Triage for conserving populations of threatened species: The case of woodland caribou in Alberta

Schneider, R.; Hauer, Grant; Adamowicz, Wiktor L.; Boutin, Stan

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2010.04.002

Cited by 102 publications

(130 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

129

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some researchers have suggested that, for real-world conservation planning, consideration of economic costs should be more important than biological assessments (e.g., Carwardine et al 2010, Knight et al 2011. Outside of the SCP literature, bio-economic trade-offs have been modelled to optimize NPV against different amounts of conservation reserves (Knoke andMoog 2005, Schneider et al 2010) or to compare NPV of timber against ecosystem goods and services values of forest stands (Knoke and Weber 2006, Knoke et al 2009, Schneider et al 2010. Such methods might profitably be applied to SCP.…”

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of applications of the six-step method of systematic conservation planning

Wiersma

SleepDarren²

2016

The Forestry Chronicle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systematic Conservation Planning (SCP) is an approach to protected areas planning that follows a step-by-step process. Recent reviews have examined the use of key "biogeographic-concepts", but an assessment of their use or effectiveness has not been done. We conducted a review of the literature on SCP to assess how the 6-step approach considers these concepts. Most of the 127 papers we reviewed varied in their application of SCP steps. Our findings suggest that protected areas plans are not effectively achieving conservation goals. Only six papers considered data uncertainty. Twenty papers used so-called "data free" conservation targets without clear rationales, and which have been shown to under-represent natural features. The median size of planning units applied (2500 ha) is too small to meet minimum area requirements for many species. We show how an examination of the variation in the ways that SCP is applied helps to identify best practices for achieving conservation effectiveness and efficiency. However, very few SCP efforts have been implemented, making it difficult to assess their effectiveness or efficiency in practice. Detailed examination of how SCP is implemented (perhaps focused on a specific region) can lead to a better understanding of how best to achieve large-scale conservation goals.Key words: Systematic Conservation Planning, 6-step biogeographic-concepts, protected areas RÉSUMÉ La planification systématique de la conservation systématique (PSCS) consiste enest une approche méthode utilisée dans la planification des territoires protégés qui suit s'appuie sur une démarche séquentielle. Des études récentes se sont penchée-sont étudié sur l' emploi dess plus importants « « concepts biogéographiques » » clés, mais aucune évaluation de son leur utilisation ou de son leur efficacité n'a encore jamais été faiteréalisée. Nous avons dons effectué une revue de la littératureana-lyse documentaire portant sur la PCS afin d' évaluer comment cette approche en 6 étapes tient tenait compte de ces concepts. La plupart des 127 articles que nous avons étudiés parcourus affichaient montraient une certainegrande variabilité dans l'utilisation des étapes de la PCS. Nos résultats laissent entendre voir que les plans pour ldes territoires protégés n'atteignent pas les objectifs de conservation. Seulement six articles ont abordé l'incertitude entourant les données. Vingt articles ont utilisé des objectifs de conservation soi-disantdits « « non rattachéssans à des données » et sans justification précise et qui se sont révélés àavérés sous-représenter les caractéristiques naturelles. La taille médiane des unités de planification étudiées (2 500 ha) est trop petite pour répondre aux exigences de superficie minimale de plusieurs espèces. Nous indiquons montrons comment comment une étude de l' examen de la variation danse l'application de la PCS permet d'identifier les meilleures pratiques qui contribueront à l'atteinte de permettant d'atteindre l' efficacité efficience et l' efficacité efficience en matière de con...

show abstract

Section: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of applications of the six-step method of systematic conservation planning

Wiersma

SleepDarren²

2016

The Forestry Chronicle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…On the other hand, wolves may benefit from sites of active development if some prey species, such as caribou, vacate disturbed areas and then concentrate in the periphery of developed areas in predictable patterns (Weir et al 2007;Polfus et al 2011). Moderate to high levels of high-value habitat of wolves in the Muskwa-Kechika overlapped areas with high resource potential for oil and gas, forest resources, and wind power; however, it is unlikely that wolf populations would be negatively affected directly from development activities of these resources, given there are thriving wolf populations on other landscapes heavily altered by industrial development (Schneider et al 2010;Latham et al 2011;Boutin et al 2012).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential conflict between future development of natural resources and high-value wildlife habitats in boreal landscapes

Suzuki

Parker

2016

Biodivers Conserv

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We used the Muskwa-Kechika Management Area in northeast British Columbia, Canada as a case study to determine potential conflicts between future resource development and high-value habitats of large mammals in an undeveloped boreal landscape. More than 50 % of high-value habitats for caribou, moose, elk, wolves and grizzly bears were located in Special Resource Management Zones, where natural resource developments could occur. We developed geographic information system (GIS) layers of potential forest resources, oil and gas, minerals, wind power, all resources combined, and roads; and quantified the proportions of high-value habitats overlapping these potentials. Greater proportions of high-value habitats across seasons for moose, elk, and wolves overlapped areas with high cumulative resource potential (winter, 49-70 %, growing season, 35-63 %) more than for three other species (grizzly bears, Stone's sheep, mountain goats). This pattern was similar for forest resources, oil and gas, wind power, and roads. Caribou were more seasonally influenced. The proportions of their high-value habitat in areas with high cumulative resource potential (winter, 53 %, growing season, 16 %), as well as high forest and oil and gas potentials, were greatest in winter; in contrast, overlap with high mineral potential was greatest during the growing season. We recommend a quantitative and visual GIS approach to scenario planning in the Muskwa-Kechika to maintain the abundance and diversity of wildlife populations there. Resource development would likely increase early seral habitats, presumably benefiting moose, elk, and wolves, but could adversely affect caribou and grizzly bears through habitat loss and increased access.

show abstract

“…First, we believe that caribou reintroduction (as any other conservation effort) must be based on a rigorous, a priori estimation of the costs and probability of success (Schneider et al, 2010), and must be supported by population viability analyses to assess the relative need for and benefits from animal translocation (DeCesare et al, 2011). We judge that most reintroductions would be compromised if conducted in areas where predator and alternative prey populations are abundant and diversified, especially if translocated animals have not experienced similar predation risk and predator diversity (Frair et al, 2007).…”

Section: Lessons From the Charlevoix Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, if a reintroduction is attempted in a highly disturbed landscape, we consider that reducing predator (Bergerud, 2007)-and even alternative prey (Latham et al, 2011)-populations might be necessary. Predator control, although logistically difficult to implement and ethically sensitive in the public opinion (Latham et al, 2011), has already proven efficient in increasing caribou recruitment in northern British Columbia (Seip, 1992) and in eastern Québec (Mosnier et al, 2008b), at least on a short-term basis; it is also less expensive (relatively speaking) than protecting and restoring areas (Schneider et al, 2010). Even though wolves are usually recognized as the main predators of caribou throughout the species' range, we urge managers not to overlook the role of bears as calf predators.…”

Section: Lessons From the Charlevoix Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The reintroduction of boreal caribou as a conservation strategy: A long-term assessment at the southern range limit

St‐Laurent

Dussault

2012

Ran

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Boreal caribou were extirpated from the Charlevoix region (Québec) in the 1920s because of hunting and poaching. In 1965, the Québec government initiated a caribou reintroduction program in Charlevoix. During the winters of 1966 and 1967, a total of 48 boreal caribou were captured, translocated by plane, and released within enclosures; only their offspring (82 individuals) were released in the wild. Between 1967 and 1980, a wolf control program was applied to support caribou population growth. The caribou population, however, remained relatively stable at 45-55 individuals during this period. During the 1980s, the population grew slowly at a rate of approximately 5% each year to reach a peak of 126 individuals in 1992. At that time, Bergerud & Mercer (1989) reported that the Charlevoix experiment was the only successful attempt at caribou reintroduction in the presence of predators (in North America). Afterwards, the population declined and since then it has been relatively stable at about 80 individuals. Here we reviewed the literature regarding the ecology and population dynamics of the Charlevoix caribou herd since its reintroduction, in an attempt to critically assess the value of reintroduction as a conservation tool for this species. Indeed, the Charlevoix caribou herd is now considered at very high risk of extinction mostly because of its small size, its isolation from other caribou populations, and low recruitment. The Charlevoix region has been heavily impacted by forestry activities since the early 1980s. Recent studies have indicated that these habitat modifications may have benefited populations of wolves and black bears-two predators of caribou-and that caribou range fidelity may have exposed caribou to higher predation risk via maladaptive habitat selection. As females are ageing, and females and calves suffer high predation pressure from wolves and bears respectively, we suggest that the future of this reintroduced herd is in question and that they are facing a high probability of extinction in the near future if further action is not taken.

show abstract

Triage for conserving populations of threatened species: The case of woodland caribou in Alberta

Cited by 102 publications

References 26 publications

A review of applications of the six-step method of systematic conservation planning

A review of applications of the six-step method of systematic conservation planning

Potential conflict between future development of natural resources and high-value wildlife habitats in boreal landscapes

The reintroduction of boreal caribou as a conservation strategy: A long-term assessment at the southern range limit

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About