Use of structured expert judgment to forecast invasions by bighead and silver carp in Lake Erie

Identifying which nonindigenous species will become invasive and forecasting the damage they will cause is difficult and presents a significant problem for natural resource management. Often, the data or resources necessary for ecological risk assessment are incomplete or absent, leaving environmental decision makers ill equipped to effectively manage valuable natural resources. Structured expert judgment (SEJ) is a mathematical and performance‐based method of eliciting, weighting, and aggregating expert judgments. In contrast to other methods of eliciting and aggregating expert judgments (where, for example, equal weights may be assigned to experts), SEJ weights each expert on the basis of his or her statistical accuracy and informativeness through performance measurement on a set of calibration variables. We used SEJ to forecast impacts of nonindigenous Asian carp (Hypophthalmichthys spp.) in Lake Erie, where it is believed not to be established. Experts quantified Asian carp biomass, production, and consumption and their impact on 4 fish species if Asian carp were to become established. According to experts, in Lake Erie Asian carp have the potential to achieve biomass levels that are similar to the sum of biomasses for several fishes that are harvested commercially or recreationally. However, the impact of Asian carp on the biomass of these fishes was estimated by experts to be small, relative to long term average biomasses, with little uncertainty. Impacts of Asian carp in tributaries and on recreational activities, water quality, or other species were not addressed. SEJ can be used to quantify key uncertainties of invasion biology and also provide a decision‐support tool when the necessary information for natural resource management and policy is not available. El Uso de Juicio Experto Estructurado para Predecir Invasiones de Carpas Asiáticas en el Lago Erie     

Resolving whether botanic gardens are on the road to conservation or a pathway for plant invasions

A global conservation goal is to understand the pathways through which invasive species are introduced into new regions. Botanic gardens are a pathway for the introduction of invasive non‐native plants, but a quantitative assessment of the risks they pose has not been performed. I analyzed data on the living collections of over 3000 botanic gardens worldwide to quantify the temporal trend in the representation of non‐native species; the relative composition of threatened, ornamental, or invasive non‐native plant species; and the frequency with which botanic gardens implement procedures to address invasive species. While almost all of the world's worst invasive non‐native plants occurred in one or more living collections (99%), less than one‐quarter of red‐listed threatened species were cultivated (23%). Even when cultivated, individual threatened species occurred in few living collections (7.3), while non‐native species were on average grown in 6 times as many botanic gardens (44.3). As a result, a botanic garden could, on average, cultivate four times as many invasive non‐native species (20) as red‐listed threatened species (5). Although the risk posed by a single living collection is small, the probability of invasion increases with the number of botanic gardens within a region. Thus, while both the size of living collections and the proportion of non‐native species cultivated have declined during the 20th century, this reduction in risk is offset by the 10‐fold increase in the number of botanic gardens established worldwide. Unfortunately, botanic gardens rarely implement regional codes of conduct to prevent plant invasions, few have an invasive species policy, and there is limited monitoring of garden escapes. This lack of preparedness is of particular concern given the rapid increase in living collections worldwide since 1950, particularly in South America and Asia, and highlights past patterns of introduction will be a poor guide to determining future invasion risks.     

Mapping epistemic cultures and learning potential of participants in citizen science projects

The ever‐widening scope and range of global change and interconnected systemic risks arising from people–environment relationships (social‐ecological risks) appears to be increasing concern among, and involvement of, citizens in an increasingly diversified number of citizen science projects responding to these risks. We examined the relationship between epistemic cultures in citizen science projects and learning potential related to matters of concern. We then developed a typology of purposes and a citizen science epistemic‐cultures heuristic and mapped 56 projects in southern Africa using this framework. The purpose typology represents the range of knowledge‐production purposes, ranging from laboratory science to social learning, whereas the epistemic‐cultures typology is a relational representation of scientist and citizen participation and their approach to knowledge production. Results showed an iterative relationship between matters of fact and matters of concern across the projects; the nexus of citizens’ engagement in knowledge‐production activities varied. The knowledge‐production purposes informed and shaped the epistemic cultures of all the sampled citizen science projects, which in turn influenced the potential for learning within each project. Through a historical review of 3 phases in a long‐term river health‐monitoring project, we found that it is possible to evolve the learning curve of citizen science projects. This evolution involved the development of scientific water monitoring tools, the parallel development of pedagogic practices supporting monitoring activities, and situated engagement around matters of concern within social activism leading to learning‐led change. We conclude that such evolutionary processes serve to increase potential for learning and are necessary if citizen science is to contribute to wider restructuring of the epistemic culture of science under conditions of expanding social‐ecological risk.     

Understanding public perceptions of risk regarding outdoor pet cats to inform conservation action

Free‐ranging domestic cats (Felis catus) incur and impose risks on ecosystems and represent a complex issue of critical importance to biodiversity conservation and cat and human health globally. Prior social science research on this topic is limited and has emphasized feral cats even though owned cats often comprise a large proportion of the outdoor cat population, particularly in urban areas. To address this gap, we examined public risk perceptions and attitudes toward outdoor pet cats across varying levels of urbanization, including along the wildland–urban interface, in Colorado (U.S.A.), through a mail survey of 1397 residents. Residents did not view all types of risks uniformly. They viewed risks of cat predation on wildlife and carnivore predation on cats as more likely than disease‐related risks. Additionally, risk perceptions were related to attitudes, prior experiences with cats and cat–wildlife interactions, and cat‐owner behavior. Our findings suggest that changes in risk perceptions may result in behavior change. Therefore, knowledge of cat‐related risk perceptions and attitudes could be used to develop communication programs aimed at promoting risk‐aversive behaviors among cat owners and cat‐management strategies that are acceptable to the public and that directly advance the conservation of native species.     

Using expert knowledge to support Endangered Species Act decision-making for data-deficient species

Many questions relevant to conservation decision-making are characterized by extreme uncertainty due to lack of empirical data and complexity of the underlying ecologic processes, leading to a rapid increase in the use of structured protocols to elicit expert knowledge. Published ecologic applications often employ a modified Delphi method, where experts provide judgments anonymously and mathematical aggregation techniques are used to combine judgments. The Sheffield elicitation framework (SHELF) differs in its behavioral approach to synthesizing individual judgments into a fully specified probability distribution for an unknown quantity. We used the SHELF protocol remotely to assess extinction risk of three subterranean aquatic species that are being considered for listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. We provided experts an empirical threat assessment for each known locality over a video conference and recorded judgments on the probability of population persistence over four generations with online submission forms and R-shiny apps available through the SHELF package. Despite large uncertainty for all populations, there were key differences between species’ risk of extirpation based on spatial variation in dominant threats, local land use and management practices, and species’ microhabitat. The resulting probability distributions provided decision makers with a full picture of uncertainty that was consistent with the probabilistic nature of risk assessments. Discussion among experts during SHELF's behavioral aggregation stage clearly documented dominant threats (e.g., development, timber harvest, animal agriculture, and cave visitation) and their interactions with local cave geology and species’ habitat. Our virtual implementation of the SHELF protocol demonstrated the flexibility of the approach for conservation applications operating on budgets and time lines that can limit in-person meetings of geographically dispersed experts.     

Bridging gaps in demographic analysis with phylogenetic imputation

Phylogenetically informed imputation methods have rarely been applied to estimate missing values in demographic data but may be a powerful tool for reconstructing vital rates of survival, maturation, and fecundity for species of conservation concern. Imputed vital rates could be used to parameterize demographic models to explore how populations respond when vital rates are perturbed. We used standardized vital rate estimates for 50 bird species to assess the use of phylogenetic imputation to fill gaps in demographic data. We calculated imputation accuracy for vital rates of focal species excluded from the data set either singly or in combination and with and without phylogeny, body mass, and life-history trait data. We used imputed vital rates to calculate demographic metrics, including generation time, to validate the use of imputation in demographic analyses. Covariance among vital rates and other trait data provided a strong basis to guide imputation of missing vital rates in birds, even in the absence of phylogenetic information. Mean NRMSE for null and phylogenetic models differed by <0.01 except when no vital rates were available or for vital rates with high phylogenetic signal (Pagel's λ > 0.8). In these cases, including body mass and life-history trait data compensated for lack of phylogenetic information: mean normalized root mean square error (NRMSE) for null and phylogenetic models differed by <0.01 for adult survival and <0.04 for maturation rate. Estimates of demographic metrics were sensitive to the accuracy of imputed vital rates. For example, mean error in generation time doubled in response to inaccurate estimates of maturation time. Accurate demographic data and metrics, such as generation time, are needed to inform conservation planning processes, for example through International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List assessments and population viability analysis. Imputed vital rates could be useful in this context but, as for any estimated model parameters, awareness of the sensitivities of demographic model outputs to the imputed vital rates is essential.     

青海湖生态系统健康评价

生态系统健康是一个新概念。对湖泊生态系统来说，目前尚没有统一的评价指标和评价方法。利用Xu等(1999)提出的指标体系对青海湖1988—1989年的生态系统健康状况进行评价。结果表明：青海湖生态系统健康在秋季最好，其次为夏季和春季，冬季最差。该结果客观地反映了青海湖的实际情况。     

Effect of risk aversion on prioritizing conservation projects

Conservation outcomes are uncertain. Agencies making decisions about what threat mitigation actions to take to save which species frequently face the dilemma of whether to invest in actions with high probability of success and guaranteed benefits or to choose projects with a greater risk of failure that might provide higher benefits if they succeed. The answer to this dilemma lies in the decision maker's aversion to risk—their unwillingness to accept uncertain outcomes. Little guidance exists on how risk preferences affect conservation investment priorities. Using a prioritization approach based on cost effectiveness, we compared 2 approaches: a conservative probability threshold approach that excludes investment in projects with a risk of management failure greater than a fixed level, and a variance‐discounting heuristic used in economics that explicitly accounts for risk tolerance and the probabilities of management success and failure. We applied both approaches to prioritizing projects for 700 of New Zealand's threatened species across 8303 management actions. Both decision makers’ risk tolerance and our choice of approach to dealing with risk preferences drove the prioritization solution (i.e., the species selected for management). Use of a probability threshold minimized uncertainty, but more expensive projects were selected than with variance discounting, which maximized expected benefits by selecting the management of species with higher extinction risk and higher conservation value. Explicitly incorporating risk preferences within the decision making process reduced the number of species expected to be safe from extinction because lower risk tolerance resulted in more species being excluded from management, but the approach allowed decision makers to choose a level of acceptable risk that fit with their ability to accommodate failure. We argue for transparency in risk tolerance and recommend that decision makers accept risk in an adaptive management framework to maximize benefits and avoid potential extinctions due to inefficient allocation of limited resources. El Efecto de la Aversión de Riesgo sobre la Priorización de Proyectos de Conservación     

Quantitative tools for implementing the new definition of significant portion of the range in the U.S. Endangered Species Act

In 2014, the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service announced a new policy interpretation for the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). According to the act, a species must be listed as threatened or endangered if it is determined to be threatened or endangered in a significant portion of its range (SPR). The 2014 policy seeks to provide consistency by establishing that a portion of the range should be considered significant if the associated individuals’ “removal would cause the entire species to become endangered or threatened.” We reviewed 20 quantitative techniques used to assess whether a portion of a species’ range is significant according to the new guidance. Our assessments are based on the 3R criteria—redundancy (i.e., buffering from catastrophe), resiliency (i.e., ability to withstand stochasticity), and representation (i.e., ability to evolve)—that the FWS uses to determine if a species merits listing. We identified data needs for each quantitative technique and considered which methods could be implemented given the data limitations typical of rare species. We also identified proxies for the 3Rs that may be used with limited data. To assess potential data availability, we evaluated 7 example species by accessing data in their species status assessments, which document all the information used during a listing decision. In all species, an SPR could be evaluated with at least one metric for each of the 3Rs robustly or with substantial assumptions. Resiliency assessments appeared most constrained by limited data, and many species lacked information on connectivity between subpopulations, genetic variation, and spatial variability in vital rates. These data gaps will likely make SPR assessments for species with complex life histories or that cross national boundaries difficult. Although we reviewed techniques for the ESA, other countries require identification of significant areas and could benefit from this research.     

Cost‐effective conservation of an endangered frog under uncertainty

How should managers choose among conservation options when resources are scarce and there is uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of actions? Well‐developed tools exist for prioritizing areas for one‐time and binary actions (e.g., protect vs. not protect), but methods for prioritizing incremental or ongoing actions (such as habitat creation and maintenance) remain uncommon. We devised an approach that combines metapopulation viability and cost‐effectiveness analyses to select among alternative conservation actions while accounting for uncertainty. In our study, cost‐effectiveness is the ratio between the benefit of an action and its economic cost, where benefit is the change in metapopulation viability. We applied the approach to the case of the endangered growling grass frog (Litoria raniformis), which is threatened by urban development. We extended a Bayesian model to predict metapopulation viability under 9 urbanization and management scenarios and incorporated the full probability distribution of possible outcomes for each scenario into the cost‐effectiveness analysis. This allowed us to discern between cost‐effective alternatives that were robust to uncertainty and those with a relatively high risk of failure. We found a relatively high risk of extinction following urbanization if the only action was reservation of core habitat; habitat creation actions performed better than enhancement actions; and cost‐effectiveness ranking changed depending on the consideration of uncertainty. Our results suggest that creation and maintenance of wetlands dedicated to L. raniformis is the only cost‐effective action likely to result in a sufficiently low risk of extinction. To our knowledge we are the first study to use Bayesian metapopulation viability analysis to explicitly incorporate parametric and demographic uncertainty into a cost‐effective evaluation of conservation actions. The approach offers guidance to decision makers aiming to achieve cost‐effective conservation under uncertainty.