Introducing a common taxonomy to support learning from failure in conservation

Dickson, Iain; Butchart, Stuart H. M.; Catalano, Allison S.; Gibbons, David W.; Jones, Julia P. G.; Lee‐Brooks, Katie; Oldfield, Thomasina; Noble, David G.; Paterson, S. K.; Roy, Sugoto; Semelin, Julien; Tinsley‐Marshall, Paul; Trevelyan, Rosie; Wauchope, Hannah S.; Wicander, Sylvia; Sutherland, William J.

doi:10.1111/cobi.13967

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are multiple reasons for the project failure (sensu Dickson et al., 2022); we limit discussion to the impacts of method efficiency and deer density. The eradication was considered incomplete because there were still deer remaining on at least two of the six islands when the decision was made to cease operations (Holmes et al., 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative efficiency of hunting methods during an incomplete Sitka black‐tailed deer eradication on Haida Gwaii, Canada

Irvine,

Thorley

2024

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasive species are reducing global biodiversity. The Llgaay gwii sdiihlda—Restoring Balance project was initiated to halt and reverse biodiversity loss on six islands on Haida Gwaii, Canada through the eradication of invasive Sitka Black‐tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus sitkensis). Invasive deer were killed using various hunting methods including bait station, boat, aerial and indicator dog hunting as well as a combination of bailing dogs with boat and aerial hunting. Cost was quantified in terms of helicopter hunting hours ($1965 CAD/hr at the time of the study) to facilitate comparisons. Efficiency was quantified as the expected number of deer per helicopter hour. Hierarchical Bayesian integrated removal models were used to estimate the change in efficiency of the various hunting methods with deer density based on a power function. The models used the number of scent trail detections by dogs at the end of the study to help parameterise the population density. At densities between 2 and 30 deer/km2, boat hunting was estimated as the most efficient method while at lower densities indicator dog hunting was most efficient. The eradication was incomplete. The estimated cost to completion using indicator dog hunting for each island was 43 helicopter hours (~$84,000) on Ramsay Island (95% CI = 19–128), 3.9 helicopter hours on Murchison Island (95% CI = 0.56–18) and no additional hours on House (95% CI = 0–1.6) though the selected method would likely have been indicator dogs with combined hunting due to the variable terrain. Lessons learned: DNA connectivity analysis can be used to determine project durability, pilot studies to confirm method efficiency in local context will increase the chances of success, local knowledge improves efficiency of hunting methods, population and efficiency estimates should be updated throughout operations to allow adaptive management, eradications on ungulates can include pauses to facilitate adaptive management, the level of certainty for determining eradication completion should be determined in advance of operations with explicit trade‐offs identified for managers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative efficiency of hunting methods during an incomplete Sitka black‐tailed deer eradication on Haida Gwaii, Canada

Irvine,

Thorley

2024

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is often due to the costs of monitoring combined with weak enforcement of monitoring requirements or unclear responsibilities for implementation (Lewis et al, 2016; Stone et al, 2013). However, this is also a problem for the wider conservation sector where detailed evaluations, particularly at project or programme scales, can be limited and poorly designed (Ferraro & Pattanayak, 2006; Dickson et al, 2022).…”

Section: Principles For Evidence‐based Biodiversity Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Principles for using evidence to improve biodiversity impact mitigation by business

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an increasing expectation on the private sector to address biodiversity impacts and contribute towards global conservation goals. Appropriate evidence use can help businesses avoid biodiversity losses and realise gains, reduce resources wasted on ineffective or suboptimal action, whilst minimising biodiversity-related risks and securing opportunities from engaging with biodiversity.We review the status of evidence-based action in the private sector, where previous studies have identified concerning trends, and explore the barriers that may currently be hindering evidence use.To learn from this, and improve evidence use, we propose a set of principles for evidence-based biodiversity impact mitigation. We outline tools and resources that can help businesses move towards evidence-based practice and achieve each of these principles.Meeting these principles would improve the biodiversity outcomes from business' biodiversity related actions. However, for business action to contribute more fully to global conservation goals, broader political and socio-economic issues also need addressing.

show abstract

“…The reluctance to use biodiversity data may be compounded by the low level of importance given to environmental issues. In conservation bodies, there is often a reluctance to share bad news or project failures, presumably to avoid putting off donors, which has led to the suggestion there is limited space to fail [2,185], despite the importance of sharing experience and learning from failure [186].…”

Section: Root Causes and Interlinkages Between Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the Impact of Conservation: The Growing Importance of Monitoring Fauna, Flora and Funga

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many stakeholders, from governments to civil society to businesses, lack the data they need to make informed decisions on biodiversity, jeopardising efforts to conserve, restore and sustainably manage nature. Here we review the importance of enhancing biodiversity monitoring, assess the challenges involved and identify potential solutions. Capacity for biodiversity monitoring needs to be enhanced urgently, especially in poorer, high-biodiversity countries where data gaps are disproportionately high. Modern tools and technologies, including remote sensing, bioacoustics and environmental DNA, should be used at larger scales to fill taxonomic and geographic data gaps, especially in the tropics, in marine and freshwater biomes, and for plants, fungi and invertebrates. Stakeholders need to follow best monitoring practices, adopting appropriate indicators and using counterfactual approaches to measure and attribute outcomes and impacts. Data should be made openly and freely available. Companies need to invest in collecting the data required to enhance sustainability in their operations and supply chains. With governments soon to commit to the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, the time is right to make a concerted push on monitoring. However, action at scale is needed now if we are to enhance results-based management adequately to conserve the biodiversity and ecosystem services we all depend on.

show abstract

Introducing a common taxonomy to support learning from failure in conservation

Abstract: W. J. (2022). Introducing a common taxonomy to support learning from failure in conservation. Conservation Biology.

Cited by 11 publications

References 36 publications

Relative efficiency of hunting methods during an incomplete Sitka black‐tailed deer eradication on Haida Gwaii, Canada

Relative efficiency of hunting methods during an incomplete Sitka black‐tailed deer eradication on Haida Gwaii, Canada

Principles for using evidence to improve biodiversity impact mitigation by business

Measuring the Impact of Conservation: The Growing Importance of Monitoring Fauna, Flora and Funga

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About