Commentary: the Past, Present, and Future of the Global Raptor Impact Network

McClure, Christopher J. W.; Anderson, David L.; Buij, Ralph; Dunn, Leah; Henderson, Michael T.; McCabe, Jennifer D.; Rolek, Brian W.; Schulwitz, Sarah E.; Spurling, D. Paul; Vargas, F. Hernán; Virani, Munir Z.; Watson, Richard T.; Méndez, Diego; Reyes, Cesar Marquez; Miranda, Everton B. P.; Glowka, Lyle; Hinchliffe, Sofi; Robinson, Bryce W.; Belthoff, James R.; Heath, Julie A.; Botha, André; Davies, Robert; Rayner, Andrew P.; Trice, Simon R.; Goodrich, Laurie J.; Therrien, Jean‐François; Oleyar, M. David; Slater, Steven J.; Buechley, Evan R.; Gurung, Sandesh; Subedi, Tulsi Ram; Sumasgutner, Petra; Sutton, Luke J.; Loercher, Franziska; Phipps, W. Louis; Tavares, José Pedro

doi:10.3356/jrr-21-13

Cited by 25 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(62 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We compiled Philippine Eagle point localities from the Global Raptor Impact Network (GRIN, McClure et al . 2021), a data information system for population monitoring of all raptor species.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Priority conservation areas and a global population estimate for the Critically Endangered Philippine Eagle derived from modelled range metrics using remote sensing habitat characteristics

Sutton

Ibañez

Salvador³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many range-restricted taxa are currently experiencing severe population declines yet lack fundamental biological information regarding distribution and population size. Establishing baseline estimates for both these key biological parameters is however critical for directing long-term monitoring and conservation planning for at-risk range-restricted species. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List uses three spatial range metrics that define species distributions and inform extinction risk assessments: extent of occurrence (EOO), area of occupancy (AOO) and area of habitat (AOH). However, calculating all three metrics using standard IUCN approaches relies on a geographically representative sample of locations, which for rare species is often spatially biased. Here, we apply model-based interpolation using an ensemble Species Distribution Model (SDM), correlating occurrences with remote-sensing derived environmental covariates, to calculate IUCN range metrics and a global population estimate for the Critically Endangered Philippine Eagle (Pithecophaga jefferyi). Our ensemble-averaged SDM had high predictive accuracy and was able to identify key areas of Philippine Eagle habitat across the species global range. We estimated an AOH = 49,426 km2 and from this metric calculated a maximum EOO = 609,697 km2 and a minimum EOO = 273,794 km2, with an AOO = 54,695 occupied cells. Based on inferred habitat from the AOH metric and territorial habitat area from home range estimates, we provide an updated global population estimate of 677 breeding pairs (range: 549-772 pairs), or 1354 mature individuals, across the entire Philippine Eagle range. We demonstrate that even when occurrence sampling is geographically biased, robust habitat models can be built which enable quantification of IUCN range metrics and a baseline population size estimate. In the absence of adequate location data for many rare and threatened taxa, our method is a promising spatial modelling tool with widespread applications, in particular for island endemics facing high extinction risk.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Priority conservation areas and a global population estimate for the Critically Endangered Philippine Eagle derived from modelled range metrics using remote sensing habitat characteristics

Sutton

Ibañez

Salvador³

et al. 2021

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It must be said that our approach to the systematic map procedure does have its limitations and is prone to biases associated with search terms and language, and there may, in fact, be past or present research on human–raptor interactions in Indonesia. This example highlights the need for more concerted and, perhaps, collaborative effort to focus on regions with little or no ongoing research beyond the current infrastructure and capabilities [ 28 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic Map of Human–Raptor Interaction and Coexistence Research

Canney

McGough

Bickford

et al. 2021

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global raptor conservation relies on humans to establish and improve interaction and coexistence. Human–wildlife interaction research is well-established, but tends to focus on large-bodied, terrestrial mammals. The scope and characteristics of research that explores human–raptor interactions are relatively unknown. As an initial step toward quantifying and characterizing the state of applied, cross-disciplinary literature on human–raptor interactions, we use established systematic map (scoping reviews) protocols to catalog literature and describe trends, identify gaps and biases, and critically reflect on the scope of research. We focus on the peer-reviewed (refereed) literature germane to human–raptor interaction, conflict, tolerance, acceptance, persecution and coexistence. Based on 383 papers retrieved that fit our criteria, we identified trends, biases, and gaps. These include a majority of research taking place within North America and Europe; disproportionately few interdisciplinary and social research studies; interactions focused on indirect anthropogenic mortality; and vague calls for human behavior changes, with few concrete steps suggested, when management objectives are discussed. Overall, we note a predominant focus on the study of ecological effects from human–raptor interactions rather than sociocultural causes, and suggest (as others have in various conservation contexts) the imperative of human behavioral, cultural, and political inquiry to conserve raptor species.

show abstract

“…We sourced crested and harpy eagle occurrences from the Global Raptor Impact Network (GRIN, McClure et al . 2021) consisting of occurrence data from the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF 2019a,b), which are mostly eBird records (crested eagle = 75 %, harpy eagle = 79 %, Sullivan et al .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitat resource overlap in two broad-ranged sympatric Neotropical forest eagles

Sutton

Anderson

Franco

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantifying resource partitioning between co-occurring species has important ecological and evolutionary implications. Yet, few studies compare resource overlap in both geographic and environmental space. We test whether the habitat requirements of two closely related Neotropical forest eagles, the crested eagle (Morphnus guianensis) and harpy eagle (Harpia harpyja), differ at fine and coarse resolutions across their shared geographic range. Using landcover and topographic covariates, we quantified resource overlap first using higher resolution (30 arc-sec data) generalized linear models (GLMs), and second using coarser-grain (2.5 arc-min data) environmental ordination. The distribution of both eagles was largely explained by canopy species richness and structural complexity with evergreen forest, but with differing responses to landcover and topography, particularly with the harpy eagle more likely in areas of dense evergreen forest. Both eagles were negatively associated with mosaic forest, with this relationship stronger for the crested eagle. Harpy eagle distribution was restricted by higher elevation and terrain roughness, compared to the crested eagle, whose distribution was more restricted by canopy species richness and structure. From the GLMs, resource overlap was > 92 % in geographical space but reduced to 64 % in environmental space. From ordination, resource overlap was 76 % in environmental space, with randomization tests supporting equivalent environmental space for both eagles. Our results suggest that at the biogeographical scale, crested and harpy eagles share environmental space, but there may be subtle differences in fine-scale habitat preference. We recommend habitat resource overlap be assessed in both geographical and environmental space at multiple resolutions to capture the inherent variability in environmental conditions available to co-occurring species.

show abstract

Commentary: the Past, Present, and Future of the Global Raptor Impact Network

Cited by 25 publications

References 52 publications

Priority conservation areas and a global population estimate for the Critically Endangered Philippine Eagle derived from modelled range metrics using remote sensing habitat characteristics

Priority conservation areas and a global population estimate for the Critically Endangered Philippine Eagle derived from modelled range metrics using remote sensing habitat characteristics

Systematic Map of Human–Raptor Interaction and Coexistence Research

Habitat resource overlap in two broad-ranged sympatric Neotropical forest eagles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About