Aim Although urbanization impacts many species, there is little information on the patterns of occurrences of threatened species in urban relative to non‐urban areas. By assessing the extent of the distribution of threatened species across all Australian cities, we aim to investigate the currently under‐utilized opportunity that cities present for national biodiversity conservation. Location Australian mainland, Tasmania and offshore islands. Methods Distributions of Australia's 1643 legally protected terrestrial species (hereafter ‘threatened species’) were compiled. We assessed the extent to which they overlapped with 99 cities (of more than 10,000 people), with all non‐urban areas, and with simulated ‘dummy’ cities which covered the same area and bioregion as the true cities but were non‐urban. We analysed differences between animals and plants, and examined variability within these groups using species accumulation modelling. Threatened species richness of true versus dummy cities was analysed using generalized linear mixed‐effects models. Results Australian cities support substantially more nationally threatened animal and plant species than all other non‐urban areas on a unit‐area basis. Thirty per cent of threatened species were found to occur in cities. Distribution patterns differed between plants and animals: individual threatened plant species were generally found in fewer cities than threatened animal species, yet plants were more likely to have a greater proportion of their distribution in urban areas than animals. Individual cities tended to contain unique suites of threatened species, especially threatened plants. The analysis of true versus dummy cities demonstrated that, even after accounting for factors such as net primary productivity and distance to the coast, cities still consistently supported a greater number of threatened species. Main conclusions This research highlights that Australian cities are important for the conservation of threatened species, and that the species assemblages of individual cities are relatively distinct. National conservation policy should recognize that cities play an integral role when planning for and managing threatened species.

No abstract

Complementary public and private conservation action is required to sustain native biodiversity in cities. Residents can contribute by wildlife gardening -removing environmental weeds, cultivating indigenous flora, and improving habitat in their gardens. There is currently little guidance about how best to involve residents in wildlife gardening and align their work with public land management. We explored how a purposively chosen wildlife gardening program in Melbourne, Australia engaged and supported residents to augment local government efforts to conserve indigenous biota. Sixteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with program members to understand the program's impact on their gardening and their connections with their council and community. Unpublished Council survey data were used to position interview findings on wildlife gardening activities and the value of program features. Interviewees detailed how they modified their gardening to assist their council to conserve indigenous biota. Five program features were implicated in this change: (1) on-site garden assessment; (2) indigenous community nursery; (3) communication hubs; (4) a framework that fosters experiential learning and community linkages; and (5) endorsement of each garden's potential conservation contribution. Collaborative wildlife gardening programs can engage residents to manage their land to achieve landscape-focused conservation goals while building relationships with council and community.

No abstract

No abstract