|
|||||||||
      |
|||||||||
|
Conservation
Biology | Conservation
magazine | Affiliate
Publications | Section
Publications | SCB
Newsletter
|
|||||||||
| You are here: Home > Resources > tips > | |||||||||||||
NEWS TIPS FROM THE June 2004 ISSUE OF CONSERVATION BIOLOGY the Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEPlease mention Conservation Biology as the source of these items:
PDFs of these papers are available to the media; please register for the Society for Conservation Biology's media services at: http://conbio.org/SCB/Information/Media/ Images are provided by the researchers; please contact them directly for more information. For more information about the Society for Conservation Biology: http://conservationbiology.org
18th ANNUAL MEETING, SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGYJuly 30-August 2, 2004, New York City
|
 |
|
| Kerry Russell (right) enrolled his family's 130-acre ranch in a Safe Harbor
Agreement on behalf of 2 endangered Texas songbirds, the golden-cheeked
warbler (pictured on left) and the black-capped vireo. The ranch is located in the Texas
Hill Country. Mr. Russell was the 1st landowner to enroll & has helped recruit other
landowners. |
Private landowners don't have to help endangered species on their property but conservationists hope to make them want to. Several conservation incentive programs encourage habitat protection on private lands in the U.S., and a new study suggests that they can work.
"These incentive programs are the most promising development in endangered species conservation in a decade," says David Wilcove, who presents this work with Joon Lee in the June Conservation Biology. Both researchers are at Princeton University in New Jersey.
Restoring habitat on private land is key to saving many endangered species. Habitat destruction is the biggest threat to endangered species, and two-thirds of those that are federally listed live on private lands. While private landowners are prohibited from harming protected species, they are not legally obligated to restore habitat on their land.
Wilcove and Lee studied three recent incentive programs aimed at restoring endangered species habitat on private lands in the U.S.: safe harbor agreements, which guarantee that landowners will not be penalized with future land use restrictions if the endangered species population grows; the Environmental Defense's Landowner Conservation Assistance Program, which helps cover costs and develops habitat restoration plans for landowners; and conservation banking, which lets landowners develop endangered species habitat in exchange for buying credits from others who conserve or restore habitat elsewhere. For each program, the researchers assessed how many landowners were participating, how much acreage was enrolled, and how many endangered species were targeted as of July 2002.
Since the safe harbor program began in 1995, participation increased steadily to 189 landowners, nearly 2 million acres and 21 endangered species in July 2002. While most of these agreements are too new to evaluate, several have already been successful. For example, thanks to a safe harbor agreement, the nene (Hawaiian goose) is once more breeding on Molokai after having been extinct there for more than 200 years.
The Landowner Conservation Assistance Program (LCAP) was established in 1999 in the Texas Hill Country to benefit two endangered songbirds, the golden-cheeked warbler and the black-capped vireo. In July 2002, 33 landowners had enrolled more than 61,000 acres to help these birds. "[The] LCAP has proved remarkably popular in the Texas Hill Country, a region where hostility to federal regulations is legendary," say the researchers. Interestingly, few participating landowners had also enrolled in safe harbor agreements, suggesting that most of them care more about technical help than regulatory relief.
Conservation banks have been operating since the early 1990s and in July 2002 there were at least 47 banks (39 in California) with a total of 50,000 acres and 37 threatened or endangered species. Nearly half of these conservation banks had sold credits.
The researchers caution that conservation incentive programs won't help all endangered species - they are likely to work best for those with habitats that can be restored relatively easily, cheaply and quickly. That said, "they do appear to be turning the tide for some of the nation's rarest species," says Wilcove.
CONTACT:
David Wilcove: 609-258-7118 (w), 609-712-1388 (c), dwilcove@princeton.edu
WEBSITE:
David Wilcove
http://www.eeb.princeton.edu/FACULTY/Wilcove/Wilcove.html
WHALE DEBATE SHIFTS
Culling in the name of ecosystem protection?
 |
|
Killer whales off the Norwegian coast - these orcas are subjects of a whalewatching industry, and were culled in the early 1970's
when the herring stock crashed due to overfishing |
Even as conservationists promote whale watching over whaling, the debate is shifting. A new report says that whaling nations are focusing less on whether rebounding whale populations should be hunted and more on whether they are threats to marine ecosystems.
"The debate on managing whale killing is moving to the question of how much of the reduced productivity of the oceans and coasts should remain available to whales," says Peter Corkeron of the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research in Tromsoe in the June Conservation Biology.
Since being internationally protected in the 1970s, some populations of large whales have rebounded and whaling is now on the rise. Norway resumed its commercial hunt for minke whales in 1993, and Japan and Iceland both hunt whales in the name of research.
However, the International Fund for Animal Welfare and other NGOs still oppose whaling and instead promote whale watching as an alternative way to make money. The whale watching industry has increased greatly in the last decade (the dollar value has grown by an estimated 12% per year), leading some to ask if this harms the whales.
 |
| Biologists conducting field work in a Norwegian fjord (Tysfjord) |
But whale conservationists may be missing the boat. As fisheries decline around the world, the debate is shifting from hunting whales to culling them. "To nations with whalers...whales are no longer natural resources to be managed sustainably but are competitors for fisheries," says Corkeron. In 2003 Japan said that whales eat up to six times more marine fish than people do, and that sustainable fisheries should not be compromised to protect abundant whales. Similarly, Norway is calling for ecosystem-based management of the "vast stocks" of whales and seals to protect fisheries.
Norway currently pays a bounty for hunting gray seals and has culled whales in the past. For example, in the late 1970s killer whales were culled off the Norwegian coast after herring stocks crashed due to overfishing. Whale culls may lie in the future too. "The logical extension of this idea is that whales should not be allowed to recover to environmental carrying capacity but rather are in need of culling under the name of ecosystem management," says Corkeron.
The latest development suggests that he is right. "Norway's parliament called on Tuesday for a three-fold increase in whale hunting quotas in a move it said would protect stocks of cod and other fish eaten by the giant mammals," according to a May 19 2004 article in the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten.
CONTACT:
Peter Corkeron: +47-776-09725 (w), +47-776-38140 (h), peter.corkeron@imr.no
WEBSITES:
Norwegian Ministry of Fisheries,
Report to the Storting [Parliament] on Norway's policy on Marine Mammals
http://odin.dep.no/fid/engelsk/p10001957/pressem/008041-070230/index-dok000-b-n-a.html
Japan's Institute of Cetacean Research
http://www.icrwhale.org/
WEEKENDS MAY THREATEN WILDLIFE
Heavier traffic drives at-risk eagle from hunting grounds
 |
| Spanish imperial eagle |
People's weekend fun may have a down side for the critically endangered Spanish imperial eagle. New research shows that on weekends, traffic doubles and the eagles avoid a roadside that provides some of their best remaining hunting grounds. And matters are likely to get worse because the government plans to build a high-speed road there.
"The final death sentence for one of the most endangered species in the world is being quietly executed," say Luis Bautista of the Instituto de Agrobiotechnologia y Recursos Naturale in Navarra, Spain, and Javier Vinuela of Instituto de Investigacion en Recursos Cinegeticos in Cuidad Real, Spain, who present this work with six co-authors in the June Conservation Biology.
People in Madrid use the road studied, M-501, for weekend getaways to recreational areas. However, on the way they drive through some of the best remaining habitat for the Spanish imperial eagle. Much of the region is urbanized and farmed, and roadsides in such areas can be important hunting grounds for raptors. For example, the rabbits that the eagles depend on are particularly common along M-501. But even though there are fewer than 400 Spanish imperial eagles left, the Madrid Autonomous Region is planning to enlarge M-501 so it can accommodate high-speed traffic. This plan goes against the recommendation of the government's Environmental Agency.
To see how M-501 currently affects the raptors, the researchers monitored traffic and nine raptor species that hunted or foraged along a 19-km long section between Madrid and the recreational areas. The researchers compared the levels of traffic and raptor sightings on weekdays and weekends.
The results showed that M-501 is already affecting the Spanish imperial eagle. On weekends, the traffic load nearly doubled from about 5,000 to 10,000 vehicles/day, and sightings of the eagle dropped by four-fifths. The same was true for two other endangered raptors, the European black vulture and the griffon vulture.
"Today the eagles take weekend breaks," says Bautista. "What about tomorrow, when there is a high-speed road? Where will the eagles go?"
CONTACT:
Luis Bautista: 34-914111328 (ask the receptionist for X1224), iarnb300@iarn.csic.es
Javier Vinuela: 34-926295450, Javier.Vinuela@uclm.es
DUTCH CONSERVATION AGREEMENTS CAN BACKFIRE
Wading birds rarer in "conserved" areas
 |
| A black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa) in a typical pose
on a fencepole. Approximately 50% of the European population of
black-tailed godwits breeds in Dutch grasslands making it the flagship
species of Dutch agri-environment schemes. Photo: Ruben Smit. |
Dutch conservation agreements pay farmers for adopting agricultural practices intended to benefit nature, but a new analysis suggests that they are not working. The agreements are not helping and in some cases may even harm their target species: the diversity of plants and meadowbirds failed to increase, and the numbers of wading birds actually decreased in fields with conservation agreements.
"It is clear that the scientific basis for the Dutch management agreements is largely missing," say David Kleijn and Ruben Smit of Wageningen University in The Netherlands and five co-authors in the June Conservation Biology.
As agriculture has intensified, biodiversity has declined dramatically in Western Europe. Accordingly, European Union countries spent about 24 billion euros on conservation agreements between 1992 and 2003. But no one knows if they really work.
The researchers tested the effectiveness of two kinds of Dutch conservation agreements (botanical agreements and meadowbird agreements) that prohibit changes in drainage, and limit fertilizer and herbicide use. Meadowbird agreements also prohibit disturbing fields during the breeding season. The researchers compared plant diversity in 22 pairs of fields with and without botanical management agreements, and compared bird diversity in 23 pairs of fields with and without meadowbird agreements.
The results showed that these two kinds of conservation agreements failed to increase biodiversity. For example, fields with botanical agreements did not have more plant species than those without agreements. And fields with meadowbird agreements did not have more of the target species than those without agreements.
 |
| One of the study areas with high densities of meadow
birds. Meadow birds prefer moist, open and monotonous grassland areas
for nesting. Photo: Ruben Smit |
Worse, fields with meadowbird agreements had about 40% fewer wading birds than those without agreements. The researchers suspect that waders may avoid fields with conservation agreements because they receive less fertilizer and so have fewer earthworms to eat. "Our results reveal an important weakness of management agreements aimed at promoting waders," say the researchers.
This could help explain why threatened wading birds are still declining in The Netherlands. For example, the black-tailed godwit population keeps dropping even though conservation agreements cover much of its best remaining habitat. About half of Europe's black-tailed godwits breed in the Netherlands, which historically had a great diversity of meadowbirds and grassland plants.
The problem may be that the conservation agreements are not addressing the underlying reason for biodiversity loss, say the researchers. The meadowbird and grassland diversity depended largely on the country's historically high groundwater levels. However, groundwater levels are now kept low so farmers can use their fields early in the spring. While this gives them a longer growing season, it also makes the soil dry out faster and so decreases the worms and other soil-dwelling prey available to wading birds. "Conservation measures that require little adaptation of the farming system...are not likely to yield positive effects in intensively used agricultural landscapes," say the researchers.
CONTACT:
David Kleijn: +31-317-483883, david.kleijn@wur.nl
Ruben Smit: +31-317-422657, Rubensmit@planet.nl
WEBSITE:
Evaluating European Agri-environment Schemes
http://www.dow.wau.nl/natcons/NP/EASY/
|
||
|
|
||
Copyright © 2008 Society for Conservation Biology (SCB)
Direct questions, comments, and technical problems to the webmaster SCB is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization |