CAN-SAR: A database of Canadian species at risk information.

Threatened species lists describe the conservation status of species and are key tools used to inform decisions for biodiversity conservation. These lists are rich in information obtained during status assessment and recovery planning processes, ranging from biological attributes to actions that support recovery. Data compiled from species lists allow for analyses, including assessing trends in threats, prioritizing actions, and identifying barriers to achieving recovery objectives. For legally protected species at risk of extinction in Canada, such analyses are challenging owing to a lack of comprehensive and accessible data reflecting information compiled from listing and recovery documents. To encourage ongoing synthesis and minimise duplication of efforts, we initiated CAN-SAR: a database of Canadian Species at Risk information. This transparent, open-access, and searchable database contains information transcribed from listing documents, including listing date, and derived variables. Derived variables required interpretation for which we developed standardised criteria to record information, including classification of recovery actions. The CAN-SAR database is updateable, and will contribute towards improved recovery planning to safeguard species of conservation concern.

An introduction to decision science for conservation.

Biodiversity conservation decisions are difficult, especially when they involve differing values, complex multidimensional objectives, scarce resources, urgency, and considerable uncertainty. Decision science embodies a theory about how to make difficult decisions and an extensive array of frameworks and tools that make that theory practical. We sought to improve conceptual clarity and practical application of decision science to help decision makers apply decision science to conservation problems. We addressed barriers to the uptake of decision science, including a lack of training and awareness of decision science; confusion over common terminology and which tools and frameworks to apply; and the mistaken impression that applying decision science must be time consuming, expensive, and complex. To aid in navigating the extensive and disparate decision science literature, we clarify meaning of common terms: decision science, decision theory, decision analysis, structured decision-making, and decision-support tools. Applying decision science does not have to be complex or time consuming; rather, it begins with knowing how to think through the components of a decision utilizing decision analysis (i.e., define the problem, elicit objectives, develop alternatives, estimate consequences, and perform trade-offs). This is best achieved by applying a rapid-prototyping approach. At each step, decision-support tools can provide additional insight and clarity, whereas decision-support frameworks (e.g., priority threat management and systematic conservation planning) can aid navigation of multiple steps of a decision analysis for particular contexts. We summarize key decision-support frameworks and tools and describe to which step of a decision analysis, and to which contexts, each is most useful to apply. Our introduction to decision science will aid in contextualizing current approaches and new developments, and help decision makers begin to apply decision science to conservation problems.

Las decisiones sobre la conservación de la biodiversidad son difíciles de tomar, especialmente cuando involucran diferentes valores, objetivos multidimensionales complejos, recursos limitados, urgencia y una incertidumbre considerable. Las ciencias de la decisión incorporan una teoría sobre cómo tomar decisiones difíciles y una variedad extensa de marcos de trabajo y herramientas que transforman esa teoría en práctica. Buscamos mejorar la claridad conceptual y la aplicación práctica de las ciencias de la decisión para ayudar al órgano decisorio a aplicar estas ciencias a los problemas de conservación. Nos enfocamos en las barreras para la aceptación de las ciencias de la decisión, incluyendo la falta de capacitación y de conciencia por estas ciencias; la confusión por la terminología común y cuáles herramientas y marcos de trabajo aplicar; y la impresión errónea de que la aplicación de estas ciencias consume tiempo y debe ser costosa y compleja. Para asistir en la navegación de la literatura extensa y dispar de las ciencias de la decisión, aclaramos el significado de varios términos comunes: ciencias de la decisión, teoría de la decisión, análisis de decisiones, toma estructurada de decisiones y herramientas de apoyo para las decisiones. La aplicación de las ciencias de la decisión no tiene que ser compleja ni debe llevar mucho tiempo; de hecho, todo comienza con saber cómo pensar detenidamente en los componentes de una decisión mediante el análisis de decisiones (es decir, definir el problema, producir objetivos, desarrollar alternativas, estimar consecuencias y realizar compensaciones). Lo anterior se logra de mejor manera mediante la aplicación de una estrategia prototipos rápidos. En cada paso, las herramientas de apoyo para las decisiones pueden proporcionar visión y claridad adicionales, mientras que los marcos de apoyo para las decisiones (p.ej.: gestión de amenazas prioritarias y planeación sistemática de la conservación) pueden asistir en la navegación de los diferentes pasos de un análisis de decisiones para contextos particulares. Resumimos los marcos de trabajo y las herramientas más importantes de apoyo para las decisiones y describimos el paso, y el contexto, del análisis de decisiones para el que es más útil aplicarlos. Nuestra introducción a las ciencias de la decisión apoyará en la contextualización de las estrategias actuales y los nuevos desarrollos, y ayudarán al órgano decisorio a comenzar a aplicar estas ciencias en los problemas de conservación.

Advances in global sensitivity analyses of demographic-based species distribution models to address uncertainties in dynamic landscapes.

Developing a rigorous understanding of multiple global threats to species persistence requires the use of integrated modeling methods that capture processes which influence species distributions. Species distribution models (SDMs) coupled with population dynamics models can incorporate relationships between changing environments and demographics and are increasingly used to quantify relative extinction risks associated with climate and land-use changes. Despite their appeal, uncertainties associated with complex models can undermine their usefulness for advancing predictive ecology and informing conservation management decisions. We developed a computationally-efficient and freely available tool (GRIP 2.0) that implements and automates a global sensitivity analysis of coupled SDM-population dynamics models for comparing the relative influence of demographic parameters and habitat attributes on predicted extinction risk. Advances over previous global sensitivity analyses include the ability to vary habitat suitability across gradients, as well as habitat amount and configuration of spatially-explicit suitability maps of real and simulated landscapes. Using GRIP 2.0, we carried out a multi-model global sensitivity analysis of a coupled SDM-population dynamics model of whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) in Mount Rainier National Park as a case study and quantified the relative influence of input parameters and their interactions on model predictions. Our results differed from the one-at-time analyses used in the original study, and we found that the most influential parameters included the total amount of suitable habitat within the landscape, survival rates, and effects of a prevalent disease, white pine blister rust. Strong interactions between habitat amount and survival rates of older trees suggests the importance of habitat in mediating the negative influences of white pine blister rust. Our results underscore the importance of considering habitat attributes along with demographic parameters in sensitivity routines. GRIP 2.0 is an important decision-support tool that can be used to prioritize research, identify habitat-based thresholds and management intervention points to improve probability of species persistence, and evaluate trade-offs of alternative management options.

Spatio-temporal variation of biotic factors underpins contemporary range dynamics of congeners.

Species' ranges are complex often exhibiting multidirectional shifts over space and time. Despite the strong fingerprint of recent historical climate change on species' distributions, biotic factors such as loss of vegetative habitat and the presence of potential competitors constitute important yet often overlooked drivers of range dynamics. Furthermore, short-term changes in environmental conditions can influence the underlying processes of local extinction and local colonization that drive range shifts, yet are rarely considered at broad scales. We used dynamic state-space occupancy models to test multiple hypotheses of the relative importance of major drivers of range shifts of Golden-winged Warblers (Vermivora chrysoptera) and Blue-winged Warblers (V. cyanoptera) between 1983 and 2012 across North America: warming temperatures; habitat changes; and occurrence of congeneric species, used here as proxy for biotic interactions. Dynamic occupancies for both species were most influenced by spatial relative to temporal variation in temperature and habitat. However, temporal variation in temperature anomalies and biotic interactions remained important. The two biotic factors considered, habitat change and biotic interactions, had the largest relative effect on estimated extinction rates followed by abiotic temperature anomalies. For the Golden-winged Warbler, the predicted presence of the Blue-winged Warbler, a hypothesized competitor, most influenced extinction probabilities, contributing to evidence supporting its role in site-level species replacement. Given the overall importance of biotic factors on range-wide dynamic occupancies, their consideration alongside abiotic factors should not be overlooked. Our results suggest that warming compounds the negative effect of habitat loss emphasizing species' need for habitat to adapt to a changing climate. Notably, even closely related species exhibited individual responses to abiotic and biotic factors considered.

Predicting species distributions for conservation decisions.

Species distribution models (SDMs) are increasingly proposed to support conservation decision making. However, evidence of SDMs supporting solutions for on-ground conservation problems is still scarce in the scientific literature. Here, we show that successful examples exist but are still largely hidden in the grey literature, and thus less accessible for analysis and learning. Furthermore, the decision framework within which SDMs are used is rarely made explicit. Using case studies from biological invasions, identification of critical habitats, reserve selection and translocation of endangered species, we propose that SDMs may be tailored to suit a range of decision-making contexts when used within a structured and transparent decision-making process. To construct appropriate SDMs to more effectively guide conservation actions, modellers need to better understand the decision process, and decision makers need to provide feedback to modellers regarding the actual use of SDMs to support conservation decisions. This could be facilitated by individuals or institutions playing the role of 'translators' between modellers and decision makers. We encourage species distribution modellers to get involved in real decision-making processes that will benefit from their technical input; this strategy has the potential to better bridge theory and practice, and contribute to improve both scientific knowledge and conservation outcomes.

A protocol for better design, application, and communication of population viability analyses.

Population viability analyses (PVAs) contribute to conservation theory, policy, and management. Most PVAs focus on single species within a given landscape and address a specific problem. This specificity often is reflected in the organization of published PVA descriptions. Many lack structure, making them difficult to understand, assess, repeat, or use for drawing generalizations across PVA studies. In an assessment comparing published PVAs and existing guidelines, we found that model selection was rarely justified; important parameters remained neglected or their implementation was described vaguely; limited details were given on parameter ranges, sensitivity analysis, and scenarios; and results were often reported too inconsistently to enable repeatability and comparability. Although many guidelines exist on how to design and implement reliable PVAs and standards exist for documenting and communicating ecological models in general, there is a lack of organized guidelines for designing, applying, and communicating PVAs that account for their diversity of structures and contents. To fill this gap, we integrated published guidelines and recommendations for PVA design and application, protocols for documenting ecological models in general and individual-based models in particular, and our collective experience in developing, applying, and reviewing PVAs. We devised a comprehensive protocol for the design, application, and communication of PVAs (DAC-PVA), which has 3 primary elements. The first defines what a useful PVA is; the second element provides a workflow for the design and application of a useful PVA and highlights important aspects that need to be considered during these processes; and the third element focuses on communication of PVAs to ensure clarity, comprehensiveness, repeatability, and comparability. Thereby, DAC-PVA should strengthen the credibility and relevance of PVAs for policy and management, and improve the capacity to generalize PVA findings across studies.

Sensitivity analyses of spatial population viability analysis models for species at risk and habitat conservation planning.

Population viability analysis (PVA) is an effective framework for modeling species- and habitat-recovery efforts, but uncertainty in parameter estimates and model structure can lead to unreliable predictions. Integrating complex and often uncertain information into spatial PVA models requires that comprehensive sensitivity analyses be applied to explore the influence of spatial and nonspatial parameters on model predictions. We reviewed 87 analyses of spatial demographic PVA models of plants and animals to identify common approaches to sensitivity analysis in recent publications. In contrast to best practices recommended in the broader modeling community, sensitivity analyses of spatial PVAs were typically ad hoc, inconsistent, and difficult to compare. Most studies applied local approaches to sensitivity analyses, but few varied multiple parameters simultaneously. A lack of standards for sensitivity analysis and reporting in spatial PVAs has the potential to compromise the ability to learn collectively from PVA results, accurately interpret results in cases where model relationships include nonlinearities and interactions, prioritize monitoring and management actions, and ensure conservation-planning decisions are robust to uncertainties in spatial and nonspatial parameters. Our review underscores the need to develop tools for global sensitivity analysis and apply these to spatial PVA.