Search

Aim After environmental disasters, species with large population losses may need urgent protection to prevent extinction and support recovery. Following the 2019–2020 Australian megafires, we estimated population losses and recovery in fire-affected fauna, to inform conservation status assessments and management. Location Temperate and subtropical Australia. Time period 2019–2030 and beyond. Major taxa Australian terrestrial and freshwater vertebrates; one invertebrate group. Methods From > 1,050 fire-affected taxa, we selected 173 whose distributions substantially overlapped the fire extent. We estimated the proportion of each taxon’s distribution affected by fires, using fire severity and aquatic impact mapping, and new distribution mapping. Using expert elicitation informed by evidence of responses to previous wildfires, we estimated local population responses to fires of varying severity. We combined the spatial and elicitation data to estimate overall population loss and recovery trajectories, and thus indicate potential eligibility for listing as threatened, or uplisting, under Australian legislation. Results We estimate that the 2019–2020 Australian megafires caused, or contributed to, population declines that make 70–82 taxa eligible for listing as threatened; and another 21–27 taxa eligible for uplisting. If so-listed, this represents a 22–26% increase in Australian statutory lists of threatened terrestrial and freshwater vertebrates and spiny crayfish, and uplisting for 8–10% of threatened taxa. Such changes would cause an abrupt worsening of underlying trajectories in vertebrates, as measured by Red List Indices. We predict that 54–88% of 173 assessed taxa will not recover to pre-fire population size within 10 years/three generations. Main conclusions We suggest the 2019–2020 Australian megafires have worsened the conservation prospects for many species. Of the 91 taxa recommended for listing/uplisting consideration, 84 a

Background: Conservation relies on the strategic use of resources because monies for conservation action are limited, especially in developing countries. South Africa’s Frog Atlas project established a baseline for the country’s amphibian data and threat levels in 2004, and in 2009 a prioritisation exercise developed a strategy for conservation research. Objectives: In this article, we assess this strategy for conservation research. Method: We conducted a quantitative and qualitative assessment of research undertaken since the strategy was developed. Results: The strategy has produced a lasting impact on taxonomy, ecological studies, monitoring and capacity building. Publications in all areas have increased, but particularly in conservation ecology. Other indicators are increases in the numbers of locality records for target taxa, species descriptions and postgraduate degrees with amphibians as the principal topic. We document important milestones for South African amphibian conservation, including the first Biodiversity Management Plan for Species (BMP-S) for Hyperolius pickersgilli, a smart device app that uploads locality data to an open access database, 15 years of monitoring data and new amphibian identification books for adults and children. The Red List Index calculated for South African amphibians shows that the country’s species are becoming more threatened (a 1% reduction in 10 years), but a hindcasting exercise suggests that most of the damage was already done by 1990. We provide a checklist for 131 amphibian species in South Africa, of which 82 species are endemic. Conclusion: A strategy for conservation research was found to greatly augment the focus of research on South African frogs. A new strategy should focus on fewer taxa over meaningful time spans

Background: Conservation relies on the strategic use of resources because monies for conservation action are limited, especially in developing countries. South Africa’s Frog Atlas project established a baseline for the country’s amphibian data and threat levels in 2004, and in 2009 a prioritisation exercise developed a strategy for conservation research. Objectives: In this article, we assess this strategy for conservation research. Method: We conducted a quantitative and qualitative assessment of research undertaken since the strategy was developed. Results: The strategy has produced a lasting impact on taxonomy, ecological studies, monitoring and capacity building. Publications in all areas have increased, but particularly in conservation ecology. Other indicators are increases in the numbers of locality records for target taxa, species descriptions and postgraduate degrees with amphibians as the principal topic. We document important milestones for South African amphibian conservation, including the first Biodiversity Management Plan for Species (BMP-S) for Hyperolius pickersgilli, a smart device app that uploads locality data to an open access database, 15 years of monitoring data and new amphibian identification books for adults and children. The Red List Index calculated for South African amphibians shows that the country’s species are becoming more threatened (a 1% reduction in 10 years), but a hindcasting exercise suggests that most of the damage was already done by 1990. We provide a checklist for 131 amphibian species in South Africa, of which 82 species are endemic. Conclusion: A strategy for conservation research was found to greatly augment the focus of research on South African frogs. A new strategy should focus on fewer taxa over meaningful time spans

To address the ongoing global biodiversity crisis, governments have set strategic objectives and have adopted indicators to monitor progress toward their achievement. Projecting the likely impacts on biodiversity of different policy decisions allows decision makers to understand if and how these targets can be met. We projected trends in two widely used indicators of population abundance Geometric Mean Abundance, equivalent to the Living Planet Index and extinction risk (the Red List Index) under different climate and land-use change scenarios. Testing these on terrestrial carnivore and ungulate species, we found that both indicators decline steadily, and by 2050, under a Business-as-usual (BAU) scenario, geometric mean population abundance declines by 18-35% while extinction risk increases for 8-23% of the species, depending on assumptions about species responses to climate change. BAU will therefore fail Convention on Biological Diversity target 12 of improving the conservation status of known threatened species. An alternative sustainable development scenario reduces both extinction risk and population losses compared with BAU and could lead to population increases. Our approach to model species responses to global changes brings the focus of scenarios directly to the species level, thus taking into account an additional dimension of biodiversity and paving the way for including stronger ecological foundations into future biodiversity scenario assessments.

To address the ongoing global biodiversity crisis, governments have set strategic objectives and have adopted indicators to monitor progress toward their achievement. Projecting the likely impacts on biodiversity of different policy decisions allows decision makers to understand if and how these targets can be met. We projected trends in two widely used indicators of population abundance Geometric Mean Abundance, equivalent to the Living Planet Index and extinction risk (the Red List Index) under different climate and land-use change scenarios. Testing these on terrestrial carnivore and ungulate species, we found that both indicators decline steadily, and by 2050, under a Business-as-usual (BAU) scenario, geometric mean population abundance declines by 18-35% while extinction risk increases for 8-23% of the species, depending on assumptions about species responses to climate change. BAU will therefore fail Convention on Biological Diversity target 12 of improving the conservation status of known threatened species. An alternative sustainable development scenario reduces both extinction risk and population losses compared with BAU and could lead to population increases. Our approach to model species responses to global changes brings the focus of scenarios directly to the species level, thus taking into account an additional dimension of biodiversity and paving the way for including stronger ecological foundations into future biodiversity scenario assessments.

Global biodiversity indicators can be used to measure the status and trends of biodiversity relating to Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) targets. Whether such indicators can support decision makers by distinguishing among policy options remains poorly evaluated. We tested the ability of two CBD indicators, the Living Planet Index and the Red List Index, to reflect projected changes in mammalian populations in sub-Saharan Africa in response to potential policies related to CBD targets for protected areas (PAs). We compared policy scenarios to expand the PA network, improve management effectiveness of the existing network, and combinations of the two, against business as usual. Both indicators showed that more effective management would provide greater benefits to biodiversity than expanding PAs alone. The indicators were able to communicate outcomes of modeled scenarios in a simple quantitative manner, but behaved differently. This work highlights both the considerable potential of indicators in supporting decisions, and the need to understand how indicators will respond as biodiversity changes.

To address the ongoing global biodiversity crisis, governments have set strategic objectives and have adopted indicators to monitor progress toward their achievement. Projecting the likely impacts on biodiversity of different policy decisions allows decision makers to understand if and how these targets can be met. We projected trends in two widely used indicators of population abundance Geometric Mean Abundance, equivalent to the Living Planet Index and extinction risk (the Red List Index) under different climate and land-use change scenarios. Testing these on terrestrial carnivore and ungulate species, we found that both indicators decline steadily, and by 2050, under a Business-as-usual (BAU) scenario, geometric mean population abundance declines by 18-35% while extinction risk increases for 8-23% of the species, depending on assumptions about species responses to climate change. BAU will therefore fail Convention on Biological Diversity target 12 of improving the conservation status of known threatened species. An alternative sustainable development scenario reduces both extinction risk and population losses compared with BAU and could lead to population increases. Our approach to model species responses to global changes brings the focus of scenarios directly to the species level, thus taking into account an additional dimension of biodiversity and paving the way for including stronger ecological foundations into future biodiversity scenario assessments.

The 2010 biodiversity target agreed by signatories to the Convention on Biological Diversity directed the attention of conservation professionals toward the development of indicators with which to measure changes in biological diversity at the global scale. We considered why global biodiversity indicators are needed, what characteristics successful global indicators have, and how existing indicators perform. Because monitoring could absorb a large proportion of funds available for conservation, we believe indicators should be linked explicitly to monitoring objectives and decisions about which monitoring schemes deserve funding should be informed by predictions of the value of such schemes to decision making. We suggest that raising awareness among the public and policy makers, auditing management actions, and informing policy choices are the most important global monitoring objectives. Using four well-developed indicators of biological diversity (extent of forests, coverage of protected areas, Living Planet Index, Red List Index) as examples, we analyzed the characteristics needed for indicators to meet these objectives. We recommend that conservation professionals improve on existing indicators by eliminating spatial biases in data availability, fill gaps in information about ecosystems other than forests, and improve understanding of the way indicators respond to policy changes. Monitoring is not an end in itself, and we believe it is vital that the ultimate objectives of global monitoring of biological diversity inform development of new indicators.

Free to read The 2010 biodiversity target agreed by signatories to the Convention on Biological Diversity directed the attention of conservation professionals toward the development of indicators with which to measure changes in biological diversity at the global scale. We considered why global biodiversity indicators are needed, what characteristics successful global indicators have, and how existing indicators perform. Because monitoring could absorb a large proportion of funds available for conservation, we believe indicators should be linked explicitly to monitoring objectives and decisions about which monitoring schemes deserve funding should be informed by predictions of the value of such schemes to decision making. We suggest that raising awareness among the public and policy makers, auditing management actions, and informing policy choices are the most important global monitoring objectives. Using four well-developed indicators of biological diversity (extent of forests, coverage of protected areas, Living Planet Index, Red List Index) as examples, we analyzed the characteristics needed for indicators to meet these objectives. We recommend that conservation professionals improve on existing indicators by eliminating spatial biases in data availability, fill gaps in information about ecosystems other than forests, and improve understanding of the way indicators respond to policy changes. Monitoring is not an end in itself, and we believe it is vital that the ultimate objectives of global monitoring of biological diversity inform development of new indicators. ©2010 Society for Conservation Biology.