Nuclear power and coastal birds: Predicting the ecological consequences of warm-water outflows

Garcia, Cécile; Stillman, Richard A.; Forster, Rodney M.; Silva, Tiago; Bremner, Julie

doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2016.09.017

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The drivers could have been a potential threat to a site or a network of sites (Table 1). Four families of drivers were identified: Development during construction (e.g., Fehmarn Belt tunnel; FEBI 2013 a , b ) and operation (e.g., Severn Estuary—A tidal barrage; Bournemouth University 2010; Liverpool Bay wind farm, Kaiser et al 2005; Cardiff Bay tidal lagoon, Goss‐Custard et al 2006 a ; Bridgwater Bay nuclear power station, Garcia et al 2016; Southampton Water—A port development, Wood 2007). Management of the biotic (e.g., Baie de Somme—A and C shellfishing; Goss‐Custard et al 2004, dit Durell et al 2008; Dee Estuary shellfishing, West and McGrorty 2003, Stillman and Wood 2013 b ; Solway Firth shellfishing, Stillman 2008 a , Stillman and Wood 2013 a ; Exe Estuary—E and G shellfishing, Stillman et al 2014, Goss‐Custard et al 2019) and physical environment (e.g., Baie de Cadiz sea‐level rise, Stillman et al 2005 a ).…”

Section: Lessons From the Waterbird Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Embedding stakeholders in the process also allows them to test scenarios, thus increasing their confidence and acceptance in the methods and to adjust their management response (Wood et al 2018). For example, stakeholders from industry, government, and conservation charities were involved in data input, testing conservation strategies for shellfisheries management (Burry Inlet, Stillman et al 2001, West et al 2003 b ; Burry Inlet/Three Rivers, Stillman 2008 c , Stillman et al 2010; Solway Firth, Stillman 2008 a , Stillman and Wood 2013 a ; The Wash—A, Stillman et al 2003, Goss‐Custard et al 2004; Menai Straits, West and McGrorty 2003, Caldow et al 2004; Morecambe Bay, West and Stillman 2010), building of power facilities (Bridgwater Bay, Garcia et al 2016; Liverpool Bay, Kaiser et al 2005), housing development (Southampton Water—B; Stillman et al 2012), port development (Baie de Seine, dit Durell et al 2005; Humber—A, Stillman et al 2005 b ), and habitat loss (Southampton Water—A, Wood 2007; Cardiff Bay, Goss‐Custard et al 2006 a ).…”

Section: Using Ibms More Efficientlymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evidence‐based conservation in a changing world: lessons from waterbird individual‐based models

Brown

Stillman

2021

Ecosphere

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drivers of environmental change are causing novel combinations of pressures on ecological systems. Prediction in ecology often uses understanding of past conditions to make predictions to the future, but such an approach can breakdown when future conditions have not previously been encountered. Individual-based models (IBMs) consider ecological systems as arising from the adaptive behavior and fates of individuals and have potential to provide more reliable predictions. To demonstrate potential, we review a lineage of related IBMs addressing the effects of environmental change on waterbirds, comprising 53 case studies of 28 species in 32 sites in 9 countries, using the Drivers-Pressures-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) environmental management framework. Each case study comprises the predictions of an IBM on the effects of one or more drivers of environmental change on one or more bird species. Drivers exert a pressure on the environment which is represented in the IBMs as changes in either area or time available for feeding, the quality of habitat, or the energetic cost of living within an environment. Birds in the IBMs adapt to increased pressure by altering their behavioral state, defined as their location, diet, and the proportion of time spent feeding. If the birds are not able to compensate behaviorally, they suffer a physiological impact, determined by a decrease in body energy reserves, increased mortality, or decreased ability to migrate. Each case study assesses the impact of alternative drivers and potential ways to mitigate impacts to advise appropriate conservation management responses. We overview the lessons learned from the case studies and highlight the opportunities of using IBMs to inform conservation management for other species. Key findings indicate that understanding the behavioral and physiological processes that determine whether or not birds survive following a change in their environment is vital, so that mitigation measures can be better targeted. This is especially important where multiple hazards exist so that sensitivities and worse-case scenarios can be better understood. Increasing the involvement of stakeholders to help inform and shape model development is encouraged and can lead to better representation of the modeled system and wider understanding and support for the final model.

show abstract

Section: Lessons From the Waterbird Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Using Ibms More Efficientlymentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence‐based conservation in a changing world: lessons from waterbird individual‐based models

Brown

Stillman

2021

Ecosphere

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fehmarn Belt tunnel (FEBI 2013b, a)) and operation (e.g. Severn Estuary -A tidal barrage (Bournemouth University 2010); Liverpool Bay wind farm (Kaiser et al 2005); Cardiff Bay tidal lagoon (Goss-Custard et al 2006a); Bridgwater Bay nuclear power station (Garcia et al 2016); Southampton Water -A port development (Wood 2007)).…”

Section: Waterbird Ibms In Relation To the Dpsir Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This work is provided by the authors as a means to ensure timely dissemination of scholarly work on a non-commercial basis. power facilities (Bridgwater Bay (Garcia et al 2016), Liverpool Bay (Kaiser et al 2005)), housing development (Southampton Water -B (Stillman et al 2012)), port development (Baie de Seine (dit Durell et al 2005), Humber -A (Stillman et al 2005b)), and habitat loss (Southampton Water -A (Wood 2007), Cardiff Bay (Goss-Custard et al 2006a)).…”

Section: Inclusion Of Stakeholdersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence-based conservation in a changing world: lessons from waterbird individual-based models

Brown¹,

Stillman²

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nuclear power and coastal birds: Predicting the ecological consequences of warm-water outflows

Cited by 2 publications

References 73 publications

Evidence‐based conservation in a changing world: lessons from waterbird individual‐based models

Evidence‐based conservation in a changing world: lessons from waterbird individual‐based models

Evidence-based conservation in a changing world: lessons from waterbird individual-based models

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About