Assessing ecological correlates of marine bird declines to inform marine conservation

Identifying drivers of ecosystem change in large marine ecosystems is central for their effective management and conservation. This is a sizable challenge, particularly in ecosystems transcending international borders, where monitoring and conservation of long‐range migratory species and their habitats are logistically and financially problematic. Here, using tools borrowed from epidemiology, we elucidated common drivers underlying species declines within a marine ecosystem, much in the way epidemiological analyses evaluate risk factors for negative health outcomes to better inform decisions. Thus, we identified ecological traits and dietary specializations associated with species declines in a community of marine predators that could be reflective of ecosystem change. To do so, we integrated count data from winter surveys collected in long‐term marine bird monitoring programs conducted throughout the Salish Sea—a transboundary large marine ecosystem in North America's Pacific Northwest. We found that decadal declines in winter counts were most prevalent among pursuit divers such as alcids (Alcidae) and grebes (Podicipedidae) that have specialized diets based on forage fish, and that wide‐ranging species without local breeding colonies were more prone to these declines. Although a combination of factors is most likely driving declines of diving forage fish specialists, we propose that changes in the availability of low‐trophic prey may be forcing wintering range shifts of diving birds in the Salish Sea. Such a synthesis of long‐term trends in a marine predator community not only provides unique insights into the types of species that are at risk of extirpation and why, but may also inform proactive conservation measures to counteract threats—information that is paramount for species‐specific and ecosystem‐wide conservation. Evaluación de las Correlaciones Ecológicas de las Declinaciones de Aves Marinas para Informar a la Conservación Marina     

Proposed Definition of Environmental Damage Illustrated by the Cases of Genetically Modified Crops and Invasive Species

Abstract: The introduction of non‐native plant species and the release of genetically modified (GM) crops can induce environmental changes at gene to ecosystem levels. Regulatory frameworks such as the Convention on Biological Diversity or the EU Deliberate Release Directive aim to prevent environmental damage but do not define the term. Although ecologists and conservationists often refer to environmental effects of GM crops or invasive species as damage, most authors do not disclose their normative assumptions or explain why some environmental impacts are regarded as detrimental and others are not. Thus far, a concise definition of environmental damage is missing and is necessary for a transparent assessment of environmental effects or risks. Therefore, we suggest defining environmental damage as a significant adverse effect on a biotic or abiotic conservation resource (i.e., a biotic or abiotic natural resource that is protected by conservational or environmental legislation) that has an impact on the value of the conservation resource, the conservation resource as an ecosystem component, or the sustainable use of the conservation resource. This definition relies on three normative assumptions: only concrete effects on a conservation resource can be damages; only adverse effects that lead to a decrease in the value of the conservation resource can be damages; and only significant adverse effects constitute damage to a conservation resource. Applying this definition within the framework of environmental risk assessment requires further normative determinations, for example, selection of a threshold to distinguish between adverse and significant adverse effects and approaches for assessing the environmental value of conservation resources. Such determinations, however, are not part of the definition of environmental damage. Rather they are part of the definition's operationalization through assessment procedures, which must be grounded in a comprehensible definition of environmental damage.     

Predictors of occupancy trend across spatial scale

Many explorations of extinction probability have had a global focus, yet it is unclear whether variables that explain the probability of extinction at large spatial extents are the same as those at small spatial extents. Thus, we used nearly annual presence-absence records for the most recent 40 years of a 110-year data set from Palenque, Mexico, an area with ongoing deforestation, to explore which of >200 species of birds have probabilities of extirpation that are likely to increase. We assessed associations between long-term trends in species presence (i.e., detection in a given year) and body size, geographic range size, diet, dependence on forest cover, taxonomy, and ecological specialization. Our response variable was the estimated slope of a weighted logistic regression for each species. We assessed the relative strength of each predictor by means of a model ranking scheme. Several variables associated with high extinction probability at global extents, such as large body size or small geographic range size, were not associated with occurrence of birds over time at our site. Body size was associated with species loss at Palenque, but occurrence trends of both very large and very small species, particularly the latter, have declined, or the species have been extirpated. We found no association between declining occurrence trend and geographic range size, yet decline correlated with whether a species depends on forest (mean occupancy trend =-0.0380, 0.0263, and 0.0186 for, respectively, species with high, intermediate, or low dependence on forest) and with complex combinations of diet and foraging strata (e.g., occurrence of canopy insectivores and terrestrial omnivores has increased, whereas occurrence of mid-level frugivores and terrestrial granivores has decreased). Our findings emphasize that analyses of local areas are necessary to explicate extirpation risk at various spatial extents.     

A global ecological signal of extinction risk in terrestrial vertebrates

To determine the distribution and causes of extinction threat across functional groups of terrestrial vertebrates, we assembled an ecological trait data set for 18,016 species of terrestrial vertebrates and utilized phylogenetic comparative methods to test which categories of habitat association, mode of locomotion, and feeding mode best predicted extinction risk. We also examined the individual categories of the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List extinction drivers (e.g., agriculture and logging) threatening each species and determined the greatest threats for each of the four terrestrial vertebrate groups. We then quantified the sum of extinction drivers threatening each species to provide a multistressor perspective on threat. Cave dwelling amphibians (p < 0.01), arboreal quadrupedal mammals (all of which are primates) (p < 0.01), aerial and scavenging birds (p < 0.01), and pedal (i.e., walking) squamates (p < 0.01) were all disproportionately threatened with extinction in comparison with the other assessed ecological traits. Across all threatened vertebrate species in the study, the most common risk factors were agriculture, threatening 4491 species, followed by logging, threatening 3187 species, and then invasive species and disease, threatening 2053 species. Species at higher risk of extinction were simultaneously at risk from a greater number of threat types. If left unabated, the disproportionate loss of species with certain functional traits and increasing anthropogenic pressures are likely to disrupt ecosystem functions globally. A shift in focus from species- to trait-centric conservation practices will allow for protection of at-risk functional diversity from regional to global scales.     

Current Constraints and Future Directions in Estimating Coextinction

Abstract: Coextinction is a poorly quantified phenomenon, but results of recent modeling suggest high losses to global biodiversity through the loss of dependent species when hosts go extinct. There are critical gaps in coextinction theory, and we outline these in a framework to direct future research toward more accurate estimates of coextinction rates. Specifically, the most critical priorities include acquisition of more accurate host data, including the threat status of host species; acquisition of data on the use of hosts by dependent species across a wide array of localities, habitats, and breadth of both hosts and dependents; development of models that incorporate correlates of nonrandom host and dependent extinctions, such as phylogeny and traits that increase extinction‐proneness; and determination of whether dependents are being lost before their hosts and adjusting models accordingly. Without synergistic development of better empirical data and more realistic models to estimate the number of cothreatened species and coextinction rates, the contribution of coextinction to global declines in biodiversity will remain unknown and unmanaged.     

Biodiversity Offsets and the Challenge of Achieving No Net Loss

Businesses, governments, and financial institutions are increasingly adopting a policy of no net loss of biodiversity for development activities. The goal of no net loss is intended to help relieve tension between conservation and development by enabling economic gains to be achieved without concomitant biodiversity losses. biodiversity offsets represent a necessary component of a much broader mitigation strategy for achieving no net loss following prior application of avoidance, minimization, and remediation measures. However, doubts have been raised about the appropriate use of biodiversity offsets. We examined what no net loss means as a desirable conservation outcome and reviewed the conditions that determine whether, and under what circumstances, biodiversity offsets can help achieve such a goal. We propose a conceptual framework to substitute the often ad hoc approaches evident in many biodiversity offset initiatives. The relevance of biodiversity offsets to no net loss rests on 2 fundamental premises. First, offsets are rarely adequate for achieving no net loss of biodiversity alone. Second, some development effects may be too difficult or risky, or even impossible, to offset. To help to deliver no net loss through biodiversity offsets, biodiversity gains must be comparable to losses, be in addition to conservation gains that may have occurred in absence of the offset, and be lasting and protected from risk of failure. Adherence to these conditions requires consideration of the wider landscape context of development and offset activities, timing of offset delivery, measurement of biodiversity, accounting procedures and rule sets used to calculate biodiversity losses and gains and guide offset design, and approaches to managing risk. Adoption of this framework will strengthen the potential for offsets to provide an ecologically defensible mechanism that can help reconcile conservation and development. Balances de Biodiversidad y el Reto de No Obtener Pérdida Neta     

A Framework for Developing Objective and Measurable Recovery Criteria for Threatened and Endangered Species

For species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service are tasked with writing recovery plans that include “objective, measurable criteria” that define when a species is no longer at risk of extinction, but neither the act itself nor agency guidelines provide an explicit definition of objective, measurable criteria. Past reviews of recovery plans, including one published in 2012, show that many criteria lack quantitative metrics with clear biological rationale and are not meeting the measureable and objective mandate. I reviewed how objective, measureable criteria have been defined implicitly and explicitly in peer‐reviewed literature, the ESA, other U.S. statutes, and legal decisions. Based on a synthesis of these sources, I propose the following 6 standards be used as minimum requirements for objective, measurable criteria: contain a quantitative threshold with calculable units, stipulate a timeframe over which they must be met, explicitly define the spatial extent or population to which they apply, specify a sampling procedure that includes sample size, specify a statistical significance level, and include justification by providing scientific evidence that the criteria define a species whose extinction risk has been reduced to the desired level. To meet these 6 standards, I suggest that recovery plans be explicitly guided by and organized around a population viability modeling framework even if data or agency resources are too limited to complete a viability model. When data and resources are available, recovery criteria can be developed from the population viability model results, but when data and resources are insufficient for model implementation, extinction risk thresholds can be used as criteria. A recovery‐planning approach centered on viability modeling will also yield appropriately focused data‐acquisition and monitoring plans and will facilitate a seamless transition from recovery planning to delisting. Un Marco de Referencia para Desarrollar Criterios de Recuperación Objetivos y Medibles para Especies Amenazadas y en Peligro     

Incorporating Climate and Ocean Change into Extinction Risk Assessments for 82 Coral Species

Many marine invertebrate species facing potential extinction have uncertain taxonomies and poorly known demographic and ecological traits. Uncertainties are compounded when potential extinction drivers are climate and ocean changes whose effects on even widespread and abundant species are only partially understood. The U.S. Endangered Species Act mandates conservation management decisions founded on the extinction risk to species based on the best available science at the time of consideration—requiring prompt action rather than awaiting better information. We developed an expert‐opinion threat‐based approach that entails a structured voting system to assess extinction risk from climate and ocean changes and other threats to 82 coral species for which population status and threat response information was limited. Such methods are urgently needed because constrained budgets and manpower will continue to hinder the availability of desired data for many potentially vulnerable marine species. Significant species‐specific information gaps and uncertainties precluded quantitative assessments of habitat loss or population declines and necessitated increased reliance on demographic characteristics and threat vulnerabilities at genus or family levels. Adapting some methods (e.g., a structured voting system) used during other assessments and developing some new approaches (e.g., integrated assessment of threats and demographic characteristics), we rated the importance of threats contributing to coral extinction risk and assessed those threats against population status and trend information to evaluate each species’ extinction risk over the 21st century. This qualitative assessment resulted in a ranking with an uncertainty range for each species according to their estimated likelihood of extinction. We offer guidance on approaches for future biological extinction risk assessments, especially in cases of data‐limited species likely to be affected by global‐scale threats. Incorporación del Cambio Climático y Oceánico en Estudios de Riesgo de Extinción para 82 Especies de Coral     

A Retrospective Evaluation of the Global Decline of Carnivores and Ungulates

Assessing temporal changes in species extinction risk is necessary for measuring conservation success or failure and for directing conservation resources toward species or regions that would benefit most. Yet, there is no long‐term picture of genuine change that allows one to associate species extinction risk trends with drivers of change or conservation actions. Through a review of 40 years of IUCN‐related literature sources on species conservation status (e.g., action plans, red‐data books), we assigned retrospective red‐list categories to the world's carnivores and ungulates (2 groups with relatively long generation times) to examine how their extinction risk has changed since the 1970s. We then aggregated species’ categories to calculate a global trend in their extinction risk over time. A decline in the conservation status of carnivores and ungulates was underway 40 years ago and has since accelerated. One quarter of all species (n = 498) moved one or more categories closer to extinction globally, while almost half of the species moved closer to extinction in Southeast Asia. The conservation status of some species improved (toward less threatened categories), but for each species that improved in status 8 deteriorated. The status of large‐bodied species, particularly those above 100 kg (including many iconic taxa), deteriorated significantly more than small‐bodied species (below 10 kg). The trends we found are likely related to geopolitical events (such as the collapse of Soviet Union), international regulations (such as CITES), shifting cultural values, and natural resource exploitation (e.g., in Southeast Asia). Retrospective assessments of global species extinction risk reduce the risk of a shifting baseline syndrome, which can affect decisions on the desirable conservation status of species. Such assessments can help conservationists identify which conservation policies and strategies are or are not helping safeguard biodiversity and thus can improve future strategies. Una Evaluación Retrospectiva de la Declinación Global de Carnívoros y Ungulados     

Assessing sensitivities of marine areas to stressors based on biological traits

Analysis of the biological traits (e.g., feeding mode and size) that control how organisms interact with their environment has been used to identify environmental drivers of, or impacts on, species and to explain the importance of biodiversity loss. Biological trait analysis (BTA) could also be used within risk-assessment frameworks or in conservation planning if one understands the groups of traits that predict the sensitivity of habitats or communities to specific human activities. Deriving sensitivities from BTA should extend sensitivity predictions to a variety of habitats, especially those in which it would be difficult to conduct experiments (e.g., due to depth or risk to human life) and to scales beyond the norm of most experiments. We used data on epibenthos, collected via video along transects at 27 sites in a relatively pristine region of the seafloor, to determine scales of natural spatial variability of derived sensitivities and the degree to which predictions of sensitivity differed among 3 stressors (extraction of species, sedimentation, and suspended sediments) or were affected by underlying community compositions. We used 3 metrics (weighted abundance, abundance of highly sensitive species, and number of highly sensitive species) to derive sensitivity to these stressors and simulated the ability of these metrics to detect a range of stressor intensities. Regardless of spatial patterns of sensitivities across the sampled area, BTA distinguished differences in sensitivity to different stressors. The BTA also successfully separated differences in community composition from differences in sensitivity to stressors. Conversely, the 3 metrics differed widely in their ability to detect simulated impacts and likely reflect underlying ecological processes, suggesting that use of multiple metrics would be informative for spatial planning and allocating conservation priorities. Our results suggest BTA could be used as a first step in strategic prioritization of protected areas and as an underlying layer for spatial planning.