How effective are agri‐environment schemes for protecting and improving herpetofaunal diversity in Australian endangered woodland ecosystems?

Summary Agricultural intensification is a major cause of reptile and amphibian decline world-wide, prompting concern on how to best protect biodiversity in commodity production landscapes and meet global food demands. Agri-environment schemes (AES) attempt to integrate biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes but are often compromised by a lack of baseline data, monitoring and evaluation. Few studies have examined the benefits of AES in protecting biodiversity relative to the wider farming landscape, and no studies have explicitly quantified the effectiveness of AES to increase herpetofaunal diversity. To examine whether AES protect and increase herpetofauna, we established a landscape-wide biodiversity monitoring programme in threatened semi-arid and temperate woodland communities in south-eastern Australia. With 31 species recorded, regional herpetofaunal diversity was relatively high, whereas local diversity was low. Herpetofaunal richness and reptile assemblage structure did not differ significantly between sites under AES and sites managed for livestock production. A gradient in species richness as a function of time-since-management intervention was not evident, although the abundance of one lizard species increased under vegetation management. Reptile richness and frog abundance differed significantly among vegetation types. Herpetofaunal richness was positively related to native plant richness and bare ground cover, whereas Boulenger's skink Morethia boulengeri was negatively affected by bare ground cover. The ragged snake-eyed skink Cryptoblepharus pannosus was positively related to the amount of woody debris. Synthesis and applications. In this system, strong habitat specificity implies local-scale management interventions under agri-environment schemes (AES) may not significantly increase herpetofaunal diversity in the short term. Vegetation management is likely to increase the abundance of common lizard species rather than increase local species richness due to barrier effects. Future incentive schemes should focus on improving habitat connectivity, enhancing pasture condition and increasing woody debris in the agricultural matrix to dissolve dispersal barriers and mitigate the legacy of historical land-use practices. We propose that AES, which manage mosaics of intergrading vegetation types at multiple spatial scales, will protect maximum herpetofaunal diversity. These recommendations have implications for AES world-wide, many of which currently do not adequately address the habitat requirements of herpetofauna.

[1]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Is biodiversity management effective? Cross-sectional relationships between management, bird response and vegetation attributes in an Australian agri-environment scheme. , 2012 .

[2]  S. McIntyre,et al.  Differential responses of plants, reptiles and birds to grazing management, fertilizer and tree clearing , 2012 .

[3]  A. Lüscher,et al.  Agri-environment scheme protects diversity of mountain grassland species , 2012 .

[4]  L. Jackson,et al.  Special Issue Article: Advancing Environmental Conservation: Essays In Honor Of Navjot Sodhi Global food security, biodiversity conservation and the future of agricultural intensification , 2012 .

[5]  F. Herzog,et al.  Interactive effects of landscape context constrain the effectiveness of local agri‐environmental management , 2012 .

[6]  D. Driscoll,et al.  Roadside connectivity does not increase reptile abundance or richness in a fragmented mallee landscape , 2012 .

[7]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Comparative use of active searches and artificial refuges to survey reptiles in temperate eucalypt woodlands , 2012, Wildlife Research.

[8]  László Podmaniczky,et al.  Environmental evaluation of agri-environment schemes using participatory approaches: experiences of testing the Agri-Environmental Footprint Index , 2012 .

[9]  D. Ramsey,et al.  Landscape and local influences on patterns of reptile occurrence in grazed temperate woodlands of southern Australia , 2011 .

[10]  A. Balmford,et al.  Reconciling Food Production and Biodiversity Conservation: Land Sharing and Land Sparing Compared , 2011, Science.

[11]  Kirsty J. Park,et al.  Pipistrelle bats and their prey do not benefit from four widely applied agri-environment management prescriptions , 2011 .

[12]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  Australia’s Stock Route Network: 1. A review of its values and implications for future management , 2011 .

[13]  A. Perkins,et al.  Adaptive management and targeting of agri-environment schemes does benefit biodiversity: a case study of the corn bunting Emberiza calandra , 2011 .

[14]  Leigh J. Martin,et al.  A predictive framework and review of the ecological impacts of exotic plant invasions on reptiles and amphibians , 2011, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[15]  R. Schooley,et al.  Connectivity of agroecosystems: dispersal costs can vary among crops , 2011, Landscape Ecology.

[16]  R. Hobbs,et al.  Temperate Woodland Conservation and Management , 2010 .

[17]  Matthew E. Watts,et al.  Conserving biodiversity in production landscapes. , 2010, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[18]  D. Macdonald,et al.  Habitat preference and mobility of Polia bombycina: are non-tailored agri-environment schemes any good for a rare and localised species? , 2010, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[19]  D. Macdonald,et al.  Optimizing the biodiversity gain from agri-environment schemes , 2009 .

[20]  X. Santos,et al.  Biodiversity and Land uses at a regional scale: Is agriculture the biggest threat for reptile assemblages? , 2009 .

[21]  D. Lindenmayer,et al.  A forgotten habitat? Granite inselbergs conserve reptile diversity in fragmented agricultural landscapes , 2008 .

[22]  N. Nelson,et al.  Fine‐scale genetic structure of a long‐lived reptile reflects recent habitat modification , 2008, Molecular ecology.

[23]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  Frontiers inEcology and the Environment Should agricultural policies encourage land sparing or wildlife-friendly farming ? , 2007 .

[24]  Josh Dorrough,et al.  Plant responses to agricultural intensification , 2008 .

[25]  D. Driscoll,et al.  Common reptiles unaffected by connectivity or condition in a fragmented farming landscape , 2008 .

[26]  A. Bennett,et al.  Regional faunal decline – reptile occurrence in fragmented rural landscapes of south-eastern Australia , 2008 .

[27]  T. Philippi,et al.  Amphibian and reptile declines over 35 years at La Selva, Costa Rica , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[28]  Robert I. McDonald,et al.  The distance decay of similarity in ecological communities , 2007 .

[29]  Mark J. Whittingham,et al.  Will agri‐environment schemes deliver substantial biodiversity gain, and if not why not? , 2006 .

[30]  L. Schwarzkopf,et al.  Mechanisms driving avoidance of non-native plants by lizards , 2006 .

[31]  M. Araújo,et al.  Climate warming and the decline of amphibians and reptiles in Europe , 2006 .

[32]  Karin Frank,et al.  A new method for conservation planning for the persistence of multiple species. , 2006, Ecology letters.

[33]  David W. Macdonald,et al.  The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK , 2006 .

[34]  Paul F. Donald,et al.  Habitat connectivity and matrix restoration: the wider implications of agri‐environment schemes , 2006 .

[35]  F. Herzog,et al.  Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries. , 2006, Ecology letters.

[36]  David J. Tongway,et al.  Grassland structure in native pastures: links to soil surface condition , 2005 .

[37]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  Making the matrix matter: challenges in Australian grazing landscapes , 2005, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[38]  D. Driscoll,et al.  Environmental and vegetation variables have a greater influence than habitat fragmentation in structuring lizard communities in remnant urban bushland , 2004 .

[39]  David B. Lindenmayer,et al.  The challenge of managing multiple species at multiple scales: reptiles in an Australian grazing landscape , 2004 .

[40]  William J. Sutherland,et al.  How effective are European agri‐environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity? , 2003 .

[41]  C. Fabricius,et al.  Comparing biodiversity between protected areas and adjacent rangeland in xeric succulent thicket, South Africa: arthropods and reptiles , 2003 .

[42]  T. Benton,et al.  Farmland biodiversity: is habitat heterogeneity the key? , 2003 .

[43]  Marti J. Anderson,et al.  A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance in ecology , 2001 .

[44]  D. E. Scott,et al.  The Global Decline of Reptiles, Déjà Vu Amphibians , 2000 .

[45]  C. Scott Findlay,et al.  Quantitative evidence for global amphibian population declines , 2000, Nature.

[46]  G. Helfman,et al.  Stream biodiversity: the ghost of land use past. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[47]  Colin J. Yates,et al.  Temperate eucalypt woodlands: A review of their status, processes threatening their persistence and techniques for restoration , 1997 .

[48]  K. R. Clarke,et al.  Non‐parametric multivariate analyses of changes in community structure , 1993 .

[49]  R. Macarthur,et al.  On Bird Species Diversity , 1961 .