Reintroduction Biology Integrating Science and Management
, by Ewen, John G.; Armstrong, Doug P.; Parker, Kevin A.; Seddon, Philip J.
- ISBN: 9781405186742 | 1405186747
- Cover: Paperback
- Copyright: 1/30/2012
This book aims to further advance the field of reintroduction biology beyond the considerable progress made since the formation of the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group. Using an issue-based framework that purposely avoids a structure based on case studies the book's central theme is advocating a strategic approach to reintroduction where all actions are guided by explicit theoretical frameworks based on clearly defined objectives. Issues covered include husbandry and intensive management, monitoring, and genetic and health management. Although taxonomically neutral there is a recognised dominance of bird and mammal studies that reflects the published research in this field. The structure and content are designed for use by people wanting to bridge the research-management gap, such as conservation managers wanting to expand their thinking about reintroduction-related decisions, or researchers who seek to make useful applied contributions to reintroduction.
John Ewen is a Research Fellow at the Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London and is supported by a Research Councils UK Academic Fellowship. He is currently co-leader of the New Zealand Department of Conservation's Hihi Recovery Group and is a member of the IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group.
Doug Armstrong is the Professor of Conservation Biology at Massey University in New Zealand. He has been involved in reintroduction since 1992, and has been the Oceania Chair of the IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group since 1997.
Kevin Parker is a post-doctoral fellow at Massey University, New Zealand. He is a member of the IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group.
Phil Seddon is an Associate Professor at the University of Otago and Director of the Department of Zoology's Postgraduate Wildlife Management Programme. Phil has been a member of the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group (RSG) since 1995, and RSG Bird Section Chair since 1998.
| Book proposal | |
| AVIAN Translocations for Conservation: Science and Management | |
| Planning and Implementation | |
| Why are we planning a translocation? | |
| Aim: To introduce the different forms of conservation translocation and the different stakeholders involved | |
| Overview: While the underling premise of translocations is deceptively simple the specifics of "who for" and "why" are seldom addressed. It is important for the success of a translocation project to clearly understand the aims and identify the stakeholders before it takes place. We suggest that translocations are primarily undertaken by three groups - conservation managers, scientists and the wider human community (ranging from volunteer groups and enthusiasts through to the tax payers who often foot the bill). Each stakeholder may have different aims, experience and resources that can influence the type and outcome of a translocation. There are also various types of translocation, ranging from: (i) a single species management exercise aimed at increasing a threatened species' range and numbers; (ii) an advocacy tool to generate interest and public support; (iii) an experimental translocation aimed at addressing hypotheses about the science of translocation and population viability; and (iv) a component of ecological restoration. Again it is essential to clearly understand why a translocation is being done as it will determine what resources and effort are available and what end point is expected. This chapter will introduce the idea of translocations and summarise the many different whys and who fors to help direct and focus a priori goal setting | |
| Possible box text 1: Tiritiri Matangi Island, New Zealand as a successful ecosystem restoration program heavily reliant on translocation. Translocations to Tiritiri Matangi Island offer an ideal model system that has incorporated all types of translocation and encompass all stakeholders | |
| Possible box text 2: Translocation, restoration and indigenous people. Traditional knowledge, values and stewardship are important components of successful management of endangered species - use the Rarotonga Flycatcher or kakerori (population declined to 29 birds) and the Kainuku, Karika and Manavaroa landowning clans as an example | |
| Possible authors: Kevin Parker (Massey University, NZ), Dr. Phillip Seddon (Otago University, NZ), Dr. Mark Stanley Price (Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust, UK), Dr. Frdric Launay (ERWDA, United Emirates), Assoc. Prof. Doug Armstrong (Massey University, NZ), representative of the Takitumu Conservation Area committee (Rarotonga) | |
| Selecting a suitable release site | |
| Aim: To review the theory behind and provide a framework for selecting suitable habitat when we often have little information to work with | |
| Overview: One of the key requirements of translocation guidelines is to select suitable habitat for release sites. This, however, is a very difficult criterion to meet. Endangered species are often restricted to habitat that may not be preferred (or are only found in captivity) and the cause of extirpation from other regions is often poorly known. This chapter will critically assess our ability to determine habitat suitability and summarise many of the pitfalls translocation practitioners have met. The importance of attempting to understand the factor(s) that caused the original population decline and required management action to remedy the threat or threats will be emphasised. In addition we will raise awareness to the often seen problem of basing management on intuition rather than data. Finally we will review modern methods that can help minimise the guesswork normally associated with selecting release sites | |
| Possible box text 1: Remnant habitats vs. ideal habitats. Review classic examples of where management was restricted by using habitat characteristics at sites of remnant populations and the benefits of relaxing these criteria. Examples will include the Lord Howe woodhen, the Hawaiian nene, the New Zealand takahe and saddleback | |
| Possible box text 2: The utilisation of GIS to predict and identify potential habitat for release sites. Provide an insight and examples of these powerful tools used in conservation of taxa such as bearded vulture and numerous mammal species | |
| Possible authors: Assoc. Prof. Doug Armstrong (Massey University, NZ), Dr. Ian Jamieson (Otago University, NZ), Kevin Parker (Massey University, NZ), Dr. Jim Groombridge (DICE, UK), Prof. Rapha?l Arlettaz (University of Bern, Switzerland), Prof. David Macdonald (University of Oxford, UK) | |
| Practicalities of selecting and moving birds | |
| Aim: To summarize the many available options for selecting individuals for translocation and to provide appropriate methodologies for holding, transport and release | |
| Overview: A translocation is a series of stressful events for the target birds. Therefore capture, processing and transportation, and subsequent condition on release, is critical to the success of any translocation. The most basic component is personal highly skilled at handling and maintaining wild birds in captivity. A working knowledge of the effects of stress on individual birds is required as it is important when considering release strategies, e.g., immediate versus delayed releases. Species will differ in their reactions to captivity, and the role of basic biological knowledge of target species is critical, particularly when deciding the age, sex ratio and number of individuals to release, multiple releases and the timing of reintroductions | |
| Possible box text 1: Various aviary and transport box designs and why they are preferred | |
| Possible box text 2: Stress. What is it? Why is it a problem? What causes it? And how do we monitor and mitigate it? | |
| Possible box text 3: Soft versus hard release. These terms need defining as they encompass a range of release strategies. The literature, however, suggests that at best soft releases have no effect, and in some cases reduces success, and yet it is often the preferred strategy. Why is this so? A critical assessment | |
| Possible box text 4: Two case studies highlighting the benefits of understanding a species biology and identifying threats. Operation nest egg. A novel approach to mitigating predation threats in the New Zealand kiwi. Translocation of the cooperatively breeding black-eared miner in Australia. Complex social structure adds major difficulties to planning and implementation of translocation programmes | |
| Possible authors: Tim Lovegrove (Auckland Regional Council, NZ), Kevin Parker (Massey University, NZ), Dr Claudia Carraro (University of Padova, Italy), Dr Rohan Clarke (Deakin University, Australia), Don Merton (Department of Conservation, NZ), Dr. Hugh Robertson (Department of Conservation, NZ) | |
| Monitoring and Management | |
| Strategic monitoring of reintroduced populations | |
| Aim: To provide a reintroduction practitioners with a framework for fitting monitoring programs to information requirements | |
| Overview: It is now well appreciated that reintroduced populations need to be monitored. However, the type and intensity of monitoring is usually decided on an ad hoc basis. We will advocate a strategic approach to monitoring, and this will consist of three main themes. First, monitoring is most efficient when tailored to questions that are identified a priori, hence a major focus in reintroduction biology should be identification of key questions. Second, a wide range of potential monitoring methods are available for bird populations, and the optimal methods will depend on the species, the questions, and the resources available. Third, monitoring requires resources, hence deciding the intensity of monitoring is an optimisation problem that requires data on costs and benefits of information in relation to other resource uses | |
| Possible box text 1: The key questions of reintroduction biology. The box will present a framework of questions that can be posed in reintroductions, and advocate that particular questions have been underemphasised in the past while others have been overemphasised | |
| Possible box text 2: An outline of different methods that can be used to monitor reintroduced bird populations, and directions on which methods are applicable in different situations. This information might best be presented in a flow chart | |
| Possible box text 3: Bayesian updating. Optimal monitoring is an inherently Bayesian problem, in that the value of monitoring changes over time and estimation of that value increases over time, requiring ongoing updating. The box would explain the principles of Bayesian updating with reference to monitoring of reintroduced populations | |
| Possible authors: Assoc. Prof. Doug Armstrong (Massey University, NZ); Dr. Phillip Seddon (Otago University, NZ); Dr. Jim Nicholls (Patuxent Wildlife Centre, USA); Dr. Brendan Wittle (University of Melbourne, Australia); Dr. Tracy Rout (University of Melbourne, Australia) | |
| Modelling projections for reintroduced populations | |
| Aim: To provide a practical guide for modelling reintroduced populations, and also to outline advanced issues in reintroduction modelling featured in recent and upcoming research | |
| Overview: Despite extensive monitoring of reintroduced populations, and many recent publications on reintroduced populations, there are still relatively few attempts to project the growth and survival of populations. This situation reflects the fact that most reintroduction practitioners lack modelling skills, hence most models are created using software packages such as VORTEX. We will outline packages that can be used for this purpose. However, we will encourage reintroduction practitioners to create models based on their understanding of the systems they are working with rather than simply plugging numbers into packages. We will outline methods for fitting survival and reproduction data to potential models, selecting among those models using information-theoretic methods, and combining these into population models for making projections. We will demonstrate a spreadsheet approach that allows people to create simple models using common spreadsheet software. We will also discuss more advanced topics, including integrated and Bayesian modelling, and spatial modelling | |
| Possible box text 1: Data analysis. A brief outline of methods for analysing survival and reproduction in bird populations | |
| Possible box text 2: Model selection and inference. A brief explanation of information-theoretic approaches for model selection, and model averaging | |
| Possible box text 3: PVA packages. A table showing existing software available for population analysis and key features of each package | |
| Possible box text 4: Spreadsheet models. A simple example showing how people can create their own population models using Microsoft Excel or other spreadsheets | |
| Possible authors: Assoc. Prof. Doug Armstrong (Massey University, NZ); Dr. Francois Sarazzin (MNHN-CNRS, France); Prof. Gary White (Colorado State University, USA); Dr. Mick McCarthy (University of Melbourne, Australia) | |
| Adaptive management of reintroduced populations | |
| Aim: To encourage reintroduction practitioners to adopt adaptive methods for improving management of populations, and illustrate how this process can work | |
| Overview: Adaptive management can maximise management efficiency by identifying effective aspects of management and determining whether management if necessary and sufficient to maintain populations. We contrast adaptive management with other methods of inference, including classic experiments, and show that adaptive management is particularly amenable to several challenges typically imposed by reintroduced populations. We outline the procedures in involved in adaptive management, integrating these with the previous chapters on monitoring and population projection. We illustrate these using the example of hihi reintroductions in New Zealand | |
| Possible box text 1: Adaptive management of hihi. The reintroduction program for the New Zealand hihi has so far been the only case of adaptive management being applied to a reintroduced population. The box will illustrate the steps followed in the adaptive management process, leading to success recovery of this species | |
| Possible box text 2: Bayesian modelling. Adaptive management is often assumed to require a Bayesian structure, although this is not necessarily the case. The box will illustrate how Bayes Theorem is potentially applied to the problem of adaptive management | |
| Possible authors: Assoc. Prof. Doug Armstrong (Massey University, NZ); Dr. Christine Hunter (University of Alaska, USA) | |
| Disease Mitigation | |
| Principles of disease management: the theory of disease ecology | |
| Aim: To overview relevant theory behind disease dynamics and threats as directly relevant to translocation | |
| Overview: The threat of: (i) disease outbreak during capture, handling and movement; (ii) transferring unwanted pathogens to the release site and (iii) the possible impacts of diseases found at the release site on recently translocated birds will depend on the ecology of the many various types of pathogen. There is a well developed field of wildlife epidemiology that can be used to discuss the likely threats and help prioritise mitigation effort (if and where it is needed). Given the nature of translocations and threatened species, a major focus will be on disease dynamics in small populations and the impacts of generalist pathogens/diseases | |
| Possible box text 1: There are important principles in disease ecology that will be explained in detail with examples. Virulence. Prevalence. Host specificity. Transmission. Susceptibility | |
| Possible box text 2: Present the mathematical framework used to determine the likelihood of pathogens establishing and persisting in populations. These models can also be used to parameterise the likely impacts on both short- and long-term viability under the presence of known pathogens | |
| Possible box text 3: It needs to be noted that diseases/pathogens are also a natural, and necessary, part of a species' biology. In addition there needs to be consideration for conserving the pathogens where our goal is to restore biodiversity. This text will provide an argument for maintaining natural disease dynamics from both the host and pathogen perspective | |
| Possible authors: Dr. John Ewen (IoZ, UK), Dr. Andrew Cunningham (IoZ, UK), Dr. Clyde Hutchinson (IoZ, UK), Prof. Andy Dobson (Princeton University, USA), Dr. Bret Gartrell (Massey University, NZ), Dr. Vittorio Guberti (Istituto Nazionale per la Fauna Selvatica, Italy), Assoc. Prof. Maurice Alley (Massey University, NZ) | |
| Realised impacts of disease and disease management in translocation | |
| Aim: To move beyond the theory and show solid evidence of the negative impacts disease can have. Also to show how we have tried to incorporate disease mitigation into the translocation process | |
| Overview: The impacts of emergent infectious disease and the accidental introduction of disease to nave avifauna have resulted in major population declines and possibly extinction. Examples of such events will form the base of a review documenting the various impacts disease outbreaks have had on endangered bird species. We will draw specifically on documentation of inadvertent exposure to disease through translocation and the impacts of disease in establishment success. Mitigation of this threat has only recently been implemented in translocation and this chapter will review current protocols and highlight the utility and limitation of these methods | |
| Possible box text 1: Case studies of two New Zealand Passeriformes. The hihi offers well documented impacts of disease on establishment success and also of emergent disease impacts and reduced population viability. The saddleback has recently highlighted the problems of disease mitigation with extended quarantine and subsequent associated mortality | |
| Possible box text 2: The pink pigeon of Mauritius and problems of recovery associated with disease. This example offers a rare insight into a well studied and highly vulnerable species | |
| Possible authors: Dr. John Ewen (IoZ, UK), Dr. Andrew Cunningham (IoZ, UK), Dr. Clyde Hutchinson (IoZ, UK), Dr. Bret Gartrell (Massey University, NZ), Kevin Parker (Massey University, NZ), Dr Kate McInnes (Department of Conservation, NZ), Dr Kirsty Swinnerton (Maui Forest Bird Project Coordinator, Hawaii) | |
| Recommended protocols for disease screening in reintroduction | |
| Aim & Overview: Provide an easy to use model of how to deal with disease issues when planning and implementing a translocation | |
| Possible box text 1: A flow diagram or decision tree on the requirements for disease management in any given translocation | |
| Possible box text 2: Here we feel it would be good to provide some critical comment on the wildlife disease screening process. A pointed text aimed at experts in the field to challenge the future development of disease management and key questions for continued research | |
| Possible authors: Dr. John Ewen (IoZ, UK), Dr. Andrew Cunningham (IoZ, UK), Dr Clyde Hutchinson (IoZ, UK), Dr Bret Gartrell (Massey University, NZ), Kevin Parker (Massey University, NZ), Dr. Vittorio Guberti (Istituto Nazionale per la Fauna Selvatica, Italy), Dr Kirsty Swinnerton (Maui Forest Bird Project Coordinator, Hawaii), Assoc. Prof. Maurice Alley (Massey Univeristy, NZ), Dr. Kate McInnes (Department of Conservation, NZ) | |
| Genetic Considerations | |
| Inbreeding and outbreeding theory relevant to reintroduction | |
| Aim: To provide an introduction to the theory behind these genetic issues | |
| Overview: Translocation of endangered bird species may leave one of two clear genetic signatures. In cases where populations are newly established (through a bottlenecked translocation event), there will be loss of genetic diversity. This may reduce the fitness of individuals in a population and/or may reduce the adaptability of individuals to as yet unseen events. Alternatively, where already established populations are supplemented through translocation, genetic material may be mixed from different sources. This mixing may reduce fitness by disrupting locally optimised gene complexes. The basic theory behind both these principles will be clearly explained with general examples. Of further consideration will be (i) maintaining the genetic integrity of remnant populations and (ii) introducing the idea that established populations may face a different adaptive landscape resulting in divergence from the source population | |
| Possible box text 1: Introduce some of the more frequently used methods and markers used to address genetic issues. Include a brief definition, an example of where they have been ustilised, and (where appropriate) advice on where each are best suited | |
| Possible box text 2: Present detailed examination on the relative (and combined) impacts of multiple generations at small population size (typical of endangered species) and bottleneck events (associated with translocation) on loss of genetic diversity | |
| Possible authors: Prof. Richard Frankham (Macquarie University, Australia), Prof. Philip Hedrick (Arizona Sate University, USA), Dr Camille Bonneaud (Harvard, USA), Dr. Trent Garner (IoZ, UK), Dr John Ewen (IoZ, UK), Dr Alexandre Robert (Musum National d'Histoire Naturelle, France), Dr David Richardson (University of East Anglia, UK) | |
| Phenotypic impacts of inbreeding and outbreeding | |
| Aim: To compliment the theoretical explanations in chapter ten with some real evidence for the negative impacts of translocation at the genetic level | |
| Overview: The phenotypic signatures of inbreeding and outbreeding are varied. At one level it has been argued that the persistence of highly inbred populations of endangered species proves that they can sustain a reduced genetic variability. Growing evidence suggests this is not often the case and it is possible to observe the reduced fitness of further bottlenecks (resulting from translocation). Where empirical data on endangered species are not currently available we will draw on more experimental systems to highlight the impacts of both inbreeding and outbreeding. Gaps in knowledge will be highlighted for directing future research areas. As an extension to avoiding outbreeding, there is also ample literature on maintaining (or not) the genetic integrity of isolated sub-populations that may represent evolutionary distinct units | |
| Possible box text 1: How do species that have touched on extinction (total population size less than 100) remain genetically viable? Detailed description of two or three species including New Zealand's black robin (including declines, conservation effort, genetic variability, and current population viability). Provide some expert opinion as to why this is so - perhaps linking into box 2 | |
| Possible box text 2: Even if we can show reduced fitness as a result of either inbreeding or outbreeding, does this mean that viability is compromised? Data on vital rates needs to then be modelled to determine the likelihood of population persistence. Utilise population data from two well studied species to show predicted population trajectories with different outcomes (one example is the griffon vulture in France) | |
| Possible authors: Dr Ian Jamieson (Otago University, NZ), Dr Jim Briskie (University of Canterbury, NZ), Dr John Ewen (IoZ, UK), Dr Jim Groombridge (DICE, UK), Assoc. Prof. Doug Armstrong (Massey University, NZ), Dr David Richardson (University of East Anglia, UK), Dr Alexandre Robert (Musum National d'Histoire Naturelle, France) | |
| Managing genetic issues in reintroduction biology | |
| Aim and overview: To summarise the genetic considerations raised in chapters ten and eleven and provide a guide for translocation practitioners to deal with these issues | |
| Possible box text 1: As with other summary chapters in this book we will design a simple flow/decision chart to help practitioners determine the likely impacts and possible mitigation of genetic issues | |
| Possible box text 2: Top up translocations to increase genetic variability. Is it possible and how many individuals are required? Also review how successful these projects are in recruiting released birds into an established population | |
| Possible authors: Dr Ian Jamieson (Otago University, NZ), Prof. Richard Frankham (Macquarie University, Australia), Dr. Trent Garner (IoZ, UK), Dr John Ewen (IoZ, UK), Dr David Richardson (University of East Anglia, UK), Dr Jim Groombridge (DICE, UK), Dr Alexandre Robert (Musum National d'Histoire Naturelle, France) | |
| Database and Information Sharing | |
| The importance of information sharing in reintroduction | |
| Aim: To highlight the necessity for reporting on all translocation attempts to the wider translocation community | |
| Overview: We learn from our mistakes and it would be much more efficient if we could also learn from others. Translocations for conservation are known for their poor success rates and we still have little understanding of the processes responsible for failure (or success). Our lack of understanding is partly due to the lack of recording information and information availability. The only way to change this is reporting on the outcomes of each translocation project. We will argue this by drawing on examples where information sharing has resulted in more efficient translocation procedures and from other areas in conservation where benefits of established information sharing networks can be seen (from the very broad templates of the IUCN red list to recent web based data sites such as ZSL's EDGE and ConservationEvidence.com). We will argue that we should be moving from a style of "one-off" reintroduction programmes to exploring patterns across multiple translocations of a given species and across multiple translocations of multiple species. As translocation practitioners are increasingly disparate in their links (with more NGOs and community group involvement) there is an urgent need to push for a more unified information sharing framework | |
| Possible box text 1: The comparative approach and its usefulness in translocation biology. We will draw on recent comparative analyses that describe patterns of threat across bird taxa to highlight the potential of this analytical tool | |
| Potential authors: Prof. William Sutherland (University of Cambridge, UK), Assoc. Prof. Doug Armstrong (Massey University, NZ), Dr Joanne Earnhardt (Lincoln Park Zoo, USA), Dr. Phillip Seddon (Otago University, NZ); Dr. John Ewen (IoZ, UK), Dr. Peter Bennett (IoZ, UK) | |
| A reintroduction database template | |
| Aim and overview: To provide a template database that can be promoted for recording information from translocations. This template should be described in a step by step framework which doubles as easy to follow instructions. The importance of various data fields can be highlighted by linking back to other relevant chapters. Outputs should allow (i) practitioners easy access to summaries of translocations of similar taxa and (ii) build a data resource to help understand the poorly known processes of failure and success across all taxa (linking to chapter thirteen) | |
| Possible box text 1: Who reads reports? A pointed review about the scientific process for conservation biologists along with the file draw reports often demanded by conservation agencies. Do scientific journals dedicated to conservation filter information to the conservation practitioners? Do reports to government bodies provide a usable resource to future translocation efforts? We will argue that both reporting modes fail to deliver what is needed | |
| Possible authors: Prof. William Sutherland (University of Cambridge, UK), Assoc. Prof. Doug Armstrong (Massey University, NZ), Dr. Phillip Seddon (Otago University, NZ), Dr. Joanne Earnhardt (Lincoln Park Zoo, USA), Sean OConner (Department of Conservation, NZ), Dr. John Ewen (IoZ, UK), Dr. Peter Bennett (IoZ, UK) | |
| Overview and Integrated Reintroduction Strategy | |
| Summary and Integrated Reintroduction Strategy | |
| Aim and overview: To provide a framework for conducting avian conservation translocations that can be utilised by all end users (Universities, Government Bodies, NGO's and community groups) | |
| We will combine all aspects of the translocation procedure into a single framework. This will help set priorities when there are competing demands and/or limited resources. Our secondary aim is to promote the science of conservation translocations and highlight the importance of information sharing to improve the chances of success | |
| Possible box text 1: Planning guide. Present a flow or decision chart that summarises the various aspects relevant to any given translocation (stemming from each book section above) | |
| Possible authors: Dr John Ewen (IoZ, UK), Assoc. Prof. Doug Armstrong (Massey University, NZ), Kevin Parker (Massey University, NZ) and Dr Phillip Seddon (University of Otago, NZ) | |
| Table of Contents provided by Publisher. All Rights Reserved. |
What is included with this book?
The New copy of this book will include any supplemental materials advertised. Please check the title of the book to determine if it should include any access cards, study guides, lab manuals, CDs, etc.
The Used, Rental and eBook copies of this book are not guaranteed to include any supplemental materials. Typically, only the book itself is included. This is true even if the title states it includes any access cards, study guides, lab manuals, CDs, etc.
Please wait while the item is added to your bag...
