Uncovering antagonisms in recovery planning for species at risk: A diagnostic approach

Abstract

Amid Earth's ongoing sixth mass extinction event, numerous measures have been proposed to recover the populations of species at risk of extinction. However, the methods and objectives of different species' recovery plans sometimes conflict with each other, causing a conundrum we refer to as recovery–action antagonism. Recovery–action antagonism reduces the cost‐effectiveness of conservation programs and can increase the extinction risk of nontarget species. We describe a method to identify interactions between recovery actions, including antagonisms proposed for different at‐risk species in a given location. The method includes a process to evaluate potential drivers of recovery‐action antagonism and other interaction types using principal coordinates analysis and distance‐based redundancy analysis. We illustrate various applications of the method through case studies performed in Pelee Island and Rouge National Urban Park, two biodiverse areas in Ontario, Canada. Potential antagonism was identified between 1.5% (Pelee) and 5% (Rouge) of the evaluated recovery actions. Although the rate of antagonism was low in our case studies, the method allows the identification of a variety of interactions, which can help to prioritize similar and complementary actions that will benefit a large number of species while minimizing actions that may have competing outcomes.

Trimming the hedges in a hurricane: Endangered Species lack research on the outcomes of conservation action

“…Captive breeding was found to be largely effective across species relative to other action categories, but typically does not address the initial drivers of population declines. Several actions demonstrated antagonistic effects (Silver et al, 2023), benefiting certain species at risk while harming others, but some, including creating or protecting habitat and sustainable agriculture, were broadly beneficial across all species examined.…”

“…Moreover, a species-specific investigation can allow for an improved understanding of the variation in response across species, within taxonomic groups, laying the foundation for more effective multi-species approaches. This is important when we consider that actions that benefit one species could have a range of positive to negative effects on another occupying the same habitat (Silver et al, 2023). The resulting database details actions that have been empirically tested and how they impacted each individual species, whether positively or negatively.…”