Strategic Planning for Species Conservation: A Handbook - IUCN

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Strategic Planning for Species Conservation Table 8.5 Real-world examples of Actions evaluated using correlational approaches Species Measured outcome Loggerhead turtle Nesting success Caretta caretta among turtles being observed by tourist groups Loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta Kemp’s ridley Lepidochelys kempii Black rhinoceros Diceros bicornis African wild dog Lycaon pictus Lion Panthera leo African wild dog Lycaon pictus Multiple species of large African ungulates Turtle stranding rates under different management conditions Change in rhino numbers over time Probability of livestock predation under different husbandry conditions Survival of reintroduced animals Enforcement of anti-poaching regulations Multiple species Various measures of human welfare Comparison method Conclusion Reference Compared nesting attempts observed by groups of tourists with those not visited by tourists, using a casecontrol approach Analysed temporal trends in stranding rates as use of turtle excluder devices varied Compared changes in rhino numbers in different countries with spending on patrol efforts Compared husbandry of attacked herds with that of herds not attacked, using a case-control approach Compared multiple reintroduction attempts using information theory Compared enforcement of anti-poaching efforts in Serengeti National Park with illegal harvest and ungulate densities over 50 years Compared people who have traditionally used resources from newlyestablished national parks in Gabon with people in similar areas beyond the influence of parks Occasionally, particular management methods may be implemented sufficiently widely to allow structured data collection on their effectiveness. For example, Woodroffe et al. (2006) used a case-control method to determine which forms of livestock husbandry were most effective at deterring predator attacks and hence avoiding lethal control of large carnivores such as lions and African wild dogs. They collected data on the husbandry of each herd that was attacked, and then collected the same data on 1–3 neighbouring herds which were present in the same area at the same time but were not attacked. By comparing the husbandry of these two herd types, they were able to identify those characteristics which 65 Observation by tourists did not reduce nesting success and should therefore be continued for its educational value Enforcement of turtle excluder devices in shrimp fisheries reduced stranding rates Declines in rhino populations were prevented only where sufficient resources were expended Specific husbandry methods were effective at deterring attacks and likely to reduce killing of predators Successful attempts entailed release of socially integrated groups into securely fenced areas Periods of poor enforcement were associated with ungulate decline and reestablishment of anti-poaching was followed by ungulate recovery Ongoing; intended to determine the impact of national parks on human welfare and hence to evaluate their long-term sustainability Johnson, Bjorndal and Bolten 1996 Lewison, Crowder and Shaver 2003 Leader-Williams and Albon 1988 Woodroffe et al. 2006 Gusset et al. 2008 Hilborn et al. 2006 Wilkie et al. 2006
66 8. Actions predisposed herds to attack, and those which were protective. Since more predators were killed by farmers where more depredation occurred (Ogada et al. 2003), encouraging the adoption of the most effective husbandry methods carried a reasonable expectation of reducing carnivore mortality. 8.3.3 Case studies Perhaps the most widely available form of evidence for the effectiveness of particular actions will be case studies. Usually, published case studies describe the consequences of action implemented at one or a few sites. Strictly speaking, case studies cannot demonstrate conclusively that any effects observed definitely occurred as consequences of the action(s) implemented, because they are not replicated and lack control sites where no such action took place. Despite this, case studies provide a wealth of information that is extraordinarily valuable for deciding how to conduct future Actions. The features that make it difficult to generalize from case studies – including unique details of particular projects such as habitats, local cultures and economic circumstances – also provide insights into the complex factors which influence the outcomes of actions in the real world. In addition, case studies often provide the only evidence of actions which fail (since failed actions are (hopefully) rarely repeated). Examples of case studies are legion; a few are given in Table 8.6. Sometimes, a particular form of Action has been implemented sufficiently widely that general conclusions can be drawn. Examples of such reviews are also given in Table 8.6. Table 8.6 Real-world examples of case studies of Actions Species Action Results Reference One-off case studies Giant weta Deinacrida rugosa Dusky gopher frog Rana sevosa Scarlet macaw Ara macao Mountain gorilla Gorilla gorilla Reviews of multiple case studies African elephant Loxodonta africana Eradication of exotic rats from Kapiti Island, New Zealand. Addition of well water to one of only two seasonal ponds used for breeding, to prolong availability of habitat for developing tadpoles. Combination of actions including outreach, construction of artificial nests, and nest protection. Vaccination of free-ranging gorillas against measles virus following confirmation of a measles-related death. Monetary compensation of farmers experiencing elephant-caused damage to crops, to try to increase tolerance for elephants. Multiple species Establishment of no-take marine reserves in temperate waters. Weta numbers did not change significantly following rat eradication. Pond habitat was maintained and tadpoles survived to metamorphosis. Years of highest recruitment coincided with periods of most intense anti-poaching effort. No further gorilla mortalities occurred but it was not clear whether vaccination prevented infection. Compensation was not effective at reducing human–elephant conflict. No-take areas appeared to increase density, biomass and species richness but conclusions were limited by small sample size. Sinclair et al. 2005 Siegel, Dinsmore and Richter 2006 Vaughan et al. 2005 Hastings et al. 1991 Human– Elephant Conflict Working Group 2000 Stewart et al. 2008
Page 1:
Strategic Planning for Species Cons
Page 4 and 5:
Marine iguanas (Amblyrhynchus crist
Page 6 and 7:
The designation of geographical ent
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
1. The evolution of SSC’s plannin
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
3. When should a Species Conservati
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33: Strategic Planning for Species Cons
Page 34 and 35: 4. Who should be involved in develo
Page 38 and 39: 5. Status Review This chapter descr
Page 56 and 57: 6. Vision and Goals This chapter de
Page 64 and 65: 7. Objectives This chapter describe
Page 74 and 75: 8. Actions This chapter describes A
Page 92 and 93: 9. Using a Species Conservation Str
Page 106 and 107: Photo 10.4 A cloud forest in Rwenzo
Page 116 and 117: Lead authors and contributors This
Page 123: IUCN, International Union for Conse
show all

Strategic Planning for Species Conservation: A Handbook - IUCN

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?