Bird conservation and the land sharing-sparing continuum in farmland-dominated landscapes of lowland England

Empirical evidence from many regions suggests that most species would be least negatively affected if human food demand were met through high-yield agricultural production and conservation of nonfarm ecosystems (land sparing), rather than through wildlife-friendly farming over a larger area (land sharing). However, repeated glaciation and a long history of agriculture may lead to different results in regions such as western Europe. We compared the consequences of land sparing and land sharing on breeding bird species in 2 lowland regions of England, The Fens, with 101 species, and Salisbury Plain, with 83. We derived density–yield responses for each species and then estimated regional population size under regional food production strategies, including land sharing and land sparing, a range of intermediate strategies, and a novel mixed strategy. In both regions, more species achieved maximum regional population size under land sparing than land sharing. In The Fens, the majority of birds were loser species (estimated to have smaller populations under all food production strategies than in the preagricultural baseline scenario), whereas in Salisbury Plain the majority were winners (smaller populations in the preagricultural baseline scenario). Loser species overwhelmingly achieved maximum regional population size under land sparing, whereas winner species achieved maximum regional population size under either land sharing or an intermediate strategy, highlighting the importance of defining which groups of species are the target of conservation. A novel 3-compartment strategy (combining high-yield farming, natural habitat, and low-yield farming) often performed better than either land sharing or land sparing. Our results support intermediate or 3-compartment land-sparing strategies to maximize bird populations across lowland agricultural landscapes. To deliver conservation outcomes, any shift toward land sparing must, however, ensure yield increases are sustainable in the long term, do not entail increased negative effects on surrounding areas, and are linked to allocation of land for nature.     

When all life counts in conservation

Conservation science involves the collection and analysis of data. These scientific practices emerge from values that shape who and what is counted. Currently, conservation data are filtered through a value system that considers native life the only appropriate subject of conservation concern. We examined how trends in species richness, distribution, and threats change when all wildlife count by adding so-called non-native and feral populations to the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List and local species richness assessments. We focused on vertebrate populations with founding members taken into and out of Australia by humans (i.e., migrants). We identified 87 immigrant and 47 emigrant vertebrate species. Formal conservation accounts underestimated global ranges by an average of 30% for immigrants and 7% for emigrants; immigrations surpassed extinctions in Australia by 52 species; migrants were disproportionately threatened (33% of immigrants and 29% of emigrants were threatened or decreasing in their native ranges); and incorporating migrant populations into risk assessments reduced global threat statuses for 15 of 18 species. Australian policies defined most immigrants as pests (76%), and conservation was the most commonly stated motivation for targeting these species in killing programs (37% of immigrants). Inclusive biodiversity data open space for dialogue on the ethical and empirical assumptions underlying conservation science.     

Incorporating putatively neutral and adaptive genomic data into marine conservation planning

The availability of genomic data for an increasing number of species makes it possible to incorporate evolutionary processes into conservation plans. Recent studies show how genetic data can inform spatial conservation prioritization (SCP), but they focus on metrics of diversity and distinctness derived primarily from neutral genetic data sets. Identifying adaptive genetic markers can provide important information regarding the capacity for populations to adapt to environmental change. Yet, the effect of including metrics based on adaptive genomic data into SCP in comparison to more widely used neutral genetic metrics has not been explored. We used existing genomic data on a commercially exploited species, the giant California sea cucumber (Parastichopus californicus), to perform SCP for the coastal region of British Columbia (BC), Canada. Using a RAD-seq data set for 717 P. californicus individuals across 24 sampling locations, we identified putatively adaptive (i.e., candidate) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) based on genotype–environment associations with seafloor temperature. We calculated various metrics for both neutral and candidate SNPs and compared SCP outcomes with independent metrics and combinations of metrics. Priority areas varied depending on whether neutral or candidate SNPs were used and on the specific metric used. For example, targeting sites with a high frequency of warm-temperature-associated alleles to support persistence under future warming prioritized areas in the southern coastal region. In contrast, targeting sites with high expected heterozygosity at candidate loci to support persistence under future environmental uncertainty prioritized areas in the north. When combining metrics, all scenarios generated intermediate solutions, protecting sites that span latitudinal and thermal gradients. Our results demonstrate that distinguishing between neutral and adaptive markers can affect conservation solutions and emphasize the importance of defining objectives when choosing among various genomic metrics for SCP.     

Effects of land use,cover, and protection on stream and riparian ecosystem services and biodiversity

Protected areas are an important part of broader landscapes that are often used to preserve biodiversity or natural features. Some argue that protected areas may also help ensure provision of ecosystem services. However, the effect of protection on ecosystem services and whether protection affects the provision of ecosystem services is known only for a few services in a few types of landscapes. We sought to fill this gap by investigating the effect of watershed protection status and land use and land cover on biodiversity and the provision of ecosystem services. We compared the ecosystem services provided in and around streams in 4 watershed types: International Union for Conservation of Nature category II protected forests, unprotected forests, unprotected forests with recent timber harvesting, and unprotected areas with agriculture. We surveyed 28 streams distributed across these watershed types in Quebec, Canada, to quantify provisioning of clean water, carbon storage, recreation, wild foods, habitat quality, and terrestrial and aquatic biodiversity richness and abundance. The quantity and quality of ecosystem services and biodiversity were generally higher in sites with intact forest—whether protected or not—relative to those embedded in production landscapes with forestry or agriculture. Clean-water provision, carbon storage, habitat quality, and tree diversity were significantly higher in and around streams surrounded by forest. Recreation, wild foods, and aquatic biodiversity did not vary among watershed types. Although some services can be provided by both protected and unprotected areas, protection status may help secure the continued supply of services sensitive to changes in land use or land cover. Our findings provide needed information about the ecosystem service and biodiversity trade-offs and synergies that result from developing a watershed or from protecting it.     

The moral residue of conservation

Should conservationists use lethal management to control introduced wildlife populations? Should they kill individual animals to protect endangered species? Are trade-offs that prioritize some values at the expense of others morally appropriate? These sorts of ethical questions are common in conservation. In debating such questions, conservationists often seem to presume 1 of 2 possible answers: the act in question is right or it is wrong. But morality in conservation is considerably more complex than this simple binary suggests. A robust conservation ethic requires a vocabulary that gives voice to the uncertainty and unease that arise when what seems to be the best available course of action also seems to involve a measure of wrongdoing. The philosophical literature on moral residue and moral dilemmas supplies this vocabulary. Moral dilemmas arise when one must neglect certain moral requirements to fulfill others. Under such circumstances, even the best possible decision leaves a moral residue, which is experienced emotionally as some form of grief. Examples of conservation scenarios that leave a moral residue include management of introduced rabbits in Australia, trophy hunting in Africa, and forest management trade-offs in the Pacific Northwest. Moral residue is integral to the moral experience of conservationists today, and grief is an appropriate response to many decisions conservationists must make. Article impact statement: Defensible conservation decisions may neglect moral requirements, leaving a moral residue; conservationists should respond with grief.     

Urban wild meat consumption and trade in central Amazonia

The switch from hunting wild meat for home consumption to supplying more lucrative city markets in Amazonia can adversely affect some game species. Despite this, information on the amounts of wild meat eaten in Amazonian cities is still limited. We estimated wild meat consumption rates in 5 cities in the State of Amazonas in Brazil through 1046 door-to-door household interviews conducted from 2004 to 2012. With these data, we modeled the relationship between wild meat use and a selection of socioeconomic indices. We then scaled up our model to determine the amounts of wild meat likely to be consumed annually in the 62 urban centers in central Amazonia. A total of 80.3% of all interviewees reported consuming wild meat during an average of 29.3 (CI 11.6) days per year. Most wild meat was reported as bought in local markets (80.1%) or hunted by a family member (14.9%). Twenty-one taxa were cited as consumed, mostly mammals (71.6%), followed by reptiles (23.2%) and then birds (5.2%). The declared frequency of wild meat consumption was positively correlated with the proportion of rural population as well as with the per capita gross domestic product of the municipality (administrative divisions) where the cities were seated. We estimated that as much as 10,691 t of wild meat might be consumed annually in the 62 urban centers within central Amazonia, the equivalent of 6.49 kg per person per year. In monetary terms, this amounts to US$21.72 per person per year or US$35.1 million overall, the latter figure is comparable to fish and timber production in the region. Given this magnitude of wild meat trade in central Amazonia, it is fundamental to integrate this activity into the formal economy and actively develop policies that allow the trade of more resilient taxa and restrict trade in species sensitive to hunting.     

Using environmental and geographic data to optimize ex situ collections and preserve evolutionary potential

Maintenance of biodiversity through seed banks and botanical gardens, where the wealth of species’ genetic variation may be preserved ex situ, is a major goal of conservation. However, challenges can persist in optimizing ex situ collections if trade-offs exist among cost, effort, and conserving species evolutionary potential, particularly when genetic data are not available. We evaluated the genetic consequences of population preservation informed by geographic (isolation by distance [IBD]) and environmental (isolation by environment [IBE]) distance for ex situ collections for which population provenance is available. We used 19 genetic and genomic data sets from 15 plant species to assess the proportion of population genetic differentiation explained by geographic and environmental factors and to simulate ex situ collections prioritizing source populations based on pairwise geographic distance, environmental distance, or both. Specifically, we tested the impact prioritizing sampling based on these distances may have on the capture of neutral, functional, or putatively adaptive genetic diversity and differentiation. Individually, IBD and IBE explained limited population genetic differences across all 3 genetic marker classes (IBD, 10–16%; IBE, 1–5.5%). Together, they explained a substantial proportion of population genetic differences for functional (45%) and adaptive (71%) variation. Simulated ex situ collections revealed that inclusion of IBD, IBE, or both increased allelic diversity and genetic differentiation captured among populations, particularly for loci that may be important for adaptation. Thus, prioritizing population collections based on environmental and geographic distance data can optimize genetic variation captured ex situ. For the vast majority of plant species for which there is no genetic information, these data are invaluable to conservation because they can guide preservation of genetic variation needed to maintain evolutionary potential within collections.     

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     

Impact of conservation areas on trophic interactions between apex predators and herbivores on coral reefs

Apex predators are declining at alarming rates due to exploitation by humans, but we have yet to fully discern the impacts of apex predator loss on ecosystem function. In a management context, it is critically important to clarify the role apex predators play in structuring populations of lower trophic levels. Thus, we examined the top‐down influence of reef sharks (an apex predator on coral reefs) and mesopredators on large‐bodied herbivores. We measured the abundance, size structure, and biomass of apex predators, mesopredators, and herbivores across fished, no‐take, and no‐entry management zones in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, Australia. Shark abundance and mesopredator size and biomass were higher in no‐entry zones than in fished and no‐take zones, which indicates the viability of strictly enforced human exclusion areas as tools for the conservation of predator communities. Changes in predator populations due to protection in no‐entry zones did not have a discernible influence on the density, size, or biomass of different functional groups of herbivorous fishes. The lack of a relationship between predators and herbivores suggests that top‐down forces may not play a strong role in regulating large‐bodied herbivorous coral reef fish populations. Given this inconsistency with traditional ecological theories of trophic cascades, trophic structures on coral reefs may need to be reassessed to enable the establishment of appropriate and effective management regimes. El Impacto de las Áreas de Conservación sobre las Interacciones Tróficas entre los Depredadores Dominantes y los Herbívoros en los Arrecifes de Coral