Occupancy trends of overwintering coastal waterbird communities reveal guild-specific patterns of redistribution and shifting reliance on existing protected areas.

Climate change and anthropogenic stressors are redistributing species and altering community composition globally. Protected areas (PAs) may not sufficiently protect populations of species undergoing distributional shifts, necessitating that we evaluate existing PAs and identify areas for future protection to conserve biodiversity across regional and temporal scales. Coastal waterbirds are important indicators of marine ecosystem health, representing mobile, long-lived, higher trophic-level consumers. Using a 20-year citizen science dataset (1999-2019) with a before-after control-intervention sampling framework for habitat protection, we applied dynamic occupancy models to assess winter occupancy trends along the Pacific coast of Canada. Specifically, we sought to understand potential drivers of regional declines, spatial commonalities among guilds, and changes in habitat use before and after PA designation, as well as between PAs and non-PAs. Occupancy trends varied regionally, with greater declines in the south compared to the north. Regional differences underlined potential range shifts, particularly for species with traits linked to temperature tolerance, movement, and high productivity foraging, as cold-tolerant, migratory benthivores and piscivores wintered farther north relative to 20 years ago or retreated to cold-water fjords. While 21 of 57 (36.8%) species responded positively to PA designation (before-after), greater occupancy declines tended to occur in PAs established pre-1999 relative to non-PAs (control-intervention). Since PAs are currently concentrated in the south, negative associations were most apparent for species retreating northward, but existing PAs may have a stabilizing or transitory effect on southern wintering species shifting into the region from farther south. We emphasize that conservation strategies must balance persistence of current communities with preserving the climate-adapted biodiversity of tomorrow by accounting for community-level effects of species moving into and out of existing PAs. Incorporating range shifts into PA planning by predicting distributional changes will allow conservation practitioners to identify priority habitats, such as cold-water refugia, for persistent wildlife communities.

Le changement climatique et les facteurs de stress anthropiques redistribuent les espèces et modifient la composition des communautés à l'échelle mondiale. Les zones protégées (ZP) ne protègent peut-être pas suffisamment les populations d'espèces qui subissent des changements de répartition, ce qui nous oblige à évaluer les ZP existantes et à identifier les zones à protéger à l'avenir pour conserver la biodiversité à l'échelle régionale et temporelle. Les oiseaux côtiers sont des indicateurs importants de la santé des écosystèmes marins, car ils représentent des consommateurs mobiles, ont une longue durée de vie et représente le niveau trophique supérieur. En utilisant un ensemble de données de science participative sur 20 ans (1999-2019) avec un échantillonnage avant-après contrôle-intervention (AACI) pour la protection de l'habitat, nous avons appliqué des modèles d'occupation dynamiques pour évaluer les tendances de l'occupation hivernale le long de la côte pacifique du Canada. Plus précisément, nous avons cherché à comprendre les moteurs potentiels des déclins régionaux, les points communs spatiaux entre les guildes et les changements dans l'utilisation de l'habitat avant et après la désignation de le ZP, ainsi qu'entre les ZP et les non-ZP. Les tendances en matière d'occupation varient d'une région à l'autre, avec des déclins plus importants dans le sud que dans le nord. Les différences régionales soulignent les déplacements potentiels de l'aire de répartition, en particulier pour les espèces dont les caractéristiques sont liées à la tolérance à la température, aux déplacements et à la recherche de nourriture à rendement élevé, car les benthivores et les piscivores migrateurs tolérants au froid ont hiverné plus au nord qu'il y a 20 ans ou se sont retirés dans les fjords aux eaux froides. Alors que 21 des 57 (36,8 %) espèces ont réagi positivement à la désignation des aires protégées (avant-après), les baisses d'occupation ont eu tendance à être plus importantes dans les aires protégées créées avant 1999 que dans les aires non protégées (contrôle-intervention). Comme les aires protégées sont actuellement concentrées dans le sud, les associations négatives étaient plus évidentes pour les espèces qui se retirent vers le nord, mais les aires protégées existantes peuvent avoir un effet stabilisateur ou transitoire sur les espèces hivernant dans le sud qui se déplacent dans la région à partir d'une région plus au sud. Nous soulignons que les stratégies de conservation doivent trouver un équilibre entre la persistance des communautés actuelles et la préservation de la biodiversité adaptée au climat de demain, en tenant compte des effets au niveau des communautés des espèces qui entrent dans les aires protégées existantes ou qui en sortent. L'intégration des changements d'aire de répartition dans la planification des aires protégées en prédisant les changements de distribution permettra aux praticiens de la conservation d'identifier les habitats prioritaires, tels que les refuges d'eau froide, pour les communautés d'espèces sauvages persistantes.

Raising the bar: Recovery ambition for species at risk in Canada and the US.

Routinely crossing international borders and/or persisting in populations across multiple countries, species are commonly subject to a patchwork of endangered species legislation. Canada and the United States share numerous endangered species; their respective acts, the Species at Risk Act (SARA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA), require documents that outline requirements for species recovery. Although there are many priorities for improving endangered species legislation effectiveness, species recovery goals are a crucial component. We compared recovery goal quality, as measured by goal quantitativeness and ambition, for species listed under SARA and ESA. By comparing across ESA and SARA, the intent of the study was to identify differences and similarities that could support the development of stronger species' recovery goals under both legislations. Our results indicated that: (1) overall, only 38% of recovery goals were quantitative, 41% had high ambition, and 26% were both quantitative and with high ambition; (2) recovery goals had higher quantitativeness and ambition under ESA than SARA; (3) recovery goals for endangered species had higher ambition than threatened species under ESA and SARA, and; (4) no recovery goal aimed to restore populations to historic levels. Combined, these findings provide guidance to strengthen recovery goals and improve subsequent conservation outcomes. In particular, species at risk planners should seek to attain higher recovery goal ambition, particularly for SARA-listed species, and include quantitative recovery goals wherever possible.

HUMAN IMPACTS. The unique ecology of human predators.

Paradigms of sustainable exploitation focus on population dynamics of prey and yields to humanity but ignore the behavior of humans as predators. We compared patterns of predation by contemporary hunters and fishers with those of other predators that compete over shared prey (terrestrial mammals and marine fishes). Our global survey (2125 estimates of annual finite exploitation rate) revealed that humans kill adult prey, the reproductive capital of populations, at much higher median rates than other predators (up to 14 times higher), with particularly intense exploitation of terrestrial carnivores and fishes. Given this competitive dominance, impacts on predators, and other unique predatory behavior, we suggest that humans function as an unsustainable "super predator," which­unless additionally constrained by managers­will continue to alter ecological and evolutionary processes globally.

Trends in extinction risk for imperiled species in Canada.

Protecting and promoting recovery of species at risk of extinction is a critical component of biodiversity conservation. In Canada, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) determines whether species are at risk of extinction or extirpation, and has conducted these assessments since 1977. We examined trends in COSEWIC assessments to identify whether at-risk species that have been assessed more than once tended to improve, remain constant, or deteriorate in status, as a way of assessing the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation in Canada. Of 369 species that met our criteria for examination, 115 deteriorated, 202 remained unchanged, and 52 improved in status. Only 20 species (5.4%) improved to the point where they were 'not at risk', and five of those were due to increased sampling efforts rather than an increase in population size. Species outcomes were also dependent on the severity of their initial assessment; for example, 47% of species that were initially listed as special concern deteriorated between assessments. After receiving an at-risk assessment by COSEWIC, a species is considered for listing under the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA), which is the primary national tool that mandates protection for at-risk species. We examined whether SARA-listing was associated with improved COSEWIC assessment outcomes relative to unlisted species. Of 305 species that had multiple assessments and were SARA-listed, 221 were listed at a level that required identification and protection of critical habitat; however, critical habitat was fully identified for only 56 of these species. We suggest that the Canadian government should formally identify and protect critical habitat, as is required by existing legislation. In addition, our finding that at-risk species in Canada rarely recover leads us to recommend that every effort be made to actively prevent species from becoming at-risk in the first place.