Developing Metapopulation Connectivity Criteria from Genetic and Habitat Data to Recover the Endangered Mexican Wolf

Restoring connectivity between fragmented populations is an important tool for alleviating genetic threats to endangered species. Yet recovery plans typically lack quantitative criteria for ensuring such population connectivity. We demonstrate how models that integrate habitat, genetic, and demographic data can be used to develop connectivity criteria for the endangered Mexican wolf (Canis lupus baileyi), which is currently being restored to the wild from a captive population descended from 7 founders. We used population viability analysis that incorporated pedigree data to evaluate the relation between connectivity and persistence for a restored Mexican wolf metapopulation of 3 populations of equal size. Decreasing dispersal rates greatly increased extinction risk for small populations (<150–200), especially as dispersal rates dropped below 0.5 genetically effective migrants per generation. We compared observed migration rates in the Northern Rocky Mountains (NRM) wolf metapopulation to 2 habitat‐based effective distance metrics, least‐cost and resistance distance. We then used effective distance between potential primary core populations in a restored Mexican wolf metapopulation to evaluate potential dispersal rates. Although potential connectivity was lower in the Mexican wolf versus the NRM wolf metapopulation, a connectivity rate of >0.5 genetically effective migrants per generation may be achievable via natural dispersal under current landscape conditions. When sufficient data are available, these methods allow planners to move beyond general aspirational connectivity goals or rules of thumb to develop objective and measurable connectivity criteria that more effectively support species recovery. The shift from simple connectivity rules of thumb to species‐specific analyses parallels the previous shift from general minimum‐viable‐population thresholds to detailed viability modeling in endangered species recovery planning. Desarrollo de Criterios de Conectividad Metapoblacional a Partir de Datos Genéticos y de Hábitat para Recuperar al Lobo Mexicano en Peligro de Extinción     

A Guide to Understanding Social Science Research for Natural Scientists

Natural scientists are increasingly interested in social research because they recognize that conservation problems are commonly social problems. Interpreting social research, however, requires at least a basic understanding of the philosophical principles and theoretical assumptions of the discipline, which are embedded in the design of social research. Natural scientists who engage in social science but are unfamiliar with these principles and assumptions can misinterpret their results. We developed a guide to assist natural scientists in understanding the philosophical basis of social science to support the meaningful interpretation of social research outcomes. The 3 fundamental elements of research are ontology, what exists in the human world that researchers can acquire knowledge about; epistemology, how knowledge is created; and philosophical perspective, the philosophical orientation of the researcher that guides her or his action. Many elements of the guide also apply to the natural sciences. Natural scientists can use the guide to assist them in interpreting social science research to determine how the ontological position of the researcher can influence the nature of the research; how the epistemological position can be used to support the legitimacy of different types of knowledge; and how philosophical perspective can shape the researcher's choice of methods and affect interpretation, communication, and application of results. The use of this guide can also support and promote the effective integration of the natural and social sciences to generate more insightful and relevant conservation research outcomes. Una Guía para Entender la Investigación de Ciencias Sociales para las Ciencias Naturales Katie Moon     

Defining and Evaluating the Umbrella Species Concept for Conserving and Restoring Landscape Connectivity

Conserving or restoring landscape connectivity between patches of breeding habitat is a common strategy to protect threatened species from habitat fragmentation. By managing connectivity for some species, usually charismatic vertebrates, it is often assumed that these species will serve as conservation umbrellas for other species. We tested this assumption by developing a quantitative method to measure overlap in dispersal habitat of 3 threatened species—a bird (the umbrella), a butterfly, and a frog—inhabiting the same fragmented landscape. Dispersal habitat was determined with Circuitscape, which was parameterized with movement data collected for each species. Despite differences in natural history and breeding habitat, we found substantial overlap in the spatial distributions of areas important for dispersal of this suite of taxa. However, the intuitive umbrella species (the bird) did not have the highest overlap with other species in terms of the areas that supported connectivity. Nevertheless, we contend that when there are no irreconcilable differences between the dispersal habitats of species that cohabitate on the landscape, managing for umbrella species can help conserve or restore connectivity simultaneously for multiple threatened species with different habitat requirements. Definición y Evaluación del Concepto de Especie Paraguas para Conservar y Restaurar la Conectividad de Paisajes     

Spatial Patterns of Breeding Success of Grizzly Bears Derived from Hierarchical Multistate Models

Conservation programs often manage populations indirectly through the landscapes in which they live. Empirically, linking reproductive success with landscape structure and anthropogenic change is a first step in understanding and managing the spatial mechanisms that affect reproduction, but this link is not sufficiently informed by data. Hierarchical multistate occupancy models can forge these links by estimating spatial patterns of reproductive success across landscapes. To illustrate, we surveyed the occurrence of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in the Canadian Rocky Mountains Alberta, Canada. We deployed camera traps for 6 weeks at 54 surveys sites in different types of land cover. We used hierarchical multistate occupancy models to estimate probability of detection, grizzly bear occupancy, and probability of reproductive success at each site. Grizzly bear occupancy varied among cover types and was greater in herbaceous alpine ecotones than in low‐elevation wetlands or mid‐elevation conifer forests. The conditional probability of reproductive success given grizzly bear occupancy was 30% (SE = 0.14). Grizzly bears with cubs had a higher probability of detection than grizzly bears without cubs, but sites were correctly classified as being occupied by breeding females 49% of the time based on raw data and thus would have been underestimated by half. Repeated surveys and multistate modeling reduced the probability of misclassifying sites occupied by breeders as unoccupied to <2%. The probability of breeding grizzly bear occupancy varied across the landscape. Those patches with highest probabilities of breeding occupancy—herbaceous alpine ecotones—were small and highly dispersed and are projected to shrink as treelines advance due to climate warming. Understanding spatial correlates in breeding distribution is a key requirement for species conservation in the face of climate change and can help identify priorities for landscape management and protection. Patrones Espaciales del Éxito Reproductivo de Osos Pardos, Derivados de Modelos Jerárquicos Multi‐Estado     

Archaeological Evidence of Validity of Fish Populations on Unexploited Reefs as Proxy Targets for Modern Populations

Reef‐fish management and conservation is hindered by a lack of information on fish populations prior to large‐scale contemporary human impacts. As a result, relatively pristine sites are often used as conservation baselines for populations near sites affected by humans. This space‐for‐time approach can only be validated by sampling assemblages through time. We used archaeological remains to evaluate whether the remote, uninhabited Northwestern Hawaiian Islands (NWHI) might provide a reasonable proxy for a lightly exploited baseline in the Main Hawaiian Islands (MHI). We used molecular and morphological techniques to describe the taxonomic and size composition of the scarine parrotfish catches present in 2 archaeological assemblages from the MHI, compared metrics of these catches with modern estimates of reproductive parameters to evaluate whether catches represented by the archaeological material were consistent with sustainable fishing, and evaluated overlap between size structures represented by the archaeological material and modern survey data from the MHI and the NWHI to assess whether a space‐for‐time substitution is reasonable. The parrotfish catches represented by archaeological remains were consistent with sustainable fishing because they were dominated by large, mature individuals whose average size remained stable from prehistoric (AD approximately 1400–1700) through historic (AD 1700–1960) periods. The ancient catches were unlike populations in the MHI today. Overlap between the size structure of ancient MHI catches and modern survey data from the NWHI or the MHI was an order of magnitude greater for the NWHI comparison, a result that supports the validity of using the NWHI parrotfish data as a proxy for the MHI before accelerated, heavy human impacts in modern times. Evidencia Arqueológica de la Validez de Poblaciones de Peces en Arrecifes Sin Explotar como Objetivos de Apoderamiento para Poblaciones Actuales     

Using empirical models of species colonization under multiple threatening processes to identify complementary threat‐mitigation strategies

Approaches to prioritize conservation actions are gaining popularity. However, limited empirical evidence exists on which species might benefit most from threat mitigation and on what combination of threats, if mitigated simultaneously, would result in the best outcomes for biodiversity. We devised a way to prioritize threat mitigation at a regional scale with empirical evidence based on predicted changes to population dynamics—information that is lacking in most threat‐management prioritization frameworks that rely on expert elicitation. We used dynamic occupancy models to investigate the effects of multiple threats (tree cover, grazing, and presence of an hyperaggressive competitor, the Noisy Miner (Manorina melanocephala) on bird‐population dynamics in an endangered woodland community in southeastern Australia. The 3 threatening processes had different effects on different species. We used predicted patch‐colonization probabilities to estimate the benefit to each species of removing one or more threats. We then determined the complementary set of threat‐mitigation strategies that maximized colonization of all species while ensuring that redundant actions with little benefit were avoided. The single action that resulted in the highest colonization was increasing tree cover, which increased patch colonization by 5% and 11% on average across all species and for declining species, respectively. Combining Noisy Miner control with increasing tree cover increased species colonization by 10% and 19% on average for all species and for declining species respectively, and was a higher priority than changing grazing regimes. Guidance for prioritizing threat mitigation is critical in the face of cumulative threatening processes. By incorporating population dynamics in prioritization of threat management, our approach helps ensure funding is not wasted on ineffective management programs that target the wrong threats or species.     

Cost‐effectiveness of conservation payment schemes for species with different range sizes

Payments to compensate landowners for carrying out costly land‐use measures that benefit endangered biodiversity have become an important policy instrument. When designing such payments, it is important to take into account that spatially connected habitats are more valuable for many species than isolated ones. One way to incentivize provision of connected habitats is to offer landowners an agglomeration bonus, that is, a bonus on top of payments they are receiving to conserve land if the land is spatially connected. Researchers have compared the cost‐effectiveness of the agglomeration bonus with 2 alternatives: an all‐or‐nothing, agglomeration payment, where landowners receive a payment only if the conserved land parcels have a certain level of spatial connectivity, and a spatially homogeneous payment, where landowners receive a payment for conserved land parcels irrespective of their location. Their results show the agglomeration bonus is rarely the most cost‐effective option, and when it is, it is only slightly better than one of the alternatives. This suggests that the agglomeration bonus should not be given priority as a policy design option. However, this finding is based on consideration of only 1 species. We examined whether the same applied to 2 species, one for which the homogeneous payment is best and the other for which the agglomeration payment is most cost‐effective. We modified a published conceptual model so that we were able to assess the cost‐effectiveness of payment schemes for 2 species and applied it to a grassland bird and a grassland butterfly in Germany that require the same habitat but have different spatial‐connectivity needs. When conserving both species, the agglomeration bonus was more cost‐effective than the agglomeration and the homogeneous payment; thus, we showed that as a policy the agglomeration bonus is a useful conservation‐payment option.     

Integration of ecological–biological thresholds in conservation decision making

In the Anthropocene, coupled human and natural systems dominate and only a few natural systems remain relatively unaffected by human influence. On the one hand, conservation criteria based on areas of minimal human impact are not relevant to much of the biosphere. On the other hand, conservation criteria based on economic factors are problematic with respect to their ability to arrive at operational indicators of well‐being that can be applied in practice over multiple generations. Coupled human and natural systems are subject to economic development which, under current management structures, tends to affect natural systems and cross planetary boundaries. Hence, designing and applying conservation criteria applicable in real‐world systems where human and natural systems need to interact and sustainably coexist is essential. By recognizing the criticality of satisfying basic needs as well as the great uncertainty over the needs and preferences of future generations, we sought to incorporate conservation criteria based on minimal human impact into economic evaluation. These criteria require the conservation of environmental conditions such that the opportunity for intergenerational welfare optimization is maintained. Toward this end, we propose the integration of ecological–biological thresholds into decision making and use as an example the planetary‐boundaries approach. Both conservation scientists and economists must be involved in defining operational ecological–biological thresholds that can be incorporated into economic thinking and reflect the objectives of conservation, sustainability, and intergenerational welfare optimization.     

Environmental cost of using poor decision metrics to prioritize environmental projects

Conservation decision makers commonly use project‐scoring metrics that are inconsistent with theory on optimal ranking of projects. As a result, there may often be a loss of environmental benefits. We estimated the magnitudes of these losses for various metrics that deviate from theory in ways that are common in practice. These metrics included cases where relevant variables were omitted from the benefits metric, project costs were omitted, and benefits were calculated using a faulty functional form. We estimated distributions of parameters from 129 environmental projects from Australia, New Zealand, and Italy for which detailed analyses had been completed previously. The cost of using poor prioritization metrics (in terms of lost environmental values) was often high—up to 80% in the scenarios we examined. The cost in percentage terms was greater when the budget was smaller. The most costly errors were omitting information about environmental values (up to 31% loss of environmental values), omitting project costs (up to 35% loss), omitting the effectiveness of management actions (up to 9% loss), and using a weighted‐additive decision metric for variables that should be multiplied (up to 23% loss). The latter 3 are errors that occur commonly in real‐world decision metrics, in combination often reducing potential benefits from conservation investments by 30–50%. Uncertainty about parameter values also reduced the benefits from investments in conservation projects but often not by as much as faulty prioritization metrics.     

Credibility and advocacy in conservation science

Conservation policy sits at the nexus of natural science and politics. On the one hand, conservation scientists strive to maintain scientific credibility by emphasizing that their research findings are the result of disinterested observations of reality. On the other hand, conservation scientists are committed to conservation even if they do not advocate a particular policy. The professional conservation literature offers guidance on negotiating the relationship between scientific objectivity and political advocacy without damaging conservation science's credibility. The value of this guidance, however, may be restricted by limited recognition of credibility's multidimensionality and emergent nature: it emerges through perceptions of expertise, goodwill, and trustworthiness. We used content analysis of the literature to determine how credibility is framed in conservation science as it relates to apparent contradictions between science and advocacy. Credibility typically was framed as a static entity lacking dimensionality. Authors identified expertise or trustworthiness as important, but rarely mentioned goodwill. They usually did not identify expertise, goodwill, or trustworthiness as dimensions of credibility or recognize interactions among these 3 dimensions of credibility. This oversimplification may limit the ability of conservation scientists to contribute to biodiversity conservation. Accounting for the emergent quality and multidimensionality of credibility should enable conservation scientists to advance biodiversity conservation more effectively.