Big Decisions and Sparse Data: Adapting Scientific Publishing to the Needs of Practical Conservation

The biggest challenge in conservation biology is breaking down the gap between research and practical management. A major obstacle is the fact that many researchers are unwilling to tackle projects likely to produce sparse or messy data because the results would be difficult to publish in refereed journals. The obvious solution to sparse data is to build up results from multiple studies. Consequently, we suggest that there needs to be greater emphasis in conservation biology on publishing papers that can be built on by subsequent research rather than on papers that produce clear results individually. This building approach requires: (1) a stronger theoretical framework, in which researchers attempt to anticipate models that will be relevant in future studies and incorporate expected differences among studies into those models; (2) use of modern methods for model selection and multi-model inference, and publication of parameter estimates under a range of plausible models; (3) explicit incorporation of prior information into each case study; and (4) planning management treatments in an adaptive framework that considers treatments applied in other studies. We encourage journals to publish papers that promote this building approach rather than expecting papers to conform to traditional standards of rigor as stand-alone papers, and believe that this shift in publishing philosophy would better encourage researchers to tackle the most urgent conservation problems.

Modeling Habitat Associations for the Common Loon (Gavia immer) at Multiple Scales in Northeastern North America

Common Loon (Gavia immer) is considered an emblematic and ecologically important example of aquatic-dependent wildlife in North America. The northern breeding range of Common Loon has contracted over the last century as a result of habitat degradation from human disturbance and lakeshore development. We focused on the state of New Hampshire, USA, where a long-term monitoring program conducted by the Loon Preservation Committee has been collecting biological data on Common Loon since 1976. The Common Loon population in New Hampshire is distributed throughout the state across a wide range of lake-specific habitats, water quality conditions, and levels of human disturbance. We used a multiscale approach to evaluate the association of Common Loon and breeding habitat within three natural physiographic ecoregions of New Hampshire. These multiple scales reflect Common Loon-specific extents such as territories, home ranges, and lake-landscape influences. We developed ecoregional multiscale models and compared them to single-scale models to evaluate model performance in distinguishing Common Loon breeding habitat. Based on information-theoretic criteria, there is empirical support for both multiscale and single-scale models across all three ecoregions, warranting a model-averaging approach. Our results suggest that the Common Loon responds to both ecological and anthropogenic factors at multiple scales when selecting breeding sites. These multiscale models can be used to identify and prioritize the conservation of preferred nesting habitat for Common Loon populations.

How well do regional or national Breeding Bird Survey data predict songbird population trends at an intact boreal site?

A study to monitor boreal songbird trends was initiated in 1998 in a relatively undisturbed and remote part of the boreal forest in the Northwest Territories, Canada. Eight years of point count data were collected over the 14 years of the study, 1998-2011. Trends were estimated for 50 bird species using generalized linear mixed-effects models, with random effects to account for temporal (repeat sampling within years) and spatial (stations within stands) autocorrelation and variability associated with multiple observers. We tested whether regional and national Breeding Bird Survey (BBS) trends could, on average, predict trends in our study area. Significant increases in our study area outnumbered decreases by 12 species to 6, an opposite pattern compared to Alberta (6 versus 15, respectively) and Canada (9 versus 20). Twenty-two species with relatively precise trend estimates (precision to detect > 30% decline in 10 years; observed SE ≤ 3.7%/year) showed nonsignificant trends, similar to Alberta (24) and Canada (20). Precision-weighted trends for a sample of 19 species with both reliable trends at our site and small portions of their range covered by BBS in Canada were, on average, more negative for Alberta (1.34% per year lower) and for Canada (1.15% per year lower) relative to Fort Liard, though 95% credible intervals still contained zero. We suggest that part of the differences could be attributable to local resource pulses (insect outbreak). However, we also suggest that the tendency for BBS route coverage to disproportionately sample more southerly, developed areas in the boreal forest could result in BBS trends that are not representative of range-wide trends for species whose range is centred farther north.