Quantitative Determination of Rarity of Freshwater Fishes and Implications for Imperiled‐Species Designations

Abstract: Conserving rare species and protecting biodiversity and ecosystem functioning depends on sound information on the nature of rarity. Rarity is multidimensional and has a variety of definitions, which presents the need for a quantitative classification scheme with which to categorize species as rare or common. We constructed such a classification for North American freshwater fishes to better describe rarity in fishes and provide researchers and managers with a tool to streamline conservation efforts. We used data on range extents, habitat specificities, and local population sizes of North American freshwater fishes and a variety of quantitative methods and statistical decision criteria, including quantile regression and a cost‐function algorithm to determine thresholds for categorizing a species as rare or common. Species fell into eight groups that conform to an established framework for rarity. Fishes listed by the American Fisheries Society (AFS) as endangered, threatened, or vulnerable were most often rare because their local population sizes were low, ranges were small, and they had specific habitat needs, in that order, whereas unlisted species were most often considered common on the basis of these three factors. Species with large ranges generally had few specific habitat needs, whereas those with small ranges tended to have narrow habitat specificities. We identified 30 species not designated as imperiled by AFS that were rare along all dimensions of rarity and may warrant further study or protection, and we found three designated species that were common along all dimensions and may require a review of their imperilment status. Our approach could be applied to other taxa to aid conservation decisions and serve as a useful tool for future revisions of listings of fish species.     

Devising Local Sustainable Development Indicators: from technical issues to bureaucratic stakes. The Greater Lyons experience

The paper will draw on the experience of Greater Lyons (France) in the development and implementation of air quality indicators in the framework of an environmental monitoring body, created in 1992. The analysis shows a patent discrepancy between the strength of the political support enjoyed by the monitoring body at its creation and its gradual confinement within the administrative structure of Greater Lyons. In fact, developing and using indicators raises not only technical issues but also political and bureaucratic stakes. The experience provides food for thought as regards the emergence of sustainable development issues within large and complex structures such as that of Greater Lyons. The paper points out that if indicators are hybrid objects, monitoring bodies, which are supposed to devise and promote them, are hybrid as well: their management, in terms of aims, means and position within the administrative body, is at least as important as their so-called ‘technical’ function.