Taxonomic biases persist from listing to management for Canadian species at risk

Creighton, Maria J.A.; Bennett, Joseph

doi:10.1080/11956860.2019.1613752

Cited by 16 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consequently, as an example only six marine fish were included in the analysis by McCune et al (2013) compared to the 41 included in this analysis-all of which had BRU as a listed threat. This bias against listing harvested fish and northern mammals under SARA has been welldocumented in the literature (Mooers et al 2007;Findlay et al 2009;Creighton and Bennett 2019) and likely contributes to the discrepancies between our analysis and that of McCune et al (2013). Within the analysis, threats were rarely listed in isolation.…”

Section: Threat Profilesmentioning

confidence: 85%

An analysis of threats and factors that predict trends in Canadian vertebrates designated as at-risk

Currie

Marconi

2020

FACETS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The identification of factors that predict trends in population abundance is critical to formulate successful conservation strategies. Here, we explore population trends of Canadian vertebrates assessed as “at-risk” by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada and the threats affecting these trends using data from the Canadian Living Planet Index. We investigate how threat profiles—the combination of threats for a given species—vary among species and taxonomic groups. We then investigate threat profile as a predictor of temporal trends—both exclusively and in combination with additional biotic and abiotic factors. Species had 5.06 (±2.77) threats listed on average, and biological resource use (BRU) was the most frequently cited. Our analysis also revealed an association between taxonomic group and population trends, as measured by the proportion of annual increases (years with a positive interannual change). By contrast, the predictive power of threat profile was poor. This analysis yielded some useful insight for conservation action, particularly the prioritization of abating BRU. However, the predictive models were not as meaningful as originally anticipated. We provide recommendations on methodological improvements to advance the understanding of factors that predict trends in population abundance for prioritizing conservation action.

show abstract

Section: Threat Profilesmentioning

confidence: 85%

An analysis of threats and factors that predict trends in Canadian vertebrates designated as at-risk

Currie

Marconi

2020

FACETS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, plains bison (Bison bison bison) were considered as Threatened by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada in 2004, but the sub-species remains unprotected in the wild under Canada's Species at Risk Act (SARA) because of negative economic implications for the Canadian bison-ranching industry [2]. Literature reviews have underscored that animal species are less likely to become protected by SARA if their protection is deemed to incur economic impacts [3][4][5][6]. When it comes to the management of Canadian forests--the habitat of many species--there is a long-standing tension between the production and protection of natural resources [7] with the former generally being the favoured option [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When the protection of a threatened species depends on the economy of a foreign nation

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A significant challenge of conservation biology is to preserve species in places where their critical habitat also attracts significant economic interest. The problem is compounded when species distributions occur across large spatial extents. Threatened boreal caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) epitomize this problem: their critical habitat encompasses a vast expanse of forest that also supplies much of Canada's merchantable timber. Boreal caribou were protected under the Canada Species at Risk Act in 2003. We investigated putative drivers of reduced disturbance for caribou habitat since then. Where the cumulative logging footprint slowed within caribou habitat, this has resulted neither from decreases in annual allowable cut of timber nor the creation or expansion of protected areas. Rather, it has fluctuated with the American economy relative to that of Canada. For each $0.05 US lost over the $CAD, 129 km 2 of caribou habitat was not disturbed by logging in a given year. Recent population declines have been occurring even though logging typically remained at <70% of allowed levels. Our study raises concerns about how caribou are functionally being conserved under the current application of existing legislation. In this globalized world, the economy of foreign nations is increasingly likely to govern national conservation objectives.

show abstract

“…Despite a comprehensive mechanism by which DFO can communicate scientific advice in the SARAlisting process, species governed by DFO, in particular freshwater fishes, are disproportionately less likely to be listed under SARA compared with other taxa (Mooers et al 2007;Favaro et al 2014;Dorey and Walker 2018). Creighton and Bennett (2019) found that 57% of fish species assessed by COSEWIC between 2003 and 2017 were not listed under SARA. For freshwater fishes with an RPA written before a SARA-listing decision (n = 34), 41% have not been listed under SARA, each owing to delays in the SARA-listing process associated with extended consultations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of science advice in recovery potential assessments in freshwater fish listing decisions under the Canadian Species at Risk Act

Montgomery

Stratton

Bzonek

et al. 2021

FACETS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fishes assessed as Threatened or Endangered by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada are disproportionately less likely to be listed under the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) compared to other taxa. We examined the extent to which the amount and type of science advice in a Recovery Potential Assessment (RPA) contributes to SARA-listing decisions for 34 wildlife species of freshwater fishes in Canada. We used a generalized linear mixed model to describe SARA listing status as a function of RPA completeness. Principal coordinates analyses were conducted to assess similarity in answers to RPA questions among listed and nonlisted species. The amount and type of science advice within an RPA were weakly related to SARA status. RPA completeness accounted for only 7.4% of model variation when family was included as a random effect, likely because nine species not listed under SARA (64%) belong to the sturgeon family. Our results suggest that, while potentially useful for informing recovery strategies, RPAs do not appear to be driving listing status for freshwater fishes in Canada. Factors beyond scientific advice likely contribute to nonlisted species and delays in listing decisions.

show abstract

Taxonomic biases persist from listing to management for Canadian species at risk

Cited by 16 publications

References 16 publications

An analysis of threats and factors that predict trends in Canadian vertebrates designated as at-risk

An analysis of threats and factors that predict trends in Canadian vertebrates designated as at-risk

When the protection of a threatened species depends on the economy of a foreign nation

The role of science advice in recovery potential assessments in freshwater fish listing decisions under the Canadian Species at Risk Act

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About