School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences - Research Publications

Permanent URI for this collection

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 33
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Integrating species metrics into biodiversity offsetting calculations to improve long-term persistence
    Marshall, E ; Visintin, C ; Valavi, R ; Wilkinson, DP ; Southwell, D ; Wintle, BA ; Kujala, H (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.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Too hot to hunt: Mechanistic predictions of thermal refuge from cat predation risk
    Briscoe, NJ ; McGregor, H ; Roshier, D ; Carter, A ; Wintle, BA ; Kearney, MR (WILEY, 2022-09)
    Abstract Many threatened species depend on climatic microrefugia, but places with harsh climates for predators may also play a refugial role. Feral cats threaten many native species in arid Australia. Although cats can persist in regions with no free water, their abundance should depend on the availability of microclimates that protect them from harsh environmental conditions. We developed a biophysical model of feral cat heat stress and used it to explore how behavior and microhabitat features influence water requirements and activity. Tests of model predictions against fine‐scale GPS and microclimate data highlight the importance of refuges, particularly rabbit burrows. Continent‐wide simulations show large but temporally varying areas of the arid zone that would be lethal for cats without access to deep or shaded burrows. Our approach can identify locations that may act as natural refuges for native prey, and where habitat management strategies may be effective in controlling cat abundance.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Credible biodiversity offsetting needs public national registers to confirm no net loss
    Kujala, H ; Maron, M ; Kennedy, CM ; Evans, MC ; Bull, JW ; Wintle, BA ; Iftekhar, SM ; Selwood, KE ; Beissner, K ; Osborn, D ; Gordon, A (CELL PRESS, 2022-06-17)
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Eight things you should never do in a monitoring program: an Australian perspective
    Lindenmayer, DB ; Woinarski, J ; Legge, S ; Maron, M ; Garnett, ST ; Lavery, T ; Dielenberg, J ; Wintle, BA (SPRINGER, 2022-10)
    Monitoring is critical to gauge the effect of environmental management interventions as well as to measure the effects of human disturbances such as climate change. Recognition of the critical need for monitoring means that, at irregular intervals, recommendations are made for new government-instigated programs or to revamp existing ones. Using insights from past well-intentioned (but sadly also often failed) attempts to establish and maintain government-instigated monitoring programs in Australia, we outline eight things that should never be done in environmental monitoring programs (if they aim to be useful). These are the following: (1) Never commence a new environmental management initiative without also committing to a monitoring program. (2) Never start a monitoring program without clear questions. (3) Never implement a monitoring program without first doing a proper experimental design. (4) Never ignore the importance of matching the purpose and objectives of a monitoring program to the design of that program. (5) Never change the way you monitor something without ensuring new methods can be calibrated with the old ones. (6) Never try to monitor everything. (7) Never collect data without planning to curate and report on it. (8) If possible, avoid starting a monitoring program without the necessary resources secured. To balance our "nevers", we provide a checklist of actions that will increase the chances a monitoring program will actually measure the effectiveness of environmental management. Scientists and resource management practitioners need to be part of a stronger narrative for, and key participants in, well-designed, implemented, and maintained government-led monitoring programs. We argue that monitoring programs should be mandated in threatened species conservation programs and all new environmental management initiatives.
  • Item
    No Preview Available
    Identifying uncertainties in scenarios and models of socio-ecological systems in support of decision-making
    Rounsevell, MDA ; Arneth, A ; Brown, C ; Cheung, WWL ; Gimenez, O ; Holman, I ; Leadley, P ; Lujan, C ; Mahevas, S ; Marechaux, I ; Pelissier, R ; Verburg, PH ; Vieilledent, G ; Wintle, BA ; Shin, Y-J (CELL PRESS, 2021-07-23)
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Getting our Act together to improve Indigenous leadership and recognition in biodiversity management
    Goolmeer, T ; Skroblin, A ; Wintle, BA (WILEY, 2022-01)
    Summary Increasingly scientists and policy makers are acknowledging the importance of Indigenous participation in effective biodiversity conservation. In Australia, the recognised Indigenous estate is vast, accounting for up to 57% of the continent and comprising some of the highest priority conservation lands, including 46% of the formal National Reserve System. The Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (the Act) is Commonwealth legislation designed to protect and manage nationally and internationally important species and ecological communities, which entails specific objectives to recognise Indigenous people. However, to date the involvement of Indigenous people in implementation of the Act has been inconsistent and inadequate, particularly in the protection of the Indigenous estate, understanding and supporting Indigenous people’s aspirations for Country and culturally significant species, and respecting the traditional management of species and landscapes. In this article, we will explore the key barriers and opportunities for improving Indigenous participation in biodiversity conservation under the Act. We structure our exploration using the three connected themes: (1) meaningful Indigenous engagement and participation, (2) recognition of the Indigenous Estate and (3) strengthening Indigenous‐led governance. We find that there is a pressing need and an immediate opportunity to reform and strengthen the Act to protect Indigenous Knowledge, to recognise and report on the role of Indigenous Estate, and to realise the aspirations of Indigenous peoples for improved land and sea management that strengthens people, culture and Country.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Design considerations for rapid biodiversity reconnaissance surveys and long-term monitoring to assess the impact of wildfire
    Southwell, D ; Legge, S ; Woinarski, J ; Lindenmayer, D ; Lavery, T ; Wintle, B (WILEY, 2022-03)
    Abstract Aims Reconnaissance surveys followed by monitoring are needed to assess the impact and response of biodiversity to wildfire. However, post‐wildfire survey and monitoring design are challenging due to the infrequency and unpredictability of wildfire, an urgency to initiate surveys and uncertainty about how species respond. In this article, we discuss key design considerations and quantitative tools available to aid post‐wildfire survey design. Our motivation was to inform the design of rapid surveys for threatened species heavily impacted by the 2019–2020 fires in Australia. Location Global. Methods We discuss a set of best practice design considerations for post‐wildfire reconnaissance surveys across a range of survey objectives. We provide examples that illustrate key design considerations from post‐fire reconnaissance surveys and monitoring programmes from around the world. Results We highlight how the objective of post‐fire surveys drastically influences design decisions (e.g. survey location and timing). We discuss how the unpredictability of wildfire and uncertainty in the response of biodiversity complicate survey design decisions. Main conclusions Surveys should be conducted immediately following wildfire to assess the impact on biodiversity, to ground truth fire severity mapping and to provide a benchmark from which to assess recovery. Where possible, surveys should be conducted at burnt and unburnt sites in regions with historical data so that state variables of interest can be compared with baseline estimates (i.e. BACI design). This highlights the need to have long‐term monitoring programmes already in place and be prepared to modify their design when wildfires occur. There is opportunity to adopt tools from statistics (i.e. power analysis) and conservation planning (i.e. spatial prioritization) to improve survey design. We must anticipate wildfires rather than respond to them reactively as they will occur more frequently due to climate change.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Developing a two-way learning monitoring program for Mankarr (Greater Bilby) in the Western Desert, Western Australia
    Skroblin, A ; Carboon, T ; Bidu, G ; Taylor, M ; Bidu, N ; Taylor, W ; Taylor, K ; Miller, M ; Robinson, L ; Williams, C ; Chapman, N ; Marney, M ; Marney, C ; Biljabu, J ; Biljabu, L ; Jeffries, P ; Samson, H ; Charles, P ; Game, ET ; Wintle, B (WILEY, 2022-01)
    Summary Indigenous people are the custodians of knowledge systems that hold detailed awareness of the environment, including applications for monitoring and management to improve biodiversity and cultural outcomes. Indigenous communities are increasingly participating in programs to monitor populations of wildlife. There is a need for frameworks to guide how Indigenous priorities, aspirations and culture can be respected within monitoring programs, as well as case studies that demonstrate how Indigenous knowledge and practice can provide opportunities together with Western science practice to improve the rigour and outcomes of wildlife monitoring. Here, we describe the process of developing a monitoring program that was tailored to be carried out by Kanyirninpa Jukurrpa Indigenous ranger teams to assess the status, trend and response to the management of a threatened and culturally significant species Mankarr (Greater Bilby; Macrotis lagotis). We applied a collaborative two‐way approach, using iterative consultations, elicitations and field trials involving Indigenous and non‐Indigenous project partners to define monitoring objectives, record biocultural knowledge and tailor a sampling methodology to fit the requirements of Martu Traditional Owners. Our project focused on creating a method that would be engaging, accessible and useful for rangers who would carry out the program, and prioritized collection of relevant data for community decision‐making regarding management. We outline our key learnings for co‐design of wildlife monitoring programs on Indigenous lands. Our approach provides insights that will assist in designing other cross‐cultural or participatory monitoring programs.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Monitoring, imperfect detection, and risk optimization of a Tasmanian devil insurance population
    Rout, TM ; Baker, CM ; Huxtable, S ; Wintle, BA (WILEY, 2018-04)
    Most species are imperfectly detected during biological surveys, which creates uncertainty around their abundance or presence at a given location. Decision makers managing threatened or pest species are regularly faced with this uncertainty. Wildlife diseases can drive species to extinction; thus, managing species with disease is an important part of conservation. Devil facial tumor disease (DFTD) is one such disease that led to the listing of the Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) as endangered. Managers aim to maintain devils in the wild by establishing disease-free insurance populations at isolated sites. Often a resident DFTD-affected population must first be removed. In a successful collaboration between decision scientists and wildlife managers, we used an accessible population model to inform monitoring decisions and facilitate the establishment of an insurance population of devils on Forestier Peninsula. We used a Bayesian catch-effort model to estimate population size of a diseased population from removal and camera trap data. We also analyzed the costs and benefits of declaring the area disease-free prior to reintroduction and establishment of a healthy insurance population. After the monitoring session in May-June 2015, the probability that all devils had been successfully removed was close to 1, even when we accounted for a possible introduction of a devil to the site. Given this high probability and the baseline cost of declaring population absence prematurely, we found it was not cost-effective to carry out any additional monitoring before introducing the insurance population. Considering these results within the broader context of Tasmanian devil management, managers ultimately decided to implement an additional monitoring session before the introduction. This was a conservative decision that accounted for uncertainty in model estimates and for the broader nonmonetary costs of mistakenly declaring the area disease-free.
  • Item
    Thumbnail Image
    Minimizing species extinctions through strategic planning for conservation fencing
    Ringma, JL ; Wintle, B ; Fuller, RA ; Fisher, D ; Bode, M (WILEY, 2017-10)
    Conservation fences are an increasingly common management action, particularly for species threatened by invasive predators. However, unlike many conservation actions, fence networks are expanding in an unsystematic manner, generally as a reaction to local funding opportunities or threats. We conducted a gap analysis of Australia's large predator-exclusion fence network by examining translocation of Australian mammals relative to their extinction risk. To address gaps identified in species representation, we devised a systematic prioritization method for expanding the conservation fence network that explicitly incorporated population viability analysis and minimized expected species' extinctions. The approach was applied to New South Wales, Australia, where the state government intends to expand the existing conservation fence network. Existing protection of species in fenced areas was highly uneven; 67% of predator-sensitive species were unrepresented in the fence network. Our systematic prioritization yielded substantial efficiencies in that it reduced expected number of species extinctions up to 17 times more effectively than ad hoc approaches. The outcome illustrates the importance of governance in coordinating management action when multiple projects have similar objectives and rely on systematic methods rather than expanding networks opportunistically.