers chose an approximate benchmark of 1 extinction per million species per year (E/MSY). We explored disparate lines of evidence that suggest a substantially lower estimate. Fossil data yield direct estimates of extinction rates, but they are temporally coarse, mostly limited to marine hard‐bodied taxa, and generally involve genera not species. Based on these data, typical background loss is 0.01 genera per million genera per year. Molecular phylogenies are available for more taxa and ecosystems, but it is debated whether they can be used to estimate separately speciation and extinction rates. We selected data to address known concerns and used them to determine median extinction estimates from statistical distributions of probable values for terrestrial plants and animals. We then created simulations to explore effects of violating model assumptions. Finally, we compiled estimates of diversification—the difference between speciation and extinction rates for different taxa. Median estimates of extinction rates ranged from 0.023 to 0.135 E/MSY. Simulation results suggested over‐ and under‐estimation of extinction from individual phylogenies partially canceled each other out when large sets of phylogenies were analyzed. There was no evidence for recent and widespread pre‐human overall declines in diversity. This implies that average extinction rates are less than average diversification rates. Median diversification rates were 0.05–0.2 new species per million species per year. On the basis of these results, we concluded that typical rates of background extinction may be closer to 0.1 E/MSY. Thus, current extinction rates are 1,000 times higher than natural background rates of extinction and future rates are likely to be 10,000 times higher. Estimación de la Tasa Normal de Extinción de Especies