Conservation under uncertainty: Optimal network protection strategies for worst-case disturbance events

Summary 1. Conservation goals are ideally set after a thorough understanding of potential threats; however, predicting future spatial patterns of threats, such as disturbance, remains challenging. Here, we develop a novel extension of network fortification‐interdiction models (NFIM) that deals with uncertainty in future spatial patterns of disturbance by optimally selecting sites that will best mitigate a worst-case scenario for a given magnitude of disturbance. 2. This approach uses information on between-patch movement probabilities and patchspecific survival, which can be estimated from mark–recapture data, to optimize life expectancy. Optimization occurs in three interrelated stages: protection, followed by disturbance and then assessment. 3. We applied the modelling approach to two mark–recapture data sets: roseate terns Sterna dougallii in the north-eastern United States and the Everglade snail kite Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus in Florida. We contrasted the results to a more conventional approach of protecting sites that maximize connectivity (by minimizing the distances among protected sites) and a biobjective model that maximizes connectivity and the number of individuals under protection. 4. Protecting sites that best mitigate future worst-case disturbance scenarios consistently resulted in higher predicted life expectancies than protecting patches that minimize dispersal distance. Predicted life expectancy was similar between NFIM and the bi-objective model for the small roseate tern network, yet the NFIM predicted higher life expectancy than any of the scenarios in the bi-objective model in the snail kite network. 5. Synthesis and applications. This application of interdiction models prescribed a combination of patches for protection that results in the least possible decrease in life expectancy. Our analyses of the snail kite and roseate tern networks suggest that managing to protect these prescribed patches by the network fortification -interdiction models (i.e. protecting against the worst-case disturbance scenario) is more beneficial than managing patches that minimize dispersal distance or maximize the number of individuals under protection if the conservation goal is to ensure the long-term persistence of a species.

[1]  Ray Hilborn,et al.  Compensatory density dependence in fish populations: importance, controversy, understanding and prognosis , 2001 .

[2]  Matthew E. Watts,et al.  Marxan and relatives: Software for spatial conservation prioritization , 2009 .

[3]  Veronica A. J. Doerr,et al.  Connectivity, dispersal behaviour and conservation under climate change: A response to Hodgson et al. , 2011 .

[4]  Viral B. Shah,et al.  Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation. , 2008, Ecology.

[5]  J. F. Gilliam,et al.  MOVEMENT IN CORRIDORS: ENHANCEMENT BY PREDATION THREAT, DISTURBANCE, AND HABITAT STRUCTURE , 2001 .

[6]  Paul Beier,et al.  Where to Restore Ecological Connectivity? Detecting Barriers and Quantifying Restoration Benefits , 2012, PloS one.

[7]  T. Dawson,et al.  Accommodating climate change contingencies in conservation strategy. , 2013, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[8]  Brendan A. Wintle,et al.  Habitat area, quality and connectivity: striking the balance for efficient conservation , 2011 .

[9]  Sheldon M. Ross Introduction to Probability Models. , 1995 .

[10]  M Cabeza,et al.  Design of reserve networks and the persistence of biodiversity. , 2001, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[11]  Ross K. Meentemeyer,et al.  When is connectivity important? A case study of the spatial pattern of sudden oak death , 2010 .

[12]  Hugh P Possingham,et al.  Accounting for uncertainty in marine reserve design. , 2006, Ecology letters.

[13]  Jane Elith,et al.  Planning for robust reserve networks using uncertainty analysis , 2006 .

[14]  Julien Martin,et al.  Multiscale patterns of movement in fragmented landscapes and consequences on demography of the snail kite in Florida. , 2006, The Journal of animal ecology.

[15]  R. Kevin Wood,et al.  Shortest‐path network interdiction , 2002, Networks.

[16]  Jane Elith,et al.  A method for spatial freshwater conservation prioritization , 2008 .

[17]  Yacov Y. Haimes,et al.  Multiobjective Decision Making: Theory and Methodology , 1983 .

[18]  M. Acevedo,et al.  Social network models predict movement and connectivity in ecological landscapes , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[19]  C. Pfister,et al.  Patterns of variance in stage-structured populations: evolutionary predictions and ecological implications. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  J. Cole Smith,et al.  Basic Interdiction Models , 2010 .

[21]  J. Kool,et al.  Population connectivity: recent advances and new perspectives , 2012, Landscape Ecology.

[22]  Barney Dickson,et al.  Biodiversity and the Precautionary Principle : Risk, Uncertainty and Practice in Conservation and Sustainable Use , 2012 .

[23]  David M. Stoms,et al.  Extinction rates under nonrandom patterns of habitat loss , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[24]  R. B. Jackson,et al.  Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. , 2000, Science.

[25]  Hayri Önal,et al.  Incorporating spatial criteria in optimum reserve network selection , 2002, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[26]  James E. Hines,et al.  Natal location influences movement and survival of a spatially structured population of snail kites , 2007, Oecologia.

[27]  Richard M Cowling,et al.  Conservation planning in a changing world. , 2007, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[28]  H. Possingham,et al.  Spatial conservation prioritization: Quantitative methods and computational tools , 2009 .

[29]  Richard L. Church,et al.  Locating and protecting critical reserve sites to minimize expected and worst-case losses , 2007 .

[30]  William J. Sutherland,et al.  The effect of local change in habitat quality on populations of migratory species , 1998 .

[31]  Matthew D. Johnson,et al.  MEASURING HABITAT QUALITY: A REVIEW , 2007 .

[32]  John M Drake,et al.  Effects of habitat quality and size on extinction in experimental populations , 2008, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[33]  Matthew E. Watts,et al.  Incorporating ecological and evolutionary processes into continental-scale conservation planning. , 2009, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[34]  Stephen R. Carpenter,et al.  Scenario Planning: a Tool for Conservation in an Uncertain World , 2003, Conservation Biology.

[35]  Richard L. Church,et al.  The importance of in situ site loss in nature reserve selection: Balancing notions of complementarity and robustness , 2007 .

[36]  Jane Elith,et al.  Uncertainty Analysis for Regional‐Scale Reserve Selection , 2006, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[37]  G. E. Phillips,et al.  Reproductive Success of Elk Following Disturbance by Humans during Calving Season , 2000 .

[38]  Justin M. Calabrese,et al.  A comparison-shopper's guide to connectivity metrics , 2004 .

[39]  Helen M. Regan,et al.  ROBUST DECISION‐MAKING UNDER SEVERE UNCERTAINTY FOR CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT , 2005 .

[40]  S. Sarkar,et al.  Systematic conservation planning , 2000, Nature.

[41]  Helen M. Regan,et al.  A TAXONOMY AND TREATMENT OF UNCERTAINTY FOR ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION BIOLOGY , 2002 .

[42]  Roger Pradel,et al.  When to stay, when to disperse and where to go: survival and dispersal patterns in a spatially structured seabird population , 2013 .

[43]  Wayne M. Getz,et al.  The use of stochastic dynamic programming in optimal landscape reconstruction for metapopulations , 2003 .

[44]  James D. Nichols,et al.  ESTIMATES OF MOVEMENT AND SITE FIDELITY USING MARK-RESIGHT DATA OF WINTERING CANADA GEESE' , 1991 .

[45]  Kenneth A. Schmidt,et al.  Site fidelity in temporally correlated environments enhances population persistence , 2004 .

[46]  James J Gilroy,et al.  A new approach to the "apparent survival" problem: estimating true survival rates from mark-recapture studies. , 2012, Ecology.

[47]  Donald L. DeAngelis,et al.  Exploring the effect of drought extent and interval on the Florida snail kite: interplay between spatial and temporal scales , 2002 .

[48]  James E. Hines,et al.  Estimating Annual Survival and Movement Rates of Adults within a Metapopulation of Roseate Terns , 1995 .

[49]  James E. Hines,et al.  Spring hunting changes the regional movements of migrating greater snow geese , 2003 .

[50]  Mark A. Burgman,et al.  Treatment of uncertainty in conservation under climate change , 2013 .

[51]  A. Hastings,et al.  The Effects of Small Dispersal Rates on Extinction Times in Structured Metapopulation Models , 2002, The American Naturalist.

[52]  Gerald G. Brown,et al.  Defending Critical Infrastructure , 2006, Interfaces.

[53]  N. Schumaker,et al.  USE OF POPULATION VIABILITY ANALYSIS AND RESERVE SELECTION ALGORITHMS IN REGIONAL CONSERVATION PLANS , 2003 .

[54]  Shripad Tuljapurkar,et al.  From stage to age in variable environments: life expectancy and survivorship. , 2006, Ecology.

[55]  Arpat Ozgul,et al.  The influence of disturbance events on survival and dispersal rates of Florida box turtles. , 2006, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[56]  M. Fortin,et al.  INFLUENCE OF FOREST COVER ON THE MOVEMENTS OF FOREST BIRDS: A HOMING EXPERIMENT , 2001 .

[57]  James D. Nichols,et al.  The use of multi-state capture-recapture models to address questions in evolutionary ecology , 1995 .

[58]  W. Kendall,et al.  Extreme weather and experience influence reproduction in an endangered bird. , 2012, Ecology.

[59]  Gilles Gauthier,et al.  Effects of exceptional conservation measures on survival and seasonal hunting mortality in greater snow geese , 2005 .