School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3
-
ItemIntegrating species metrics into biodiversity offsetting calculations to improve long-term persistence(WILEY, 2022-04)Abstract Several methods of measuring biodiversity in development‐offset trades exist. However, there is little consensus on which biodiversity metrics should be used for quantifying development impacts and assigning offsets. We simulated development impacts in a virtual landscape and offset these impacts using six biodiversity metrics: vegetation area, vegetation condition, habitat suitability, species abundance, metapopulation connectivity and rarity‐weighted richness. We tested long‐term impacts of metric choice during offsetting by combining simulated landscapes with population viability analyses. No net loss or net gains in habitat were achieved using all metrics except vegetation area and condition. Limited habitat and like‐for‐like requirements resulted in offsets exhausting available habitat in each vegetation class before offset requirements were met when using vegetation‐based metrics. We also found that impact avoidance was an important driver in how much compensation offsets could deliver. When impacts avoided high‐suitability habitats, all six metrics achieved no net loss or net gains for most species. However, when core habitats were developed, none of the metrics were able to consistently prevent population declines. Synthesis and application. When impacts on high‐quality habitat were avoided, and assuming the protection and restoration benefits can occur in practice, vegetation‐based metrics may produce offsets which deliver gains in species abundance equivalent to species‐specific metrics. However, species‐specific metrics outperformed vegetation‐based metrics when core habitats were lost. Applying avoidance measures as a first step to minimise biodiversity impacts during development will significantly improve offset outcomes for species and result in greater long‐term population benefits delivered through offsetting.
-
ItemThe conservation impacts of ecological disturbance: Time-bound estimates of population loss and recovery for fauna affected by the 2019-2020 Australian megafires(WILEY, 2022-10-01)Aim: After environmental disasters, species with large population losses may need urgent protection to prevent extinction and support recovery. Following the 2019–2020 Australian megafires, we estimated population losses and recovery in fire-affected fauna, to inform conservation status assessments and management. Location: Temperate and subtropical Australia. Time period: 2019–2030 and beyond. Major taxa: Australian terrestrial and freshwater vertebrates; one invertebrate group. Methods: From > 1,050 fire-affected taxa, we selected 173 whose distributions substantially overlapped the fire extent. We estimated the proportion of each taxon’s distribution affected by fires, using fire severity and aquatic impact mapping, and new distribution mapping. Using expert elicitation informed by evidence of responses to previous wildfires, we estimated local population responses to fires of varying severity. We combined the spatial and elicitation data to estimate overall population loss and recovery trajectories, and thus indicate potential eligibility for listing as threatened, or uplisting, under Australian legislation. Results: We estimate that the 2019–2020 Australian megafires caused, or contributed to, population declines that make 70–82 taxa eligible for listing as threatened; and another 21–27 taxa eligible for uplisting. If so-listed, this represents a 22–26% increase in Australian statutory lists of threatened terrestrial and freshwater vertebrates and spiny crayfish, and uplisting for 8–10% of threatened taxa. Such changes would cause an abrupt worsening of underlying trajectories in vertebrates, as measured by Red List Indices. We predict that 54–88% of 173 assessed taxa will not recover to pre-fire population size within 10 years/three generations. Main conclusions: We suggest the 2019–2020 Australian megafires have worsened the conservation prospects for many species. Of the 91 taxa recommended for listing/uplisting consideration, 84 are now under formal review through national processes. Improving predictions about taxon vulnerability with empirical data on population responses, reducing the likelihood of future catastrophic events and mitigating their impacts on biodiversity, are critical.
-
ItemQuantifying the impact of vegetation-based metrics on species persistence when choosing offsets for habitat destruction(WILEY, 2021-04)Developers are often required by law to offset environmental impacts through targeted conservation actions. Most offset policies specify metrics for calculating offset requirements, usually by assessing vegetation condition. Despite widespread use, there is little evidence to support the effectiveness of vegetation-based metrics for ensuring biodiversity persistence. We compared long-term impacts of biodiversity offsetting based on area only; vegetation condition only; area × habitat suitability; and condition × habitat suitability in development and restoration simulations for the Hunter Region of New South Wales, Australia. We simulated development and subsequent offsetting through restoration within a virtual landscape, linking simulations to population viability models for 3 species. Habitat gains did not ensure species persistence. No net loss was achieved when performance of offsetting was assessed in terms of amount of habitat restored, but not when outcomes were assessed in terms of persistence. Maintenance of persistence occurred more often when impacts were avoided, giving further support to better enforce the avoidance stage of the mitigation hierarchy. When development affected areas of high habitat quality for species, persistence could not be guaranteed. Therefore, species must be more explicitly accounted for in offsets, rather than just vegetation or habitat alone. Declines due to a failure to account directly for species population dynamics and connectivity overshadowed the benefits delivered by producing large areas of high-quality habitat. Our modeling framework showed that the benefits delivered by offsets are species specific and that simple vegetation-based metrics can give misguided impressions on how well biodiversity offsets achieve no net loss.