Making monitoring meaningful

Abstract

Conservation monitoring in Australia has assumed increasing importance in recent years, as societal pressure to actively manage environmental problems has risen. More resources than ever before are being channelled to the task of documenting environmental change.Yet the field remains crippled by a pervasive lack of rigour in analysing, reporting and responding to the results of data collected. Millions of dollars are currently being wasted on monitoring programmes that have no realistic chance of detecting changes in the variables of interest. This is partly because detecting change in ecological systems is a genuinely difficult technical and logistical challenge. However, the failure to plan, fund and execute sophisticated analyses of monitoring data and then to use the results to improve monitoring methods, can also be attributed to the failure of professional ecologists, conservation practitioners and bureaucrats to work effectively together. In this paper, we offer constructive advice about how all parties involved can help to change this situation. We use three case studies of recent monitoring projects from our own experience to illustrate ways in which the disconnect between science and bureaucracy can be bridged and some obstacles to collecting and analysing ecologically meaningful data sets can be overcome. We urge a continuing discussion on this issue and hope to stimulate a change in the culture of conservation monitoring in Australia.

Steps towards better amphibian conservation

“…This means that conservation practitioners must improve conservation and management of amphibians and scientists should provide novel methods to deal with old and new problems faced by conservation practitioners. Unfortunately, the dialogue between scientists and conservationists is often insufficient and conservation practitioners rarely base their decisions on scientific evidence (Sutherland et al 2004, Pullin and Knight 2005, Field et al 2007. Therefore, the contribution by Gilioli et al (2008) where conservation practitioners and scientists join forces to solve a real-world conservation problem is highly welcome.…”

Using variance components to estimate power in a hierarchically nested sampling design

“…Survey designs with low statistical power have a high probability of failing to detect population change and are likely to mislead managers by falsely concluding a population is stable (Peterman 1990;Taylor and Gerrodette 1993;Legg and Nagy 2006). Incorporating estimates of statistical power is therefore essential when choosing an appropriate sampling design structure (Legg and Nagy 2006;Field et al 2007), which in turn affects monitoring schemes.…”

Threats from introduced birds to native birds

“…Nevertheless, community support is often an essential component of control programs (Lunney et al 2007;Strubbe et al 2011) and there are instances of programs being rendered ineffective because of public resistance (Genovesi 2005). Above all, programs that purport to be dealing with introduced birds for the sake of biodiversity conservation must define the threat that is being managed, assess the efficacy of the methods being used, and define, monitor and evaluate threat abatement (Field et al 2007;Davis et al 2011;Lowe et al 2011; see Box 1).…”