Dispersal ecology of deadwood organisms and connectivity conservation

Limited knowledge of dispersal for most organisms hampers effective connectivity conservation in fragmented landscapes. In forest ecosystems, deadwood‐dependent organisms (i.e., saproxylics) are negatively affected by forest management and degradation globally. We reviewed empirically established dispersal ecology of saproxylic insects and fungi. We focused on direct studies (e.g., mark‐recapture, radiotelemetry), field experiments, and population genetic analyses. We found 2 somewhat opposite results. Based on direct methods and experiments, dispersal is limited to within a few kilometers, whereas genetic studies showed little genetic structure over tens of kilometers, which indicates long‐distance dispersal. The extent of direct dispersal studies and field experiments was small and thus these studies could not have detected long‐distance dispersal. Particularly for fungi, more studies at management‐relevant scales (1–10 km) are needed. Genetic researchers used outdated markers, investigated few loci, and faced the inherent difficulties of inferring dispersal from genetic population structure. Although there were systematic and species‐specific differences in dispersal ability (fungi are better dispersers than insects), it seems that for both groups colonization and establishment, not dispersal per se, are limiting their occurrence at management‐relevant scales. Because most studies were on forest landscapes in Europe, particularly the boreal region, more data are needed from nonforested landscapes in which fragmentation effects are likely to be more pronounced. Given the potential for long‐distance dispersal and the logical necessity of habitat area being a more fundamental landscape attribute than the spatial arrangement of habitat patches (i.e., connectivity sensu strict), retaining high‐quality deadwood habitat is more important for saproxylic insects and fungi than explicit connectivity conservation in many cases.     

The importance of Indigenous Peoples’ lands for the conservation of terrestrial mammals

Indigenous Peoples’ lands cover over one-quarter of Earth's surface, a significant proportion of which is still free from industrial-level human impacts. As a result, Indigenous Peoples and their lands are crucial for the long-term persistence of Earth's biodiversity and ecosystem services. Yet, information on species composition on these lands globally remains largely unknown. We conducted the first comprehensive analysis of terrestrial mammal composition across mapped Indigenous lands based on data on area of habitat (AOH) for 4460 mammal species assessed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. We overlaid each species’ AOH on a current map of Indigenous lands and found that 2695 species (60% of assessed mammals) had ≥10% of their ranges on Indigenous Peoples’ lands and 1009 species (23%) had >50% of their ranges on these lands. For threatened species, 473 (47%) occurred on Indigenous lands with 26% having >50% of their habitat on these lands. We also found that 935 mammal species (131 categorized as threatened) had ≥ 10% of their range on Indigenous Peoples’ lands that had low human pressure. Our results show how important Indigenous Peoples’ lands are to the successful implementation of conservation and sustainable development agendas worldwide.     

Prospects for stakeholder coordination by protected‐area managers in Europe

Growing resource demands by humans, invasive species, natural hazards, and a changing climate have created broad‐scale impacts and the need for broader‐extent conservation activities that span ownerships and even political borders. Implementing regional‐scale conservation brings great challenges, and learning how to overcome these challenges is essential for maintaining biodiversity (i.e., richness and evenness of biological communities) and ecosystem functions and services across scales and borders in the face of system change. We administered an online survey to examine factors potentially driving perspectives of protected‐area (PA) managers regarding coordination with neighboring PAs and other stakeholders (i.e., stakeholder coordination) for conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services during the next decade within diverse regions across Europe. Although >70% (n = 58) of responding PA managers indicated that climate change and invasive species are relevant for their PAs, they gave <50% probability that these threats could be mitigated through stakeholder coordination. They thought there was a >60% probability (n = 85) that stakeholder coordination would take place with the aim to improve conservation outcomes. Consistent with the foundation on which many European PAs were established, managers viewed maintaining or enhancing biodiversity as the most important (>70%; n = 61) expected benefit. Other benefits included maintaining or enhancing human resources and environmental education (range of Bayesian credibility intervals [CIs] 57–93%). They thought the main barriers to stakeholder coordination were the lack of human and economic resources (CI 59–67% chance of hindering; n = 64) followed by communication and interstakeholder differences in political structures and laws (CI 51–64% probability of hindering). European policies and strategies that address these hindering factors could be particularly effective means of enabling implementation of green infrastructure networks in which PAs are the nodes.     

Matches and mismatches between conservation investments and biodiversity values in the European Union

Recently, the European Commission adopted a new strategy to halt the loss of biodiversity. Member states are expected to favor a more effective collection and redistribution of European Union (EU) funds under the current Multiannual Financial Framework for 2014–2020. Because of the large spatial variation in the distribution of biodiversity and conservation needs at the continental scale, EU instruments should ensure that countries with higher biodiversity values get more funds and resources for the conservation than other countries. Using linear regressions, we assessed the association between conservation investments and biodiversity values across member states, accounting for a variety of conservation investment indicators, taxonomic groups (including groups of plants, vertebrates, and invertebrates), and indicators of biodiversity value. In general, we found clear overall associations between conservation investments and biodiversity variables. However, some countries received more or less investment than would be expected based on biodiversity values in those countries. We also found that the extensive use of birds as unique indicators of conservation effectiveness may lead to biased decisions. Our results can inform future decisions regarding funding allocation and thus improve distribution of EU conservation funds.     

Gillnet illumination as an effective measure to reduce sea turtle bycatch

The growing demand for fish around the world is an immediate threat to marine megafauna that are unintentionally captured in commercial and artisanal fishery operations. Bycatch mitigation strategies, such as turtle excluder devices, circle hooks, and net illumination, have successfully reduced this risk in some fisheries. We explored the effectiveness of gillnet illumination to reduce sea turtle captures in 2 artisanal fisheries (Mankoadze and Winneba, Ghana) under normal fishing conditions. We first quantified sea turtle bycatch in Ghana's artisanal gillnet fishery from 15 boats for 12 months. We then quantified catch of targeted species and sea turtle bycatch from 20 boats for 15 months (7427 net sets). For 10 of these boats, we placed a Centro Economy green light (1 LED) at each 10-m interval on the net. We also quantified target catch and sea turtle bycatch from 30 boats for 8 months (2250 net sets). In 15 of these boats, a Centro Deluxe green light (3 LEDs) was installed at 15-m intervals. Boats with economy lights and those with deluxe lights both exhibited an 81% decrease in sea turtle captures (W = 1, p < 0.001, n = 20; W = 215, p < 0.001, n = 30, respectively) compared with control boats without lights. Illuminated nets resulted in fewer turtle catches for leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea), and green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas) (p < 0.05 for all species). Target catch (mass) (W = 53, p = 0.853 n = 20; W = 76, p = 0.449, n = 23) and value (W = 50, p = 1, n = 20; W = 69, p = 0.728, = 23) were not different across treatments. Our study affirms net illumination can reduce capture rates of 3 species of sea turtles, including the imperiled leatherback. Gear modification methods can successfully reduce bycatch if they are affordable and have broad applications for multiple species in different fisheries.     

Exposing ecological and economic costs of the research‐implementation gap and compromises in decision making

The frequently discussed gap between conservation science and practice is manifest in the gap between spatial conservation prioritization plans and their implementation. We analyzed the research‐implementation gap of one zoning case by comparing results of a spatial prioritization analysis aimed at avoiding ecological impact of peat mining in a regional zoning process with the final zoning plan. We examined the relatively complex planning process to determine the gaps among research, zoning, and decision making. We quantified the ecological costs of the differing trade‐offs between ecological and socioeconomic factors included in the different zoning suggestions by comparing the landscape‐level loss of ecological features (species occurrences, habitat area, etc.) between the different solutions for spatial allocation of peat mining. We also discussed with the scientists and planners the reasons for differing zoning suggestions. The implemented plan differed from the scientists suggestion in that its focus was individual ecological features rather than all the ecological features for which there were data; planners and decision makers considered effects of peat mining on areas not included in the prioritization analysis; zoning was not truly seen as a resource‐allocation process and not emphasized in general minimizing ecological losses while satisfying economic needs (peat‐mining potential); and decision makers based their prioritization of sites on site‐level information showing high ecological value and on single legislative factors instead of finding a cost‐effective landscape‐level solution. We believe that if the zoning and decision‐making processes are very complex, then the usefulness of science‐based prioritization tools is likely to be reduced. Nevertheless, we found that high‐end tools were useful in clearly exposing trade‐offs between conservation and resource utilization.     

A multispecies test of source–sink indicators to prioritize habitat for declining populations

For species at risk of decline or extinction in source–sink systems, sources are an obvious target for habitat protection actions. However, the way in which source habitats are identified and prioritized can reduce the effectiveness of conservation actions. Although sources and sinks are conceptually defined using both demographic and movement criteria, simplifications are often required in systems with limited data. To assess the conservation outcomes of alternative source metrics and resulting prioritizations, we simulated population dynamics and extinction risk for 3 endangered species. Using empirically based habitat population models, we linked habitat maps with measured site‐ or habitat‐specific demographic conditions, movement abilities, and behaviors. We calculated source–sink metrics over a range of periods of data collection and prioritized consistently high‐output sources for conservation. We then tested whether prioritized patches identified the habitats that most affected persistence by removing them and measuring the population response. Conservation decisions based on different source–sink metrics and durations of data collection affected species persistence. Shorter time series obscured the ability of metrics to identify influential habitats, particularly in temporally variable and slowly declining populations. Data‐rich source–sink metrics that included both demography and movement information did not always identify the habitats with the greatest influence on extinction risk. In some declining populations, patch abundance better predicted influential habitats for short‐term regional persistence. Because source–sink metrics (i.e., births minus deaths; births and immigrations minus deaths and emigration) describe net population conditions and cancel out gross population counts, they may not adequately identify influential habitats in declining populations. For many nonequilibrium populations, new metrics that maintain the counts of individual births, deaths, and movement may provide additional insight into habitats that most influence persistence.     

Killing Tigers to Save Them: Fallacies of the Farming Argument

Abstract: The lucrative, illegal trade in tigers (Panthera tigris) remains a major conservation problem. Tiger farming has been proposed as a potential solution, with farmed tigers substituting for wild tigers. At first glance, this argument's logic seems simple: farming will increase the supply of tigers, prices will fall, and poaching will no longer be profitable. We contend, however, that this supply‐side argument relies on mistaken assumptions. First, tiger markets are imperfect, meaning they are dominated by a few producers who control price. Second, consumers prefer wild tigers to farmed tigers and therefore the two are not pure substitutes. In economic terms, products from wild tigers are luxury goods, commanding a price premium. Third, there is no evidence that farmed tigers can be produced or sold more cheaply than wild tigers. In sum, it is unlikely that farming will drive down the price of wild‐caught tigers or decrease profitability for tiger poachers. Rather, tiger farming is more likely to increase aggregate demand for tiger products and stimulate higher levels of poaching.     

Hierarchical Bayesian Spatial Models for Multispecies Conservation Planning and Monitoring

Abstract: Biologists who develop and apply habitat models are often familiar with the statistical challenges posed by their data's spatial structure but are unsure of whether the use of complex spatial models will increase the utility of model results in planning. We compared the relative performance of nonspatial and hierarchical Bayesian spatial models for three vertebrate and invertebrate taxa of conservation concern (Church's sideband snails [Monadenia churchi], red tree voles [Arborimus longicaudus], and Pacific fishers [Martes pennanti pacifica]) that provide examples of a range of distributional extents and dispersal abilities. We used presence–absence data derived from regional monitoring programs to develop models with both landscape and site‐level environmental covariates. We used Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithms and a conditional autoregressive or intrinsic conditional autoregressive model framework to fit spatial models. The fit of Bayesian spatial models was between 35 and 55% better than the fit of nonspatial analogue models. Bayesian spatial models outperformed analogous models developed with maximum entropy (Maxent) methods. Although the best spatial and nonspatial models included similar environmental variables, spatial models provided estimates of residual spatial effects that suggested how ecological processes might structure distribution patterns. Spatial models built from presence–absence data improved fit most for localized endemic species with ranges constrained by poorly known biogeographic factors and for widely distributed species suspected to be strongly affected by unmeasured environmental variables or population processes. By treating spatial effects as a variable of interest rather than a nuisance, hierarchical Bayesian spatial models, especially when they are based on a common broad‐scale spatial lattice (here the national Forest Inventory and Analysis grid of 24 km² hexagons), can increase the relevance of habitat models to multispecies conservation planning.