Generating population estimates for migratory shorebird species in the world’s largest flyway
- Hansen, Birgita, Rogers, Danny, Watkins, Doug, Weller, Dan, Clemens, Robert, Newman, Mike, Woehler, Eric, Mundkur, Taej, Fuller, Richard
- Authors: Hansen, Birgita , Rogers, Danny , Watkins, Doug , Weller, Dan , Clemens, Robert , Newman, Mike , Woehler, Eric , Mundkur, Taej , Fuller, Richard
- Date: 2022
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Ibis Vol. 164, no. 3 (2022), p. 735-749
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Population estimates are widely used to underpin conservation decisions. However, determining accurate population estimates for migratory species is especially challenging, as they are often widespread and it is rarely possible to survey them throughout their full distribution. In the East Asian–Australasian Flyway (EAAF), this problem is compounded by its size (85 million square kilometres) and the number of migratory species it supports (nearly 500). Here, we provide analytical approaches for addressing this problem, presenting a revision of the EAAF population estimates for 37 migratory shorebird species protected under Australian national environmental legislation. Population estimates were generated by (1) summarizing existing count data in the non-breeding range, (2) spatially extrapolating across uncounted areas, and (3) modelling abundance on the basis of estimates of breeding range and density. Expert review was used to adjust modelled estimates, particularly in under-counted areas. There were many gaps in shorebird monitoring data, necessitating substantial use of extrapolation and expert review, the extent of which varied among species. Spatial extrapolation to under-counted areas often produced estimates that were much higher than the observed data, and expert review was used to cross-check and adjust these where necessary. Estimates of population size obtained through analyses of breeding ranges and density indicated that 18 species were poorly represented by counts in the non-breeding season. It was difficult to determine independently the robustness of these estimates, but these breeding ground estimates were considered the best available data for 10 species that mostly use poorly surveyed freshwater or pelagic habitats in the non-breeding season. We discuss the rationale and limitations of these approaches to population estimation, and how they could be modified for other applications. Data available for population estimates will vary in quality and extent among species, regions and migration stage, and approaches need to be flexible enough to provide useful information for conservation policy and planning. © 2021 British Ornithologists' Union.
- Authors: Hansen, Birgita , Rogers, Danny , Watkins, Doug , Weller, Dan , Clemens, Robert , Newman, Mike , Woehler, Eric , Mundkur, Taej , Fuller, Richard
- Date: 2022
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Ibis Vol. 164, no. 3 (2022), p. 735-749
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Population estimates are widely used to underpin conservation decisions. However, determining accurate population estimates for migratory species is especially challenging, as they are often widespread and it is rarely possible to survey them throughout their full distribution. In the East Asian–Australasian Flyway (EAAF), this problem is compounded by its size (85 million square kilometres) and the number of migratory species it supports (nearly 500). Here, we provide analytical approaches for addressing this problem, presenting a revision of the EAAF population estimates for 37 migratory shorebird species protected under Australian national environmental legislation. Population estimates were generated by (1) summarizing existing count data in the non-breeding range, (2) spatially extrapolating across uncounted areas, and (3) modelling abundance on the basis of estimates of breeding range and density. Expert review was used to adjust modelled estimates, particularly in under-counted areas. There were many gaps in shorebird monitoring data, necessitating substantial use of extrapolation and expert review, the extent of which varied among species. Spatial extrapolation to under-counted areas often produced estimates that were much higher than the observed data, and expert review was used to cross-check and adjust these where necessary. Estimates of population size obtained through analyses of breeding ranges and density indicated that 18 species were poorly represented by counts in the non-breeding season. It was difficult to determine independently the robustness of these estimates, but these breeding ground estimates were considered the best available data for 10 species that mostly use poorly surveyed freshwater or pelagic habitats in the non-breeding season. We discuss the rationale and limitations of these approaches to population estimation, and how they could be modified for other applications. Data available for population estimates will vary in quality and extent among species, regions and migration stage, and approaches need to be flexible enough to provide useful information for conservation policy and planning. © 2021 British Ornithologists' Union.
Implications of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for the governance of biodiversity conservation
- Gallo-Cajiao, Eduardo, Dolšak, Nives, Prakash, Aseem, Mundkur, Taej, Harris, Paul, Mitchell, Ronald, Davidson, Nick, Hansen, Birgita, Woodworth, Bradley, Fuller, Richard, Price, Melissa, Petkov, Nicky, Mauerhofer, Volker, Morrison, Tiffany, Watson, James, Chowdhury, Sayam, Zöckler, Christoph, Widerberg, Oscar, Yong, Ding, Klich, Daniel, Smagol, Vitaliy, Piccolo, John, Biggs, Duan
- Authors: Gallo-Cajiao, Eduardo , Dolšak, Nives , Prakash, Aseem , Mundkur, Taej , Harris, Paul , Mitchell, Ronald , Davidson, Nick , Hansen, Birgita , Woodworth, Bradley , Fuller, Richard , Price, Melissa , Petkov, Nicky , Mauerhofer, Volker , Morrison, Tiffany , Watson, James , Chowdhury, Sayam , Zöckler, Christoph , Widerberg, Oscar , Yong, Ding , Klich, Daniel , Smagol, Vitaliy , Piccolo, John , Biggs, Duan
- Date: 2023
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Frontiers in Conservation Science Vol. 4, no. (2023), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Maintaining peace and conserving biodiversity hinge on an international system of cooperation codified in institutions, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine brings recent progress to a crossroads. Against this backdrop, we address some implications of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for the governance of biodiversity conservation both within and beyond Russia. The Russian invasion of Ukraine threatens the governance system for biodiversity conservation, as it pertains to Russia and beyond, due to three interacting factors: (i) isolation of Russia from the international system, (ii) halt and delay of international cooperation, and (iii) changes in international and domestic policy priorities. We recommend making the existing international system of governance for conserving biodiversity more resilient and adaptable, while aligning security agendas with biodiversity conservation goals. Copyright © 2023 Gallo-Cajiao, Dolšak, Prakash, Mundkur, Harris, Mitchell, Davidson, Hansen, Woodworth, Fuller, Price, Petkov, Mauerhofer, Morrison, Watson, Chowdhury, Zöckler, Widerberg, Yong, Klich, Smagol, Piccolo and Biggs.
- Authors: Gallo-Cajiao, Eduardo , Dolšak, Nives , Prakash, Aseem , Mundkur, Taej , Harris, Paul , Mitchell, Ronald , Davidson, Nick , Hansen, Birgita , Woodworth, Bradley , Fuller, Richard , Price, Melissa , Petkov, Nicky , Mauerhofer, Volker , Morrison, Tiffany , Watson, James , Chowdhury, Sayam , Zöckler, Christoph , Widerberg, Oscar , Yong, Ding , Klich, Daniel , Smagol, Vitaliy , Piccolo, John , Biggs, Duan
- Date: 2023
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Frontiers in Conservation Science Vol. 4, no. (2023), p.
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Maintaining peace and conserving biodiversity hinge on an international system of cooperation codified in institutions, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine brings recent progress to a crossroads. Against this backdrop, we address some implications of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for the governance of biodiversity conservation both within and beyond Russia. The Russian invasion of Ukraine threatens the governance system for biodiversity conservation, as it pertains to Russia and beyond, due to three interacting factors: (i) isolation of Russia from the international system, (ii) halt and delay of international cooperation, and (iii) changes in international and domestic policy priorities. We recommend making the existing international system of governance for conserving biodiversity more resilient and adaptable, while aligning security agendas with biodiversity conservation goals. Copyright © 2023 Gallo-Cajiao, Dolšak, Prakash, Mundkur, Harris, Mitchell, Davidson, Hansen, Woodworth, Fuller, Price, Petkov, Mauerhofer, Morrison, Watson, Chowdhury, Zöckler, Widerberg, Yong, Klich, Smagol, Piccolo and Biggs.
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »