Volume 33, Issue 2 p. 456-468
Conservation Methods

Metrics of progress in the understanding and management of threats to Australian birds

S. T. Garnett

Corresponding Author

S. T. Garnett

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory, 0909 Australia

Address correspondence to S. T. Garnett, email [email protected].Search for more papers by this author
S. H. M. Butchart

S. H. M. Butchart

BirdLife International, David Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street, Cambridge, CB2 3QZ U.K.

Department of Zoology, The University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge, CB2 3EJ U.K.

Search for more papers by this author
G. B. Baker

G. B. Baker

Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, The University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, 7005 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
E. Bayraktarov

E. Bayraktarov

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld, 4072 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
K. L. Buchanan

K. L. Buchanan

School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, 75 Pigdons Road, Geelong, Victoria, 3216 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
A. A. Burbidge

A. A. Burbidge

87 Rosedale Street, Floreat, Western Australia, 6014 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
A. L. M. Chauvenet

A. L. M. Chauvenet

School of Environment and Science & Environmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, 4222 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
L. Christidis

L. Christidis

National Marine Science Centre, Southern Cross University, Lismore, New South Wales, 2480 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
G. Ehmke

G. Ehmke

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld, 4072 Australia

BirdLife Australia, Carlton, Victoria, 3053 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
M. Grace

M. Grace

Department of Zoology, The University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3PS U.K.

Search for more papers by this author
D. G. Hoccom

D. G. Hoccom

Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Bedfordshire, SG 19 2DL U.K.

Search for more papers by this author
S. M. Legge

S. M. Legge

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld, 4072 Australia

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, 2601 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
I. Leiper

I. Leiper

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory, 0909 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
D. B. Lindenmayer

D. B. Lindenmayer

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, 2601 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
R. H. Loyn

R. H. Loyn

The Centre for Freshwater Ecosystems, School of Life Sciences, La Trobe University, Wodonga, Victoria, 3690 Australia

Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, Albury, New South Wales, 2640 Australia

Eco Insights, Beechworth, Victoria, 3747 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
M. Maron

M. Maron

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld, 4072 Australia

School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, 4072 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
P. McDonald

P. McDonald

Zoology, School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, New South Wales, 2351 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
P. Menkhorst

P. Menkhorst

Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research, Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Heidelberg, Victoria, 3084 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
H. P. Possingham

H. P. Possingham

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld, 4072 Australia

The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA, 22203-1606 U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author
J. Radford

J. Radford

Department of Ecology, Environment and Evolution, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, 3086 Australia

Research Centre for Future Landscapes, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, 3086 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
A. E. Reside

A. E. Reside

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld, 4072 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
D. M. Watson

D. M. Watson

Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, Albury, New South Wales, 2640 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
J. E. M. Watson

J. E. M. Watson

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Qld, 4072 Australia

School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, 4072 Australia

Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, NY, 10460-1068 U.S.A.

Search for more papers by this author
B. Wintle

B. Wintle

School of Bioscience, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, 3010 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
J. C. Z. Woinarski

J. C. Z. Woinarski

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory, 0909 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
H. M. Geyle

H. M. Geyle

Threatened Species Recovery Hub, National Environmental Science Program, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory, 0909 Australia

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 22 November 2018
Citations: 21

Article impact statement: Quantification of needs and achievements in research and management will help conservation funders and practitioners prioritize investment and action.

Abstract

en

Although evidence-based approaches have become commonplace for determining the success of conservation measures for the management of threatened taxa, there are no standard metrics for assessing progress in research or management. We developed 5 metrics to meet this need for threatened taxa and to quantify the need for further action and effective alleviation of threats. These metrics (research need, research achievement, management need, management achievement, and percent threat reduction) can be aggregated to examine trends for an individual taxon or for threats across multiple taxa. We tested the utility of these metrics by applying them to Australian threatened birds, which appears to be the first time that progress in research and management of threats has been assessed for all threatened taxa in a faunal group at a continental scale. Some research has been conducted on nearly three-quarters of known threats to taxa, and there is a clear understanding of how to alleviate nearly half of the threats with the highest impact. Some management has been attempted on nearly half the threats. Management outcomes ranged from successful trials to complete mitigation of the threat, including for one-third of high-impact threats. Progress in both research and management tended to be greater for taxa that were monitored or occurred on oceanic islands. Predation by cats had the highest potential threat score. However, there has been some success reducing the impact of cat predation, so climate change (particularly drought), now poses the greatest threat to Australian threatened birds. Our results demonstrate the potential for the proposed metrics to encapsulate the major trends in research and management of both threats and threatened taxa and provide a basis for international comparisons of evidence-based conservation science.

Abstract

es

Medidas de Progreso en el Entendimiento y el Manejo de las Amenazas que Enfrentan las Aves Australianas

Resumen

Aunque los métodos basados en evidencias se han vuelto muy comunes para la determinación del éxito de las medidas de conservación del manejo de los taxones amenazados, hoy en día no existen medidas estandarizadas para la evaluación del progreso de la investigación o el manejo. Desarrollamos cinco medidas para cumplir con esta necesidad que tienen los taxones amenazados y para cuantificar la necesidad de una mayor acción y un alivio efectivo de las amenazas. Estas medidas (falta de investigación, éxito de la investigación, falta de manejo, éxito del manejo y porcentaje de reducción de amenazas) pueden agregarse para examinar las tendencias de un taxón individual o las tendencias de las amenazas para múltiples taxones. Probamos la utilidad de estas medidas por medio de su aplicación en aves australianas amenazadas, que parece ser la primera vez que se evalúa el progreso en la investigación y en el manejo de amenazas para el caso de varios taxones amenazados dentro de un grupo faunístico a escala continental. Se ha realizado algún tipo de investigación sobre casi tres cuartas partes de las amenazas conocidas para los taxones, y hay un claro entendimiento de cómo aliviar casi la mitad de las amenazas con el impacto más alto. Se ha intentado algún tipo de manejo con casi la mitad de las amenazas. Los resultados del manejo variaron desde ensayos exitosos hasta la mitigación completa de la amenaza, incluso para un tercio de las amenazas de alto impacto. Tanto el progreso en la investigación como en el manejo tendió a ser mayor para los taxones que estaban siendo monitoreados, o que ocurrían en islas oceánicas. La depredación por gatos tuvo el puntaje más como amenaza potencial. Sin embargo, ha habido poco de éxito en la reducción del impacto de la depredación por gatos, así que ahora el cambio climático (particularmente la sequía) es la mayor amenaza para las aves amenazadas en Australia. Nuestros resultados demuestran el potencial que tienen las medidas propuestas de encapsular las tendencias más importantes en la investigación y en el manejo tanto de las amenazas como de los taxones amenazados y de proporcionar una base para comparaciones internacionales de la ciencia de la conservación basada en evidencias.

摘要

zh

虽然受威胁物种的管理中常常用到基于证据的方法来确定保护措施的成效, 但还没有统一的标准来评估受胁物种研究或管理的进展。我们为受威胁物种制定了五个指标, 并量化分析了深入行动和有效减缓威胁的需求。这些指标 (研究需求、研究成果、管理需求、管理成果和威胁减少的百分比) 可以共同用于分析单个类群的趋势或跨类群的威胁。我们通过在澳大利亚受胁迫鸟类上的应用检验了这些指标的效用, 这是首次在大陆尺度上评估一个动物区系中所有受胁迫类群面临威胁的研究和管理进展。该类群已知的威胁中有四分之三已有一些研究, 且影响最大的威胁中有一半已被清楚地指出应如何减缓这种威胁。针对近一半的威胁因素已有相应管理措施。管理成果包括成功的尝试到完全减缓威胁, 这涉及了三分之一影响较大的威胁。那些受到监测、或分布在海岛上, 或的类群的研究和管理往往有更多进展。被猫捕食的鸟类受到的潜在威胁最大。不过, 在减轻被猫捕食的影响方面已取得一些成功, 而气候变化 (特别是干旱) 才是目前澳大利亚鸟类面临的最大威胁。我们的结果表明, 我们制定的指标可以概括受威胁类群及其面临威胁的研究和管理的主要趋势, 并为全球范围内基于证据的保护科学的比较分析提供了基础。【翻译: 胡怡思; 审校: 聂永刚】