Franziska Peter, Rebecca Bleumer, Christina Martinez Christophersen, Sally Matern, Tim Diekötter
Despite their relevance for anthropogenic impacts on biodiversity, synergistic effects are rarely considered in conservation science or management. However, the implementation of single agri-environment measures may limit their potential benefits for biodiversity since species often require a multitude of complementary key resources, particularly in homogeneous and structurally poor landscapes. To advance conservation management, we studied whether hedgerows promote benefits of sown wildflower fields for insectivorous bats in temperate agro-ecosystems. At 12 study sites, we simultaneously monitored bat activity and insect abundances from early to late summer at paired locations, that is, the ecotone of a sown wildflower field bordering a hedgerow and an open boundary of the same wildflower field. Particularly in early and mid-summer, we found distinct preferences of bats for the ecotone of wildflower field and hedgerow. Yet, independent of the season, neither insects nor specifically moths showed a significant preference for the ecotone. Finally, both bat activity as well as insect abundances shifted towards the ecotone when distance to the nearest forest patch was high. We showed that synergies of hedgerows and wildflower fields promote benefits of the latter for both edge- and open-space foraging bats, particularly in homogeneous and structurally poor agricultural landscapes. Therefore, successful conservation management should take advantage of synergies between complementary conservation measures at the local patch scale and at the same time, account for landscape composition and configuration.
{"title":"Sown wildflower fields and hedgerows synergistically promote insectivorous bats","authors":"Franziska Peter, Rebecca Bleumer, Christina Martinez Christophersen, Sally Matern, Tim Diekötter","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13275","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13275","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Despite their relevance for anthropogenic impacts on biodiversity, synergistic effects are rarely considered in conservation science or management. However, the implementation of single agri-environment measures may limit their potential benefits for biodiversity since species often require a multitude of complementary key resources, particularly in homogeneous and structurally poor landscapes. To advance conservation management, we studied whether hedgerows promote benefits of sown wildflower fields for insectivorous bats in temperate agro-ecosystems. At 12 study sites, we simultaneously monitored bat activity and insect abundances from early to late summer at paired locations, that is, the ecotone of a sown wildflower field bordering a hedgerow and an open boundary of the same wildflower field. Particularly in early and mid-summer, we found distinct preferences of bats for the ecotone of wildflower field and hedgerow. Yet, independent of the season, neither insects nor specifically moths showed a significant preference for the ecotone. Finally, both bat activity as well as insect abundances shifted towards the ecotone when distance to the nearest forest patch was high. We showed that synergies of hedgerows and wildflower fields promote benefits of the latter for both edge- and open-space foraging bats, particularly in homogeneous and structurally poor agricultural landscapes. Therefore, successful conservation management should take advantage of synergies between complementary conservation measures at the local patch scale and at the same time, account for landscape composition and configuration.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13275","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143113605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The velocity of climate change, which estimates the migration speed necessary to maintain constant climatic conditions, is increasingly used to map climate-related threats to biodiversity. Using newly developed climate velocity data for North America to 2100 based on an ensemble of current-generation climate projections, we asked how important differing sources of uncertainty from global climate model projections are, how the magnitude of this uncertainty compares with the internal variability of the climate system, and what aspects of climate velocity are robust to such uncertainty. We found that most variation was due to contrasts among global climate models, followed by variation among alternative emissions pathways. However, correlation was great enough (0.817) to allow application of velocity to inform conservation and management. In contrast, internal variability (i.e., weather at multidecadal timescales) resulted in low correlation between simulated and observed velocity for the 2001–2020 period. A null model using current baseline climate data and assumed uniform 2° heating was moderately correlated with velocity from ensemble future projections, helping to identify model-independent velocity patterns difficult to capture via rules such as protection of elevational gradients. Such uncertainty analyses are essential for informed application of velocity and other climate exposure metrics.
{"title":"Sources of uncertainty in estimation of climate velocity and their implications for ecological and conservation applications","authors":"Carlos Carroll, Colin R. Mahony","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13296","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13296","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The velocity of climate change, which estimates the migration speed necessary to maintain constant climatic conditions, is increasingly used to map climate-related threats to biodiversity. Using newly developed climate velocity data for North America to 2100 based on an ensemble of current-generation climate projections, we asked how important differing sources of uncertainty from global climate model projections are, how the magnitude of this uncertainty compares with the internal variability of the climate system, and what aspects of climate velocity are robust to such uncertainty. We found that most variation was due to contrasts among global climate models, followed by variation among alternative emissions pathways. However, correlation was great enough (0.817) to allow application of velocity to inform conservation and management. In contrast, internal variability (i.e., weather at multidecadal timescales) resulted in low correlation between simulated and observed velocity for the 2001–2020 period. A null model using current baseline climate data and assumed uniform 2° heating was moderately correlated with velocity from ensemble future projections, helping to identify model-independent velocity patterns difficult to capture via rules such as protection of elevational gradients. Such uncertainty analyses are essential for informed application of velocity and other climate exposure metrics.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13296","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143113022","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Amanda A. Hyman, Erin R. Crone, Abigail Benson, Jason Dunham, Abigail J. Lynch, Laura Thompson, Meryl C. Mims
As climate change accelerates, understanding which species are most vulnerable and why they are vulnerable will be vital to inform conservation action. Climate change vulnerability assessments (CCVAs) are tools to assess species' responses to climate change, detect drivers of vulnerability, and inform conservation planning. CCVAs are commonly composed of three elements: exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Incorporating all three elements can be challenging, and including only two of the three elements may be a more feasible approach in many systems. Although two-element CCVA approaches have become more common, their utility and procedures remain poorly documented. We conducted a literature review to explore the scope, methods, and rationale of CCVAs that use a two-element approach to assess vertebrate vulnerability. Despite the potential to expand CCVAs into understudied systems, two-element assessments had similar geographic and taxonomic biases as those previously detected in CCVAs in general. Methods varied, yet we found that variables used in two-element studies could be condensed into standardized categories to enhance comparability. Finally, limitations in data availability and computational resources were common rationales for using a two-element approach. By clarifying the purposes, opportunities, and limitations of two-element assessment, this review can aid in selecting appropriate methods for CCVAs.
{"title":"Exposure, sensitivity, or adaptive capacity? Reviewing assessments that use only two of three elements of climate change vulnerability","authors":"Amanda A. Hyman, Erin R. Crone, Abigail Benson, Jason Dunham, Abigail J. Lynch, Laura Thompson, Meryl C. Mims","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13293","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13293","url":null,"abstract":"<p>As climate change accelerates, understanding which species are most vulnerable and why they are vulnerable will be vital to inform conservation action. Climate change vulnerability assessments (CCVAs) are tools to assess species' responses to climate change, detect drivers of vulnerability, and inform conservation planning. CCVAs are commonly composed of three elements: exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Incorporating all three elements can be challenging, and including only two of the three elements may be a more feasible approach in many systems. Although two-element CCVA approaches have become more common, their utility and procedures remain poorly documented. We conducted a literature review to explore the scope, methods, and rationale of CCVAs that use a two-element approach to assess vertebrate vulnerability. Despite the potential to expand CCVAs into understudied systems, two-element assessments had similar geographic and taxonomic biases as those previously detected in CCVAs in general. Methods varied, yet we found that variables used in two-element studies could be condensed into standardized categories to enhance comparability. Finally, limitations in data availability and computational resources were common rationales for using a two-element approach. By clarifying the purposes, opportunities, and limitations of two-element assessment, this review can aid in selecting appropriate methods for CCVAs.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13293","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143112937","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Anne-Christine Mupepele, Vivien von Königslöw, Anna-Maria Bleile, Felix Fornoff, Jochen Fründ, Alexandra-Maria Klein
In an agricultural landscape, production and conservation ideally go hand in hand. In a win-win scenario, conservation measures, such as hedges and flower strips, provide support for biodiversity and crop production for example by increased pollination and pollinator diversity. However, these conservation measures may also decrease pollination by attracting pollinators and competing with crop flower visits. Here, we studied plant–pollinator interactions from two different perspectives. First, we looked at the production perspective investigating whether plant–pollinator networks differed between apple orchards with and without adjacent flower strips and hedges. With help of the Bayes factor, we investigated similarity and conclude that there are no differences between pollination networks with or without adjacent flower strips and hedges. Second, we looked at the conservation perspective and analyzed the impact of hedges and flower strips on pollinators and their interactions with plants before and after apple bloom in April. We showed that apple pollinators used more flower resources in flower strips and hedges across the whole season compared to isolated orchards. In orchards with flower strips and hedges, interactions were more constant over time. We conclude that flower strips and hedges are beneficial for conservation of apple pollinators without being harmful for apple flower pollination.
{"title":"Plant–pollinator interactions in apple orchards from a production and conservation perspective","authors":"Anne-Christine Mupepele, Vivien von Königslöw, Anna-Maria Bleile, Felix Fornoff, Jochen Fründ, Alexandra-Maria Klein","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13280","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13280","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In an agricultural landscape, production and conservation ideally go hand in hand. In a win-win scenario, conservation measures, such as hedges and flower strips, provide support for biodiversity and crop production for example by increased pollination and pollinator diversity. However, these conservation measures may also decrease pollination by attracting pollinators and competing with crop flower visits. Here, we studied plant–pollinator interactions from two different perspectives. First, we looked at the production perspective investigating whether plant–pollinator networks differed between apple orchards with and without adjacent flower strips and hedges. With help of the Bayes factor, we investigated similarity and conclude that there are no differences between pollination networks with or without adjacent flower strips and hedges. Second, we looked at the conservation perspective and analyzed the impact of hedges and flower strips on pollinators and their interactions with plants before and after apple bloom in April. We showed that apple pollinators used more flower resources in flower strips and hedges across the whole season compared to isolated orchards. In orchards with flower strips and hedges, interactions were more constant over time. We conclude that flower strips and hedges are beneficial for conservation of apple pollinators without being harmful for apple flower pollination.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13280","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143112510","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Adam Toomes, Oliver C. Stringham, Stephanie Moncayo, Katherine G. W. Hill, Jacob Maher, Freyja Watters, Sebastian Chekunov, Pablo García-Díaz, Lewis Mitchell, Joshua V. Ross, Phillip Cassey
The trade of alien species as pets is increasingly recognized as a biosecurity risk due to their intentional and accidental release into the wild. However, pets are often categorized as native or non-native at a national level, meaning that their presence outside of their native range, yet within their native country, may be an overlooked biosecurity threat. So-called “domestic non-natives” have established new populations across several countries and, in some cases, become invasive. Here, we investigated the extent of the domestic trade of native Australian pet species outside of their natural distributions and determined whether such locations were climatically suitable for potential alien establishments. Australia provides a unique system to explore this issue because it deters the trade of most alien species yet permits the keeping of a large diversity of native pets. We monitored trade from a popular Australian e-commerce site used to trade native pet birds, reptiles, and amphibians (29 k advertisements over 1 year; from July 2019 to July 2020). Of the 177 native vertebrate species we observed in the pet trade, 129 species (73%) had at least some instances of their trade occurring outside of their natural distribution. We found that climatically suitable environments were present outside the native range of 90 species and that these regions were proximal to suburbs where we observed trade. Our results indicate that the “domestic non-native” trade is widespread in Australia and that, if captive pets escape or are released into the wild in sufficient numbers, there is a risk of establishment for most of these species. We suggest that regulations pertaining to the trade of native pets ensure that careful biosecurity consideration is given in circumstances when trade occurs beyond a species' native range, both in the context of Australia and for other large countries with widespread pet industries.
{"title":"The pet trade of native species outside of their natural distributions within Australia is a biosecurity risk","authors":"Adam Toomes, Oliver C. Stringham, Stephanie Moncayo, Katherine G. W. Hill, Jacob Maher, Freyja Watters, Sebastian Chekunov, Pablo García-Díaz, Lewis Mitchell, Joshua V. Ross, Phillip Cassey","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13298","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13298","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The trade of alien species as pets is increasingly recognized as a biosecurity risk due to their intentional and accidental release into the wild. However, pets are often categorized as native or non-native at a national level, meaning that their presence outside of their native range, yet within their native country, may be an overlooked biosecurity threat. So-called “domestic non-natives” have established new populations across several countries and, in some cases, become invasive. Here, we investigated the extent of the domestic trade of native Australian pet species outside of their natural distributions and determined whether such locations were climatically suitable for potential alien establishments. Australia provides a unique system to explore this issue because it deters the trade of most alien species yet permits the keeping of a large diversity of native pets. We monitored trade from a popular Australian e-commerce site used to trade native pet birds, reptiles, and amphibians (29 k advertisements over 1 year; from July 2019 to July 2020). Of the 177 native vertebrate species we observed in the pet trade, 129 species (73%) had at least some instances of their trade occurring outside of their natural distribution. We found that climatically suitable environments were present outside the native range of 90 species and that these regions were proximal to suburbs where we observed trade. Our results indicate that the “domestic non-native” trade is widespread in Australia and that, if captive pets escape or are released into the wild in sufficient numbers, there is a risk of establishment for most of these species. We suggest that regulations pertaining to the trade of native pets ensure that careful biosecurity consideration is given in circumstances when trade occurs beyond a species' native range, both in the context of Australia and for other large countries with widespread pet industries.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13298","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143112620","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Julia T. Gieser, Sebastian Kolb, Jo Marie Reiff, Kai Riess, Maura Hunke, Martin H. Entling, Jens Schirmel
The use of fungicides in agriculture can reduce animal biodiversity. Such non-target effects could be mitigated through fungus-resistant cultivars that reduce the need for fungicide applications. Hence, we conducted a study in 32 commercial vineyards in southwest Germany. We investigated the effect of fungicide spraying intensities (susceptible vs resistant cultivars) and management (conventional vs organic) on ground beetles as a widely used indicator group in agroecological studies. In addition, we examined the effects of local habitat conditions (e.g., microclimate, vegetation) and landscape characteristics. Fungicide applications were reduced by half in conventional, and almost by two-thirds in organic vineyards with fungus-resistant cultivars, compared to susceptible grape varieties in the same management regime. While there was no evidence that fungus-resistant cultivars positively affect the diversity of ground beetles, organic management doubled the number of individuals of conservation-relevant species per vineyard. Additionally, the proportion of semi-natural habitats in the surrounding landscape, and the vegetation height significantly affected the species composition across vineyards. We conclude that local habitat conditions and landscape characteristics influence ground beetles more than the fungicide spraying intensity. Additional measures such as organic management, moderate ground vegetation management, and landscape diversification are needed for the conservation of ground beetles in viticulture.
{"title":"Limited benefits of organic management and fungicide reduction to ground beetles in vineyards","authors":"Julia T. Gieser, Sebastian Kolb, Jo Marie Reiff, Kai Riess, Maura Hunke, Martin H. Entling, Jens Schirmel","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13303","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13303","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The use of fungicides in agriculture can reduce animal biodiversity. Such non-target effects could be mitigated through fungus-resistant cultivars that reduce the need for fungicide applications. Hence, we conducted a study in 32 commercial vineyards in southwest Germany. We investigated the effect of fungicide spraying intensities (susceptible vs resistant cultivars) and management (conventional vs organic) on ground beetles as a widely used indicator group in agroecological studies. In addition, we examined the effects of local habitat conditions (e.g., microclimate, vegetation) and landscape characteristics. Fungicide applications were reduced by half in conventional, and almost by two-thirds in organic vineyards with fungus-resistant cultivars, compared to susceptible grape varieties in the same management regime. While there was no evidence that fungus-resistant cultivars positively affect the diversity of ground beetles, organic management doubled the number of individuals of conservation-relevant species per vineyard. Additionally, the proportion of semi-natural habitats in the surrounding landscape, and the vegetation height significantly affected the species composition across vineyards. We conclude that local habitat conditions and landscape characteristics influence ground beetles more than the fungicide spraying intensity. Additional measures such as organic management, moderate ground vegetation management, and landscape diversification are needed for the conservation of ground beetles in viticulture.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13303","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143111266","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Local participation has been greatly promoted to accomplish conservation and development goals globally, but the participation paradox, in which those empowered to participate fail to do so, has rarely been thoroughly scrutinized. Here we test the participation paradox with empirical data of 234 local decision-makers' participation in a decision-making forum, Conservation Area Management Committees, in the Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Using an explanatory sequential mixed methods design, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected in 2013 and 2016, analyzed, interpreted, and integrated. Women, minorities, younger members, and non-elected members participated significantly less in decision-making than men, older members, and elected members and those with leadership roles and longer tenures on the committees. Qualitative analyses revealed five major themes for motivation to participate: influence in the community; personal incentives; conservation; improving access to natural resources; and feelings of accomplishment. Key constraints to participation included hardships and competing tasks; lack of incentives; perceptions of limited agency; disinterest; and emotional burdens. Participation motivations and constraints varied by gender, social group, and membership types. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results for participatory approaches to conservation and sustainable development in general and the governance of protected areas in particular.
{"title":"Empirical test of the participation paradox in conservation and development","authors":"Nabin Baral, Joel T. Heinen, Marc J. Stern","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13276","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13276","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Local participation has been greatly promoted to accomplish conservation and development goals globally, but the participation paradox, in which those empowered to participate fail to do so, has rarely been thoroughly scrutinized. Here we test the participation paradox with empirical data of 234 local decision-makers' participation in a decision-making forum, Conservation Area Management Committees, in the Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Using an explanatory sequential mixed methods design, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected in 2013 and 2016, analyzed, interpreted, and integrated. Women, minorities, younger members, and non-elected members participated significantly less in decision-making than men, older members, and elected members and those with leadership roles and longer tenures on the committees. Qualitative analyses revealed five major themes for motivation to participate: influence in the community; personal incentives; conservation; improving access to natural resources; and feelings of accomplishment. Key constraints to participation included hardships and competing tasks; lack of incentives; perceptions of limited agency; disinterest; and emotional burdens. Participation motivations and constraints varied by gender, social group, and membership types. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results for participatory approaches to conservation and sustainable development in general and the governance of protected areas in particular.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13276","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143110784","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>Challender et al. (<span>2024</span>) argue that a recent amendment to a CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) resolution could be detrimental to pangolins via reducing sustainable use options, particularly for Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and Local Communities (LCs) in Central and West Africa. The resolution in question, Res. Conf. 17.10 (Rev. CoP19), was initially adopted in 2016 when all eight pangolin species were included in Appendix I of CITES, prohibiting international commercial trade of wild-caught pangolins. The latest amendment, adopted in 2022 by the CITES Conference of the Parties, is consistent with the long-standing CITES precedent of calling for the closure of domestic markets in certain endangered CITES Appendix I species (or taxa)—examples include elephants, Asian big cats, helmeted hornbill, and marine turtles (CITES, <span>2016</span>, <span>2022a</span>, <span>2022b</span>, <span>2022c</span>). It urges “Parties in whose jurisdiction there is a legal domestic market for specimens of pangolins that is contributing to poaching or illegal trade, [to] take all necessary legislative, regulatory and enforcement measures to close their domestic markets for commercial trade in pangolin specimens and report such closures to the Secretariat” (CITES, <span>2022d</span>, p. 2).</p><p>IPs and LCs have been historically excluded from conservation decision-making and actions in numerous countries (Brittain et al., <span>2021</span>). In the context of Res. Conf. 17.10 (Rev. CoP19), Challender et al. propose that legal provisions for IPs and LCs to use pangolins sustainably could enhance pangolin conservation. The authors focus on Central and West Africa, suggesting domestic legislation excludes IPs and LCs in tropical Africa from using pangolins. However, this is not the case in Gabon (and possibly elsewhere in Africa), where traditional customary law permits pangolin hunting outside protected areas (Mambeya et al., <span>2018</span>).</p><p>We agree with Challender et al. that policies aiming to reduce threats to pangolins should consider the views and needs of IPs and LCs. Nonetheless, given that all pangolin species are globally threatened, we caution that any such use must be based on robust sustainability assessments and a clear understanding of what constitutes sustainable use—both of which are currently lacking for pangolins (we expand on this point below). Furthermore, such programs should also be grounded in site-specific assessments, as pangolin population dynamics and the socio-economic characteristics of communities around pangolin habitat conceivably vary across pangolin range. Additionally, given that the hunting and commercialization of pangolins are prohibited by law in virtually all Central and West African countries (USAID/West Africa Biodiversity and Climate Change, <span>2020</span>), and all international trade for primarily commercial purposes is prohibited by CITES, con
{"title":"Sustainability assessments should precede interventions promoting the hunting and consumptive use of pangolins","authors":"Charles A. Emogor, Kumar Paudel, Susan Lieberman","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13289","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13289","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Challender et al. (<span>2024</span>) argue that a recent amendment to a CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) resolution could be detrimental to pangolins via reducing sustainable use options, particularly for Indigenous Peoples (IPs) and Local Communities (LCs) in Central and West Africa. The resolution in question, Res. Conf. 17.10 (Rev. CoP19), was initially adopted in 2016 when all eight pangolin species were included in Appendix I of CITES, prohibiting international commercial trade of wild-caught pangolins. The latest amendment, adopted in 2022 by the CITES Conference of the Parties, is consistent with the long-standing CITES precedent of calling for the closure of domestic markets in certain endangered CITES Appendix I species (or taxa)—examples include elephants, Asian big cats, helmeted hornbill, and marine turtles (CITES, <span>2016</span>, <span>2022a</span>, <span>2022b</span>, <span>2022c</span>). It urges “Parties in whose jurisdiction there is a legal domestic market for specimens of pangolins that is contributing to poaching or illegal trade, [to] take all necessary legislative, regulatory and enforcement measures to close their domestic markets for commercial trade in pangolin specimens and report such closures to the Secretariat” (CITES, <span>2022d</span>, p. 2).</p><p>IPs and LCs have been historically excluded from conservation decision-making and actions in numerous countries (Brittain et al., <span>2021</span>). In the context of Res. Conf. 17.10 (Rev. CoP19), Challender et al. propose that legal provisions for IPs and LCs to use pangolins sustainably could enhance pangolin conservation. The authors focus on Central and West Africa, suggesting domestic legislation excludes IPs and LCs in tropical Africa from using pangolins. However, this is not the case in Gabon (and possibly elsewhere in Africa), where traditional customary law permits pangolin hunting outside protected areas (Mambeya et al., <span>2018</span>).</p><p>We agree with Challender et al. that policies aiming to reduce threats to pangolins should consider the views and needs of IPs and LCs. Nonetheless, given that all pangolin species are globally threatened, we caution that any such use must be based on robust sustainability assessments and a clear understanding of what constitutes sustainable use—both of which are currently lacking for pangolins (we expand on this point below). Furthermore, such programs should also be grounded in site-specific assessments, as pangolin population dynamics and the socio-economic characteristics of communities around pangolin habitat conceivably vary across pangolin range. Additionally, given that the hunting and commercialization of pangolins are prohibited by law in virtually all Central and West African countries (USAID/West Africa Biodiversity and Climate Change, <span>2020</span>), and all international trade for primarily commercial purposes is prohibited by CITES, con","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13289","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143120861","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Dara M. Wald, Miguel Diaz-Manrique, Laura Witzling, Jaqueline Comito
Adoption of on-farm conservation strategies, such as edge-of-field practices, has the potential to reduce nutrient runoff, promote greater biodiversity, and improve water quality. To date, adoption rates among farmers are extremely low. Communication with farmers has been identified as a vital strategy to encourage the voluntary adoption of these practices and policies that promote on-farm conservation. Yet little is known about which information sources shape farmers' concerns about conservation practices, perceptions of the risks and benefits of conservation practices, and ultimately, adoption behaviors. Using the Social Amplification of Risk Framework, the Risk Information Seeking and Processing Model, and a cross-sectional survey, we examined farmers' concerns about nitrate loss and water quality, perceptions of the risks and benefits of conservation practices, attention to messages and information sources, and communication behaviors. We received N = 474 completed surveys. Attention to agricultural associations was associated with decreased concern about nitrates and diminished perceptions of the benefits of edge-of-field practices. Farmers paying greater attention to non-agricultural and social media sources were more likely to share and seek information. Attention to interpersonal sources was associated with greater adoption behaviors. This work highlights the importance of farmers' social networks, exposure to multiple information sources, and the need to identify new strategies for engagement and direct communication with hard-to-reach audiences. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of this work for conservation communication and land management practices to promote environmental health.
{"title":"Motivating conservation action in the Upper Midwest: Source attention, information seeking and sharing, and farmers' land management decisions","authors":"Dara M. Wald, Miguel Diaz-Manrique, Laura Witzling, Jaqueline Comito","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13287","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13287","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Adoption of on-farm conservation strategies, such as edge-of-field practices, has the potential to reduce nutrient runoff, promote greater biodiversity, and improve water quality. To date, adoption rates among farmers are extremely low. Communication with farmers has been identified as a vital strategy to encourage the voluntary adoption of these practices and policies that promote on-farm conservation. Yet little is known about which information sources shape farmers' concerns about conservation practices, perceptions of the risks and benefits of conservation practices, and ultimately, adoption behaviors. Using the Social Amplification of Risk Framework, the Risk Information Seeking and Processing Model, and a cross-sectional survey, we examined farmers' concerns about nitrate loss and water quality, perceptions of the risks and benefits of conservation practices, attention to messages and information sources, and communication behaviors. We received <i>N</i> = 474 completed surveys. Attention to agricultural associations was associated with decreased concern about nitrates and diminished perceptions of the benefits of edge-of-field practices. Farmers paying greater attention to non-agricultural and social media sources were more likely to share and seek information. Attention to interpersonal sources was associated with greater adoption behaviors. This work highlights the importance of farmers' social networks, exposure to multiple information sources, and the need to identify new strategies for engagement and direct communication with hard-to-reach audiences. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of this work for conservation communication and land management practices to promote environmental health.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13287","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143119653","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jakub Skorupski, Christian Seebass, Wolfgang Festl, Natalia Kiseleva, Przemysław Śmietana, Mihai Marinov
This study provides a comprehensive, population-scale analysis of the mitogenome of the critically endangered European mink, Mustela lutreola, involving 52 individuals from Russia, Germany (conservation breeding stock), Romania, and France-Spain. Significant mitogenomic diversity was identified within the previously presumed genetically homogenous French-Spanish population, challenging concerns of inbreeding. Despite having lower nucleotide diversity (π = 0.00024) than the German (π = 0.00055) and Russian (π = 0.00048) populations, the French-Spanish group exhibited impressive haplotype diversity (h = 0.9810) compared to Russian (h = 0.8727) and German (h = 0.7826) populations. Considering genetic diversity and uniqueness, the French-Spanish population ranked highest in conservation importance, second only to the combined assessment of all other populations. The extensive population structuring identified two distinct haplogroups—the Central-Eastern European and the Aquitaine-Navarre—suggesting reconsideration of their conservation status. These findings guide tailored conservation strategies, emphasizing the need for careful interpopulation translocations to protect genetic diversity and prevent outbreeding depression. A decision algorithm for these translocations has been proposed.
{"title":"To mix, or not to mix?: Mitogenomic insights for risk assessment of an interpopulation translocations of the critically endangered European mink","authors":"Jakub Skorupski, Christian Seebass, Wolfgang Festl, Natalia Kiseleva, Przemysław Śmietana, Mihai Marinov","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13291","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13291","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study provides a comprehensive, population-scale analysis of the mitogenome of the critically endangered European mink, <i>Mustela lutreola</i>, involving 52 individuals from Russia, Germany (conservation breeding stock), Romania, and France-Spain. Significant mitogenomic diversity was identified within the previously presumed genetically homogenous French-Spanish population, challenging concerns of inbreeding. Despite having lower nucleotide diversity (<i>π</i> = 0.00024) than the German (<i>π</i> = 0.00055) and Russian (<i>π</i> = 0.00048) populations, the French-Spanish group exhibited impressive haplotype diversity (<i>h</i> = 0.9810) compared to Russian (<i>h</i> = 0.8727) and German (<i>h</i> = 0.7826) populations. Considering genetic diversity and uniqueness, the French-Spanish population ranked highest in conservation importance, second only to the combined assessment of all other populations. The extensive population structuring identified two distinct haplogroups—the Central-Eastern European and the Aquitaine-Navarre—suggesting reconsideration of their conservation status. These findings guide tailored conservation strategies, emphasizing the need for careful interpopulation translocations to protect genetic diversity and prevent outbreeding depression. A decision algorithm for these translocations has been proposed.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13291","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143119056","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}