Simon B. Z. Gorta, Alex J. Berryman, Richard T. Kingsford, Marcel Klaassen, Rohan H. Clarke
Wild birds have experienced unprecedented, near‐global mass mortalities since 2021, driven by outbreaks of high‐pathogenicity avian influenza virus (HPAIV) H5N1 lineage 2.3.4.4b. Managing this panzootic requires identification of transmission pathways. We investigated potential HPAIV transmission via kleptoparasitism (food theft) by examining the distribution, behaviors, and movements of two globally widespread and commonly kleptoparasitic seabird families: Fregatidae (frigatebirds) and Stercorariidae (skuas). These kleptoparasites force other seabirds (targets) to regurgitate food, which the kleptoparasite then ingests, potentially facilitating direct transfer of viral particles from target to kleptoparasite. Scavenging and predation probably contribute further to viral spread. Although frigatebirds use kleptoparasitism on a year‐round basis, skuas more commonly do so outside of the breeding season. Both frequently forage, disperse, or migrate across oceans and hemispheres. Dense aggregations of kleptoparasitic and target seabirds at breeding and/or roosting sites may facilitate the spread of HPAIV. In addition, the migration of these species could also facilitate broadscale geographic spread of HPAIV. Surveillance of kleptoparasites for HPAIVs could aid in early detection and may be important for seabird conservation.
{"title":"Kleptoparasitism in seabirds—A potential pathway for global avian influenza virus spread","authors":"Simon B. Z. Gorta, Alex J. Berryman, Richard T. Kingsford, Marcel Klaassen, Rohan H. Clarke","doi":"10.1111/conl.13052","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13052","url":null,"abstract":"Wild birds have experienced unprecedented, near‐global mass mortalities since 2021, driven by outbreaks of high‐pathogenicity avian influenza virus (HPAIV) H5N1 lineage 2.3.4.4b. Managing this panzootic requires identification of transmission pathways. We investigated potential HPAIV transmission via kleptoparasitism (food theft) by examining the distribution, behaviors, and movements of two globally widespread and commonly kleptoparasitic seabird families: Fregatidae (frigatebirds) and Stercorariidae (skuas). These kleptoparasites force other seabirds (targets) to regurgitate food, which the kleptoparasite then ingests, potentially facilitating direct transfer of viral particles from target to kleptoparasite. Scavenging and predation probably contribute further to viral spread. Although frigatebirds use kleptoparasitism on a year‐round basis, skuas more commonly do so outside of the breeding season. Both frequently forage, disperse, or migrate across oceans and hemispheres. Dense aggregations of kleptoparasitic and target seabirds at breeding and/or roosting sites may facilitate the spread of HPAIV. In addition, the migration of these species could also facilitate broadscale geographic spread of HPAIV. Surveillance of kleptoparasites for HPAIVs could aid in early detection and may be important for seabird conservation.","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142236632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Land use is both a major cause of the biodiversity crises and a potential solution to it. Decisions about land use are made in complex social–ecological systems, yet conservation research, policy, and practice often neglect the diverse and dynamic nature of land use. A deeper integration of land system science and conservation science provides major opportunities in this context, through a transfer of concepts, data, and methodologies. Specifically, a closer exchange between land-use data developers and users will enable common terminology and better data use, allowing to move beyond coarse land-cover representations of land use. Similarly, archetyping and regionalization approaches can help to embrace, rather than oversimplify, the diversity of land-use actors and practices. Finally, systematically linking land-use actors to portfolios of pressures on biodiversity, beyond their direct impact on habitat, can better represent and map co-occurring and interacting threats. Together, this will enable conservation policymakers and planners to recognize the often-complex and wicked nature of conservation challenges related to land, allowing for more context-specific conservation policymaking and planning, and more targeted conservation interventions.
{"title":"Moving beyond simplistic representations of land use in conservation","authors":"Tobias Kuemmerle","doi":"10.1111/conl.13055","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13055","url":null,"abstract":"Land use is both a major cause of the biodiversity crises and a potential solution to it. Decisions about land use are made in complex social–ecological systems, yet conservation research, policy, and practice often neglect the diverse and dynamic nature of land use. A deeper integration of land system science and conservation science provides major opportunities in this context, through a transfer of concepts, data, and methodologies. Specifically, a closer exchange between land-use data developers and users will enable common terminology and better data use, allowing to move beyond coarse land-cover representations of land use. Similarly, archetyping and regionalization approaches can help to embrace, rather than oversimplify, the diversity of land-use actors and practices. Finally, systematically linking land-use actors to portfolios of pressures on biodiversity, beyond their direct impact on habitat, can better represent and map co-occurring and interacting threats. Together, this will enable conservation policymakers and planners to recognize the often-complex and wicked nature of conservation challenges related to land, allowing for more context-specific conservation policymaking and planning, and more targeted conservation interventions.","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142234064","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Justine Bell-James, Rose Foster, Miguel Frohlich, Carla Archibald, Claudia Benham, Megan Evans, Pedro Fidelman, Tiffany Morrison, Liza Rolim Baggio, Peter Billings, Nicole Shumway
In many countries, complex environmental problems such as biodiversity decline are regulated at the national level by a disparate range of laws and nonstatutory policy instruments variously described by terms including plans, strategies, guidelines, statements of intent, and/or incentives. Such instruments are often grouped together by conservation policymakers and scientists under the umbrella term “policy.” However, from a legal perspective, there are critical differences between these so-called policy instruments. In this paper, we focus on what we consider to be the critical difference: whether a policy instrument is binding, and therefore whether an administrative decision (e.g., about a development proposal) can be legally challenged due to noncompliance with that policy instrument. Drawing from international examples, the aim of this paper is to give conservation policymakers and scientists the guidance needed to critically differentiate between laws and nonstatutory policy, assess current or proposed policies, and determine whether a nonstatutory instrument gives rise to binding obligations, thus allowing for decisions to be challenged before a court. In doing so, we encourage conservation scientists, policymakers, activists, and practitioners to reflect critically on what is possible and not possible when nonstatutory “policy” instruments are designed and implemented.
{"title":"Not all conservation “policy” is created equally: When does a policy give rise to legally binding obligations?","authors":"Justine Bell-James, Rose Foster, Miguel Frohlich, Carla Archibald, Claudia Benham, Megan Evans, Pedro Fidelman, Tiffany Morrison, Liza Rolim Baggio, Peter Billings, Nicole Shumway","doi":"10.1111/conl.13054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13054","url":null,"abstract":"In many countries, complex environmental problems such as biodiversity decline are regulated at the national level by a disparate range of laws and nonstatutory policy instruments variously described by terms including plans, strategies, guidelines, statements of intent, and/or incentives. Such instruments are often grouped together by conservation policymakers and scientists under the umbrella term “policy.” However, from a legal perspective, there are critical differences between these so-called policy instruments. In this paper, we focus on what we consider to be the critical difference: whether a policy instrument is binding, and therefore whether an administrative decision (e.g., about a development proposal) can be legally challenged due to noncompliance with that policy instrument. Drawing from international examples, the aim of this paper is to give conservation policymakers and scientists the guidance needed to critically differentiate between laws and nonstatutory policy, assess current or proposed policies, and determine whether a nonstatutory instrument gives rise to binding obligations, thus allowing for decisions to be challenged before a court. In doing so, we encourage conservation scientists, policymakers, activists, and practitioners to reflect critically on what is possible and not possible when nonstatutory “policy” instruments are designed and implemented.","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142198031","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Amy A. Yackel Adams, Nathan J. Hostetter, William A. Link, Sarah J. Converse
Invasive species are a major cause of biodiversity loss and are notoriously expensive and challenging to manage. We developed a decision-analytic framework for evaluating invasive species removal strategies, given objectives of maximizing eradication probability and minimizing costs. The framework uses an existing estimation model for spatially referenced removal data—one of the most accessible types of invasive species data—to obtain estimates of population growth rate, movement probability, and detection probability. We use these estimates in simulations to identify Pareto-efficient strategies—strategies where increases in eradication probability cannot be obtained without increases in cost—from a set of proposed strategies. We applied the framework post hoc to a successful eradication of veiled chameleons (Chamaeleo calyptratus) and identified the potential for substantial improvements in efficiency. Our approach provides managers and policymakers with tools to identify cost-effective strategies for a range of invasive species using only prior knowledge or data from initial physical removals.
{"title":"Identifying Pareto-efficient eradication strategies for invasive populations","authors":"Amy A. Yackel Adams, Nathan J. Hostetter, William A. Link, Sarah J. Converse","doi":"10.1111/conl.13051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13051","url":null,"abstract":"Invasive species are a major cause of biodiversity loss and are notoriously expensive and challenging to manage. We developed a decision-analytic framework for evaluating invasive species removal strategies, given objectives of maximizing eradication probability and minimizing costs. The framework uses an existing estimation model for spatially referenced removal data—one of the most accessible types of invasive species data—to obtain estimates of population growth rate, movement probability, and detection probability. We use these estimates in simulations to identify Pareto-efficient strategies—strategies where increases in eradication probability cannot be obtained without increases in cost—from a set of proposed strategies. We applied the framework post hoc to a successful eradication of veiled chameleons (<i>Chamaeleo calyptratus</i>) and identified the potential for substantial improvements in efficiency. Our approach provides managers and policymakers with tools to identify cost-effective strategies for a range of invasive species using only prior knowledge or data from initial physical removals.","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142198279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Colter A. Feuerstein, Ryan P. Kovach, Carter G. Kruse, Matt E. Jaeger, Donovan A. Bell, Zachary L. Robinson, Andrew R. Whiteley
The preservation of genetic variation is fundamental in biodiversity conservation, yet its importance for population viability remains contentious. Mixed‐source reintroductions, where individuals are translocated into a single vacant habitat from multiple genetically divergent and often depauperate populations, provide an opportunity to evaluate how genetic variation and hybridization influence individual and relative population fitness. Population genetic theory predicts that individuals with higher genetic variation and hybrids among populations should have higher fitness. We tested these two hypotheses by analyzing individual and population‐scale data for westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi) in four mixed‐source reintroductions. We observed more hybrid and fewer nonhybrid offspring than expected across four independent mixed‐source reintroductions. We also found clear evidence that heterozygosity influenced individual reproductive and relative population fitness. Overall, we found a strong, positive relationship between genetic variation, hybridization, and transplant fitness, emphasizing the importance of genetic variation and population mixing in conservation.
{"title":"Genetic variation and hybridization determine the outcomes of conservation reintroductions","authors":"Colter A. Feuerstein, Ryan P. Kovach, Carter G. Kruse, Matt E. Jaeger, Donovan A. Bell, Zachary L. Robinson, Andrew R. Whiteley","doi":"10.1111/conl.13049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13049","url":null,"abstract":"The preservation of genetic variation is fundamental in biodiversity conservation, yet its importance for population viability remains contentious. Mixed‐source reintroductions, where individuals are translocated into a single vacant habitat from multiple genetically divergent and often depauperate populations, provide an opportunity to evaluate how genetic variation and hybridization influence individual and relative population fitness. Population genetic theory predicts that individuals with higher genetic variation and hybrids among populations should have higher fitness. We tested these two hypotheses by analyzing individual and population‐scale data for westslope cutthroat trout (<jats:italic>Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi</jats:italic>) in four mixed‐source reintroductions. We observed more hybrid and fewer nonhybrid offspring than expected across four independent mixed‐source reintroductions. We also found clear evidence that heterozygosity influenced individual reproductive and relative population fitness. Overall, we found a strong, positive relationship between genetic variation, hybridization, and transplant fitness, emphasizing the importance of genetic variation and population mixing in conservation.","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142138422","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nicole Kaechele, Rachelle Beveridge, Megan Adams, Paul Boyce, Kyle Artelle
Rigorous scientific practice relies on the tenet of transparency. However, despite regular transparency in areas such as data availability and methodological practice, the influence of personal and professional values in research design and dissemination is often not disclosed or discussed in conservation science. Conservation scientists are increasingly driven to work in collaboration with communities where their work takes place, which raises important questions about the research process, especially as the field remains largely represented by a Western scientific worldview. The process of reflexivity, and the creation of positionality statements as one form of a reflexive practice, is an important component of transparency, rigor, and best practice in contemporary conservation science. In our own professional practices, however, we have found that guidance on how to produce positionality statements and maintain reflexivity throughout the lifecycle of research is too often lacking. In response, we build on existing literature and our own experience to offer a primer as a starting point to the practice of reflexivity. Rather than being prescriptive, we seek to demonstrate flexible approaches that researchers may consider when communicating reflexive practice to enhance research transparency. We explore the challenges and potential pitfalls in a reflexive practice and offer considerations and advice based on our collective professional experience.
{"title":"A primer for the practice of reflexivity in conservation science","authors":"Nicole Kaechele, Rachelle Beveridge, Megan Adams, Paul Boyce, Kyle Artelle","doi":"10.1111/conl.13047","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13047","url":null,"abstract":"Rigorous scientific practice relies on the tenet of transparency. However, despite regular transparency in areas such as data availability and methodological practice, the influence of personal and professional values in research design and dissemination is often not disclosed or discussed in conservation science. Conservation scientists are increasingly driven to work in collaboration with communities where their work takes place, which raises important questions about the research process, especially as the field remains largely represented by a Western scientific worldview. The process of reflexivity, and the creation of positionality statements as one form of a reflexive practice, is an important component of transparency, rigor, and best practice in contemporary conservation science. In our own professional practices, however, we have found that guidance on how to produce positionality statements and maintain reflexivity throughout the lifecycle of research is too often lacking. In response, we build on existing literature and our own experience to offer a primer as a starting point to the practice of reflexivity. Rather than being prescriptive, we seek to demonstrate flexible approaches that researchers may consider when communicating reflexive practice to enhance research transparency. We explore the challenges and potential pitfalls in a reflexive practice and offer considerations and advice based on our collective professional experience.","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142138424","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Marília Hauser, Carolina R. C. Doria, Christophe Pécheyran, Emmanuel Ponzevera, Jacques Panfili, Gislene Torrente-Vilara, Jean-François Renno, Carlos Edward Freitas, Carmen García-Dávila, Fabrice Duponchelle
Hydropower expansion is increasingly responsible for connectivity and biodiversity loss in freshwater ecosystems. The Amazon basin, which supports the highest level of freshwater biodiversity globally, faces such unplanned expansion. Here, we demonstrate and quantify the impacts of two major hydroelectric dams on the Madeira River on the trans-Amazonian movements of one apex predatory catfish (Brachyplatystoma rousseauxii) performing the longest migration known in freshwaters. Using otolith microchemistry, we show that above the dams, the former basin-wide homing migration between the breeding grounds in the upper Madeira and the nursery in the Amazon estuary has now been replaced by residency. We found evidence suggesting downstream migration of juvenile fish past dams into the Amazon estuary and that some of them home back to the Madeira. However, we did not find evidence that the fish homing back from the estuary can access their breeding grounds in the upper Madeira; they remain blocked below the dams. Our results provide undisputable evidence that the conservation of the species primarily requires the reestablishment of connectivity with the construction of efficient fishways.
{"title":"Quantitative impacts of hydroelectric dams on the trans-Amazonian migrations of goliath catfish","authors":"Marília Hauser, Carolina R. C. Doria, Christophe Pécheyran, Emmanuel Ponzevera, Jacques Panfili, Gislene Torrente-Vilara, Jean-François Renno, Carlos Edward Freitas, Carmen García-Dávila, Fabrice Duponchelle","doi":"10.1111/conl.13046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13046","url":null,"abstract":"Hydropower expansion is increasingly responsible for connectivity and biodiversity loss in freshwater ecosystems. The Amazon basin, which supports the highest level of freshwater biodiversity globally, faces such unplanned expansion. Here, we demonstrate and quantify the impacts of two major hydroelectric dams on the Madeira River on the trans-Amazonian movements of one apex predatory catfish (<i>Brachyplatystoma rousseauxii</i>) performing the longest migration known in freshwaters. Using otolith microchemistry, we show that above the dams, the former basin-wide homing migration between the breeding grounds in the upper Madeira and the nursery in the Amazon estuary has now been replaced by residency. We found evidence suggesting downstream migration of juvenile fish past dams into the Amazon estuary and that some of them home back to the Madeira. However, we did not find evidence that the fish homing back from the estuary can access their breeding grounds in the upper Madeira; they remain blocked below the dams. Our results provide undisputable evidence that the conservation of the species primarily requires the reestablishment of connectivity with the construction of efficient fishways.","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142101194","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Simon Ferrier, Chris Ware, Jenet M. Austin, Hedley S. Grantham, Thomas D. Harwood, James E. M. Watson
The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework lays out an ambitious set of goals and targets aimed at halting and reversing biodiversity loss. The extent of natural ecosystems has been selected as one of a small set of headline indicators against which countries will report progress under this framework. We evaluate the effectiveness with which this indicator is expected to capture the overall scope of the ecosystem-focused component of Goal A, and interlinkages with the species-focused component of this same goal, using extensive global data on the integrity, connectivity, and plant species composition of forests. Results generated for all forest-supporting countries demonstrate that consideration of these additional factors can profoundly alter understanding of the state of forest biodiversity relative to that based on extent alone. Employment of ecosystem extent as a headline indicator must therefore be augmented by appropriate use of component and complementary indicators addressing other key dimensions of ecosystem change.
昆明-蒙特利尔全球生物多样性框架提出了一系列雄心勃勃的目标和指标，旨在遏制和扭转生物多样性的丧失。自然生态系统的范围被选为一小套标题指标之一，各国将根据这些指标报告在该框架下取得的进展。我们利用有关森林完整性、连通性和植物物种组成的大量全球数据，评估了这一指标在捕捉目标 A 中以生态系统为重点的组成部分的总体范围以及与该目标中以物种为重点的组成部分之间的相互联系方面的有效性。为所有支持森林的国家得出的结果表明，相对于仅仅基于范围的理解，考虑这些额外因素可以深刻改变对森林生物多样性状况的理解。因此，在使用生态系统范围作为主要指标的同时，还必须适当使用针对生态系统变化其他关键方面的组成部分和补充指标。
{"title":"Ecosystem extent is a necessary but not sufficient indicator of the state of global forest biodiversity","authors":"Simon Ferrier, Chris Ware, Jenet M. Austin, Hedley S. Grantham, Thomas D. Harwood, James E. M. Watson","doi":"10.1111/conl.13045","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13045","url":null,"abstract":"The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework lays out an ambitious set of goals and targets aimed at halting and reversing biodiversity loss. The extent of natural ecosystems has been selected as one of a small set of headline indicators against which countries will report progress under this framework. We evaluate the effectiveness with which this indicator is expected to capture the overall scope of the ecosystem-focused component of Goal A, and interlinkages with the species-focused component of this same goal, using extensive global data on the integrity, connectivity, and plant species composition of forests. Results generated for all forest-supporting countries demonstrate that consideration of these additional factors can profoundly alter understanding of the state of forest biodiversity relative to that based on extent alone. Employment of ecosystem extent as a headline indicator must therefore be augmented by appropriate use of component and complementary indicators addressing other key dimensions of ecosystem change.","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142023093","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Gerard Edward Ryan, Emily Nicholson, Christopher M. Baker, Michael A. McCarthy
Information about species’ locations can influence what happens to them—from supporting habitat protection to exposing poaching targets. Debate about releasing locations when new species are found highlights the trade‐off between the risk of loss and the benefits of funding and public support. No research so far has collected data on how such decisions are made, and no decision tools easily compare a range of decision‐making scenarios. Here, we present a method to compare the costs and benefits of decisions about the disclosure of information about newly discovered species and populations. We implement our method for seven species where information is completely or partially secret. We ask decision‐makers to estimate the costs and benefits associated with these case studies and apply our method. Results show a range of implications from choices that are always better, to others that depend on risk attitude, and demonstrate that the process of decision‐making can be transparent and easily communicated.
{"title":"The costs and benefits of publicising species discoveries","authors":"Gerard Edward Ryan, Emily Nicholson, Christopher M. Baker, Michael A. McCarthy","doi":"10.1111/conl.13044","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13044","url":null,"abstract":"Information about species’ locations can influence what happens to them—from supporting habitat protection to exposing poaching targets. Debate about releasing locations when new species are found highlights the trade‐off between the risk of loss and the benefits of funding and public support. No research so far has collected data on how such decisions are made, and no decision tools easily compare a range of decision‐making scenarios. Here, we present a method to compare the costs and benefits of decisions about the disclosure of information about newly discovered species and populations. We implement our method for seven species where information is completely or partially secret. We ask decision‐makers to estimate the costs and benefits associated with these case studies and apply our method. Results show a range of implications from choices that are always better, to others that depend on risk attitude, and demonstrate that the process of decision‐making can be transparent and easily communicated.","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141794638","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Charles A. Emogor, Lauren Coad, Ben Balmford, Daniel J. Ingram, Diane Detoeuf, Robert J. Fletcher, Inaoyom Imong, Andrew Dunn, Andrew Balmford
There is limited quantitative evidence of the effects of socio-economic shocks on biological resource use. Focusing on wild meat hunting, a substantial livelihood and food source in tropical regions, we evaluated the impacts of the shock from Nigeria's coronavirus disease (COVID-19) lockdown on species exploitation around a global biodiversity hotspot. Using a 3-year quantitative dataset collected during and after the lockdown (covering 1008 hunter-months) and matching by time of year, we found that successful hunting trip rates were more frequent during the lockdown, with a corresponding increase in the monthly number, mass, and value of animals caught. Moreover, hunters consumed a larger proportion of wild meat and sold less during lockdown, compared to non-lockdown periods. These results suggest that local communities relied on wild meat to supplement reduced food and income during the lockdown, buffering the COVID-19's socio-economic shock. Our findings also indicate that wild species may be especially vulnerable to increased hunting pressure during socio-economic shocks.
{"title":"Changes in wild meat hunting and use by rural communities during the COVID-19 socio-economic shock","authors":"Charles A. Emogor, Lauren Coad, Ben Balmford, Daniel J. Ingram, Diane Detoeuf, Robert J. Fletcher, Inaoyom Imong, Andrew Dunn, Andrew Balmford","doi":"10.1111/conl.13042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13042","url":null,"abstract":"There is limited quantitative evidence of the effects of socio-economic shocks on biological resource use. Focusing on wild meat hunting, a substantial livelihood and food source in tropical regions, we evaluated the impacts of the shock from Nigeria's coronavirus disease (COVID-19) lockdown on species exploitation around a global biodiversity hotspot. Using a 3-year quantitative dataset collected during and after the lockdown (covering 1008 hunter-months) and matching by time of year, we found that successful hunting trip rates were more frequent during the lockdown, with a corresponding increase in the monthly number, mass, and value of animals caught. Moreover, hunters consumed a larger proportion of wild meat and sold less during lockdown, compared to non-lockdown periods. These results suggest that local communities relied on wild meat to supplement reduced food and income during the lockdown, buffering the COVID-19's socio-economic shock. Our findings also indicate that wild species may be especially vulnerable to increased hunting pressure during socio-economic shocks.","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141754233","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：