Continental-scale assessment reveals inadequate monitoring for threatened vertebrates in a megadiverse country

Ben C. Scheele, Sarah Legge, Wade Blanchard, Stephen Garnett, Hayley Geyle, Graeme Gillespie, Perter Harrison, David Lindenmayer, Mark Lintermans, Natasha Robinson, John Woinarski

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

    Abstract

    Monitoring threatened species is essential for quantifying population trends, understanding causes of species' declines, and guiding the development and assessment of effective recovery actions. Here, we provide a systematic, continental-scale evaluation of the extent and quality of monitoring for threatened species, focussing on terrestrial and freshwater vertebrates in Australia. We found marked inadequacies: one in four threatened taxa are not monitored at all; for taxa that are monitored, monitoring quality, as assessed across nine metrics, was generally low. Higher quality monitoring was associated with policy recognition, in the form of species recovery plans, and for species having a more imperilled conservation status. Across taxonomic classes, the proportion of species monitored was highest for mammals and then birds, whereas monitoring quality was greatest for birds. Improving monitoring quality requires setting clear objectives, direct integration with management, incorporating explicit management triggers, long-term resourcing, and better communication and accessibility of monitoring information. While our results revealed that overall monitoring efforts are inadequate, the positive relationship between improved monitoring outcomes and national policy support highlights that, when resources are available, good monitoring outcomes can be achieved. Quality monitoring programs for threatened species, and biodiversity more generally, should be recognized as vital measures of a nation's progress, analogous and complementary to more widely-used economic and human health indicators.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)273-278
    Number of pages6
    JournalBiological Conservation
    Volume235
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2019

    Fingerprint

    vertebrate
    vertebrates
    monitoring
    threatened species
    bird
    recovery plan
    birds
    conservation status
    accessibility
    animal communication
    human health
    mammal
    communication
    mammals
    biodiversity
    economics
    resource

    Cite this

    Scheele, Ben C. ; Legge, Sarah ; Blanchard, Wade ; Garnett, Stephen ; Geyle, Hayley ; Gillespie, Graeme ; Harrison, Perter ; Lindenmayer, David ; Lintermans, Mark ; Robinson, Natasha ; Woinarski, John. / Continental-scale assessment reveals inadequate monitoring for threatened vertebrates in a megadiverse country. In: Biological Conservation. 2019 ; Vol. 235. pp. 273-278.
    @article{ef36d79f393d488a9fe6a3449f387138,
    title = "Continental-scale assessment reveals inadequate monitoring for threatened vertebrates in a megadiverse country",
    abstract = "Monitoring threatened species is essential for quantifying population trends, understanding causes of species' declines, and guiding the development and assessment of effective recovery actions. Here, we provide a systematic, continental-scale evaluation of the extent and quality of monitoring for threatened species, focussing on terrestrial and freshwater vertebrates in Australia. We found marked inadequacies: one in four threatened taxa are not monitored at all; for taxa that are monitored, monitoring quality, as assessed across nine metrics, was generally low. Higher quality monitoring was associated with policy recognition, in the form of species recovery plans, and for species having a more imperilled conservation status. Across taxonomic classes, the proportion of species monitored was highest for mammals and then birds, whereas monitoring quality was greatest for birds. Improving monitoring quality requires setting clear objectives, direct integration with management, incorporating explicit management triggers, long-term resourcing, and better communication and accessibility of monitoring information. While our results revealed that overall monitoring efforts are inadequate, the positive relationship between improved monitoring outcomes and national policy support highlights that, when resources are available, good monitoring outcomes can be achieved. Quality monitoring programs for threatened species, and biodiversity more generally, should be recognized as vital measures of a nation's progress, analogous and complementary to more widely-used economic and human health indicators.",
    keywords = "Adaptive management, Conservation, Conservation policy, Extinction, Management, Monitoring, Threatened species",
    author = "Scheele, {Ben C.} and Sarah Legge and Wade Blanchard and Stephen Garnett and Hayley Geyle and Graeme Gillespie and Perter Harrison and David Lindenmayer and Mark Lintermans and Natasha Robinson and John Woinarski",
    year = "2019",
    month = "7",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1016/j.biocon.2019.04.023",
    language = "English",
    volume = "235",
    pages = "273--278",
    journal = "Biological Conservation",
    issn = "0006-3207",
    publisher = "Elsevier",

    }

    Scheele, BC, Legge, S, Blanchard, W, Garnett, S, Geyle, H, Gillespie, G, Harrison, P, Lindenmayer, D, Lintermans, M, Robinson, N & Woinarski, J 2019, 'Continental-scale assessment reveals inadequate monitoring for threatened vertebrates in a megadiverse country', Biological Conservation, vol. 235, pp. 273-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.04.023

    Continental-scale assessment reveals inadequate monitoring for threatened vertebrates in a megadiverse country. / Scheele, Ben C.; Legge, Sarah; Blanchard, Wade; Garnett, Stephen; Geyle, Hayley; Gillespie, Graeme; Harrison, Perter; Lindenmayer, David; Lintermans, Mark; Robinson, Natasha; Woinarski, John.

    In: Biological Conservation, Vol. 235, 01.07.2019, p. 273-278.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Continental-scale assessment reveals inadequate monitoring for threatened vertebrates in a megadiverse country

    AU - Scheele, Ben C.

    AU - Legge, Sarah

    AU - Blanchard, Wade

    AU - Garnett, Stephen

    AU - Geyle, Hayley

    AU - Gillespie, Graeme

    AU - Harrison, Perter

    AU - Lindenmayer, David

    AU - Lintermans, Mark

    AU - Robinson, Natasha

    AU - Woinarski, John

    PY - 2019/7/1

    Y1 - 2019/7/1

    N2 - Monitoring threatened species is essential for quantifying population trends, understanding causes of species' declines, and guiding the development and assessment of effective recovery actions. Here, we provide a systematic, continental-scale evaluation of the extent and quality of monitoring for threatened species, focussing on terrestrial and freshwater vertebrates in Australia. We found marked inadequacies: one in four threatened taxa are not monitored at all; for taxa that are monitored, monitoring quality, as assessed across nine metrics, was generally low. Higher quality monitoring was associated with policy recognition, in the form of species recovery plans, and for species having a more imperilled conservation status. Across taxonomic classes, the proportion of species monitored was highest for mammals and then birds, whereas monitoring quality was greatest for birds. Improving monitoring quality requires setting clear objectives, direct integration with management, incorporating explicit management triggers, long-term resourcing, and better communication and accessibility of monitoring information. While our results revealed that overall monitoring efforts are inadequate, the positive relationship between improved monitoring outcomes and national policy support highlights that, when resources are available, good monitoring outcomes can be achieved. Quality monitoring programs for threatened species, and biodiversity more generally, should be recognized as vital measures of a nation's progress, analogous and complementary to more widely-used economic and human health indicators.

    AB - Monitoring threatened species is essential for quantifying population trends, understanding causes of species' declines, and guiding the development and assessment of effective recovery actions. Here, we provide a systematic, continental-scale evaluation of the extent and quality of monitoring for threatened species, focussing on terrestrial and freshwater vertebrates in Australia. We found marked inadequacies: one in four threatened taxa are not monitored at all; for taxa that are monitored, monitoring quality, as assessed across nine metrics, was generally low. Higher quality monitoring was associated with policy recognition, in the form of species recovery plans, and for species having a more imperilled conservation status. Across taxonomic classes, the proportion of species monitored was highest for mammals and then birds, whereas monitoring quality was greatest for birds. Improving monitoring quality requires setting clear objectives, direct integration with management, incorporating explicit management triggers, long-term resourcing, and better communication and accessibility of monitoring information. While our results revealed that overall monitoring efforts are inadequate, the positive relationship between improved monitoring outcomes and national policy support highlights that, when resources are available, good monitoring outcomes can be achieved. Quality monitoring programs for threatened species, and biodiversity more generally, should be recognized as vital measures of a nation's progress, analogous and complementary to more widely-used economic and human health indicators.

    KW - Adaptive management

    KW - Conservation

    KW - Conservation policy

    KW - Extinction

    KW - Management

    KW - Monitoring

    KW - Threatened species

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85065551099&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.04.023

    DO - 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.04.023

    M3 - Article

    VL - 235

    SP - 273

    EP - 278

    JO - Biological Conservation

    JF - Biological Conservation

    SN - 0006-3207

    ER -