The Scope and Treatment of Threats in Endangered Species Recovery Plans

Lawler, Joshua J.; Campbell, Steven; Guerry, Anne D.; Kolozsvary, Mary Beth; O’Connor, Raymond J.; Seward, Lindsay C. N.

doi:10.2307/3060975

Cited by 44 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is hard to determine what efforts outside of the ESA are reducing threats to biodiversity, and a lack of basic understanding of the dynamic nature of threats causing species to require federal protection can undermine recovery efforts (Lawler et al, 2002). Past analyses have identified habitat degradation/loss, invasive species, pollution, and transient human disturbances as the biggest threats causing species to become listed under the ESA (Evans et al, 2016;Wilcove, Rothstein, Dubow, Phillips, & Losos, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal analysis of threats causing species endangerment in the United States

Leu

Haines

Check

et al. 2019

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding temporal variation of threats that cause species endangerment is a key to understand conservation strategies needed to improve species recovery. We assessed temporal variation in the threats to species listed under the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA) as identified by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Based on initial review of ESA listing decisions and literature, we identified six overarching threat categories: habitat modification, overutilization, pollution, species-species interaction, demographic stochasticity, and environmental stochasticity. We screened listing decision documents to determine threat occurrence (i.e., presence/absence of a given threat in a listing decision) for each threat category for all species listed between 1975 and 2017. We evaluated how the number of threats and specific threat occurrences changed over the past four decades. We found that the number of threats per listing decision increased more than twofold from an average of 1.5 (95% CI: 1.3-1.7) threats in 1975 to 3.7 (95% CI: 3.4-4.0) threats in 2017. Threat occurrence increased for habitat modification, environmental stochasticity and species-species interaction, while it decreased for overutilization since 1975 and for demographic stochasticity and pollution since the mid-2000s. The documented increase in number of threats at time of listing may be due to a growing human population exerting increased pressure on species persistence, improved scientific advancement in understanding factors influencing species endangerment, or prolonged time taken for more recent species to be listed under the ESA. We believe that key federal and state governmental regulations have resulted in a documented decrease in overutilization, demographic stochasticity, and pollution, and we recommend large-scale strategies combined with local planning efforts to address the growing threats of habitat loss, environmental stochasticity, and species-species interaction. K E Y W O R D SEndangered Species Act, environmental regulations, policy, temporal, threats Authors after Haines are listed in alphabetical order

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal analysis of threats causing species endangerment in the United States

Leu

Haines

Check

et al. 2019

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Habitat loss and fragmentation are considered to be among the most imminent threats to biological diversity worldwide and thus are fundamental issues in conservation biology [1]–[4]. Fragmentation is a complex phenomenon that is simultaneously a consequence of habitat loss and a process in and of itself [5]–[7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Power to Detect Recent Fragmentation Events Using Genetic Differentiation Methods

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Habitat loss and fragmentation are imminent threats to biological diversity worldwide and thus are fundamental issues in conservation biology. Increased isolation alone has been implicated as a driver of negative impacts in populations associated with fragmented landscapes. Genetic monitoring and the use of measures of genetic divergence have been proposed as means to detect changes in landscape connectivity. Our goal was to evaluate the sensitivity of Wright’s F st, Hedrick’ G’st, Sherwin’s MI, and Jost’s D to recent fragmentation events across a range of population sizes and sampling regimes. We constructed an individual-based model, which used a factorial design to compare effects of varying population size, presence or absence of overlapping generations, and presence or absence of population sub-structuring. Increases in population size, overlapping generations, and population sub-structuring each reduced F st, G’st, MI, and D. The signal of fragmentation was detected within two generations for all metrics. However, the magnitude of the change in each was small in all cases, and when N e was >100 individuals it was extremely small. Multi-generational sampling and population estimates are required to differentiate the signal of background divergence from changes in Fst, G’st, MI, and D associated with fragmentation. Finally, the window during which rapid change in Fst, G’st, MI, and D between generations occurs can be small, and if missed would lead to inconclusive results. For these reasons, use of F st, G’st, MI, or D for detecting and monitoring changes in connectivity is likely to prove difficult in real-world scenarios. We advocate use of genetic monitoring only in conjunction with estimates of actual movement among patches such that one could compare current movement with the genetic signature of past movement to determine there has been a change.

show abstract

“…Butler, du Toit & Bingham, 2004;Manor & Saltz, 2004;Marks & Duncan, 2009) and increased susceptibility to persisting and/or novel diseases (e.g. Lawler et al, 2002;Rhodes et al, 2011). Human activities occur disproportionately more in fertile lowland regions, and species in these areas are often not well represented in protected areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wildlife disease prevalence in human‐modified landscapes

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human-induced landscape change associated with habitat loss and fragmentation places wildlife populations at risk. One issue in these landscapes is a change in the prevalence of disease which may result in increased mortality and reduced fecundity. Our understanding of the influence of habitat loss and fragmentation on the prevalence of wildlife diseases is still in its infancy. What is evident is that changes in disease prevalence as a result of human-induced landscape modification are highly variable. The importance of infectious diseases for the conservation of wildlife will increase as the amount and quality of suitable habitat decreases due to human land-use pressures. We review the experimental and observational literature of the influence of human-induced landscape change on wildlife disease prevalence, and discuss disease transmission types and host responses as mechanisms that are likely to determine the extent of change in disease prevalence. It is likely that transmission dynamics will be the key process in determining a pathogen's impact on a host population, while the host response may ultimately determine the extent of disease prevalence. Finally, we conceptualize mechanisms and identify future research directions to increase our understanding of the relationship between human-modified landscapes and wildlife disease prevalence. This review highlights that there are rarely consistent relationships between wildlife diseases and human-modified landscapes. In addition, variation is evident between transmission types and landscape types, with the greatest positive influence on disease prevalence being in urban landscapes and directly transmitted disease systems. While we have a limited understanding of the potential influence of habitat loss and fragmentation on wildlife disease, there are a number of important areas to address in future research, particularly to account for the variability in increased and decreased disease prevalence. Previous studies have been based on a one-dimensional comparison between unmodified and modified sites. What is lacking are spatially and temporally explicit quantitative approaches which are required to enable an understanding of the range of key causal mechanisms and the reasons for variability. This is particularly important for replicated studies across different host-pathogen systems. Furthermore, there are few studies that have attempted to separate the independent effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on wildlife disease, which are the major determinants of wildlife population dynamics in human-modified landscapes. There is an urgent need to understand better the potential causal links between the processes of human-induced landscape change and the associated influences of habitat fragmentation, matrix hostility and loss of connectivity on an animal's physiological stress, immune response and disease susceptibility. This review identified no study that had assessed the influence of human-induced landscape change on the prevalence of a wildlife sexually transmi...

show abstract

The Scope and Treatment of Threats in Endangered Species Recovery Plans

Cited by 44 publications

References 8 publications

Temporal analysis of threats causing species endangerment in the United States

Temporal analysis of threats causing species endangerment in the United States

The Power to Detect Recent Fragmentation Events Using Genetic Differentiation Methods

Wildlife disease prevalence in human‐modified landscapes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About