The complex relationship between personal sense of connection to animals and self‐reported proenvironmental behaviors by zoo visitors

The global biodiversity crisis requires an engaged citizenry that provides collective support for public policies and recognizes the consequences of personal consumption decisions. Understanding the factors that affect personal engagement in proenvironmental behaviors is essential for the development of actionable conservation solutions. Zoos and aquariums may be some of the only places where many people can explore their relations with wild animals and proenvironmental behaviors. Using a moderated‐mediation analysis of a survey of U.S. zoo and aquarium visitors (n = 3588), we explored the relationship between the sense of connection to animals and self‐reported engagement in proenvironmental behaviors related to climate change and how this relationship is affected by certainty that climate change is happening, level of concern about climate change, and perceptions of effectiveness in personally addressing climate change. We found a significant, directional relationship between sense of connection to animals and self‐reported proenvironmental behaviors. Political inclination within the conservative to liberal spectrum did not affect the relationship. We conclude that a personal sense of connection to animals may provide a foundation for educational and communication strategies to enhance involvement in proenvironmental actions.     

Effectiveness of multiple release sites in reintroduction of Persian fallow deer

Releasing animals in more than one location may increase or decrease the probability of success of a reintroduction project, yet the question of how many release sites to use has received little attention. We used empirical data from the reintroduction program of the Persian fallow deer (Dama mesopotamica) (Galilee region in northern Israel) in an individual-based spatially explicit simulation model to assess the effects of releasing deer from multiple sites. We examined whether multiple release sites increase reintroduction success, and if so, whether the optimal number of sites for a given scenario can be determined and whether the outcome differs if animals are released alternately (i.e., the location of the release alternates yearly between sites) or consecutively (i.e., one release site is used for several years, then another is used, and so forth). We selected 8 potential release sites in addition to the original site and simulated the release of 180 individuals at a rate of 10 individuals per year in different combinations of the original site and 1-4 additional sites. In our model, releasing animals into the wild at multiple sites produced higher population growth and greater spatial expansion than releasing animals at only one site and a consecutive-release approach was superior to an alternate-release approach. We suggest that through the use of simulation modeling that is based on empirical data from previous releases, managers can make better-informed decisions regarding the use of multiple release sites and greatly improve the probability of reintroduction success.     

The Ability of Landowners and Their Cooperatives to Leverage Payments Greater Than Opportunity Costs from Conservation Contracts

In negotiations over land‐right acquisitions, landowners have an informational advantage over conservation groups because they know more about the opportunity costs of conservation measures on their sites. This advantage creates the possibility that landowners will demand payments greater than the required minimum, where this minimum required payment is known as the landowner's willingness to accept (WTA). However, in recent studies of conservation costs, researchers have assumed landowners will accept conservation with minimum payments. We investigated the ability of landowners to demand payments above their WTA when a conservation group has identified multiple sites for protection. First, we estimated the maximum payment landowners could potentially demand, which is set when groups of landowners act as a cooperative. Next, through the simulation of conservation auctions, we explored the amount of money above landowners’ WTA (i.e., surplus) that conservation groups could cede to secure conservation agreements, again investigating the influence of landowner cooperatives. The simulations showed the informational advantage landowners held could make conservation investments up to 42% more expensive than suggested by the site WTAs. Moreover, all auctions resulted in landowners obtaining payments greater than their WTA; thus, it may be unrealistic to assume landowners will accept conservation contracts with minimum payments. Of particular significance for species conservation, conservation objectives focused on overall species richness, which therefore recognize site complementarity, create an incentive for landowners to form cooperatives to capture surplus. To the contrary, objectives in which sites are substitutes, such as the maximization of species occurrences, create a disincentive for cooperative formation. La Habilidad de Propietarios y Sus Cooperativas para Implementar Pagos Mayores que los Costos de Oportunidad en Contratos de Conservación     

Effects of Harvesting Flowers from Shrubs on the Persistence and Abundance of Wild Shrub Populations at Multiple Spatial Extents

Abstract: Wildflower harvesting is an economically important activity of which the ecological effects are poorly understood. We assessed how harvesting of flowers affects shrub persistence and abundance at multiple spatial extents. To this end, we built a process‐based model to examine the mean persistence and abundance of wild shrubs whose flowers are subject to harvest (serotinous Proteaceae in the South African Cape Floristic Region). First, we conducted a general sensitivity analysis of how harvesting affects persistence and abundance at nested spatial extents. For most spatial extents and combinations of demographic parameters, persistence and abundance of flowering shrubs decreased abruptly once harvesting rate exceeded a certain threshold. At larger extents, metapopulations supported higher harvesting rates before their persistence and abundance decreased, but persistence and abundance also decreased more abruptly due to harvesting than at smaller extents. This threshold rate of harvest varied with species’ dispersal ability, maximum reproductive rate, adult mortality, probability of extirpation or local extinction, strength of Allee effects, and carrying capacity. Moreover, spatial extent interacted with Allee effects and probability of extirpation because both these demographic properties affected the response of local populations to harvesting more strongly than they affected the response of metapopulations. Subsequently, we simulated the effects of harvesting on three Cape Floristic Region Proteaceae species and found that these species reacted differently to harvesting, but their persistence and abundance decreased at low rates of harvest. Our estimates of harvesting rates at maximum sustainable yield differed from those of previous investigations, perhaps because researchers used different estimates of demographic parameters, models of population dynamics, and spatial extent than we did. Good demographic knowledge and careful identification of the spatial extent of interest increases confidence in assessments and monitoring of the effects of harvesting. Our general sensitivity analysis improved understanding of harvesting effects on metapopulation dynamics and allowed qualitative assessment of the probability of extirpation of poorly studied species.     

A Comparison of Global Conservation Prioritization Models with Spatial Spending Patterns of Conservation Nongovernmental Organizations

Abstract: In recent decades, various conservation organizations have developed models to prioritize locations for conservation. Through a survey of the spending patterns of 281 conservation nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), we examined the relation between 2 such models and spatial patterns of spending by conservation NGOs in 44 countries in sub‐Saharan Africa. We tested whether, at the country level, the proportion of a country designated as a conservation priority was correlated with where NGOs spent money. For one model (the combination of Conservation International's hotspots and High Biodiversity Wilderness Areas, which are areas of high endemism with high or low levels of vegetation loss respectively), there was no relation between the proportion of a country designated as a priority and levels of NGO spending, including by the NGO associated with the model. In the second model (Global 200), the proportion of a country designated as a priority and the amount of money spent by NGOs were significantly and positively related. Less money was spent in countries in northern and western sub‐Saharan Africa than countries in southern and eastern Africa, relative to the proportion of the country designated as a conservation priority. We suggest that on the basis of our results some NGOs consider increasing their spending on the areas designated as of conservation priority which are currently relatively underfunded, although there are economic, political, cultural, historical, biological, and practical reasons why current spending patterns may not align with priority sites.