Framework for assessing species vulnerability whilst on migration to a spatially explicit anthropogenic pressure

IF 4.9 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Ros M.W. Green , Niall H.K. Burton , Aonghais S.C.P. Cook , Samantha E. Franks , Jonathan A. Green
{"title":"Framework for assessing species vulnerability whilst on migration to a spatially explicit anthropogenic pressure","authors":"Ros M.W. Green ,&nbsp;Niall H.K. Burton ,&nbsp;Aonghais S.C.P. Cook ,&nbsp;Samantha E. Franks ,&nbsp;Jonathan A. Green","doi":"10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111118","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Animals are having to adapt to increasing anthropogenic activities and the pressures these create. The impacts experienced when encountering novel pressures on migration may be particularly acute compared to those routinely experienced in other parts of the annual cycle. To mitigate avoidable population declines, stakeholders must rigorously assess which species are vulnerable to these pressures and develop effective management solutions accordingly. However, inconsistent approaches to these assessments often hinder regulatory efficiency and decisions.</div><div>Here we present a consistent assessment framework for quantifying vulnerability to an identified spatially explicit pressure that might impact populations during migration. Standardised terminologies, methods for consistently scoring sensitivity and exposure, and for quantifying and assessing the role of uncertainty on the vulnerability index, are outlined. The framework is demonstrated using the 29 populations of Anatidae that migrate over UK waters annually and may be exposed to collision risk from offshore wind farms. Sawbills and sea ducks were more vulnerable than swans, geese and other ducks. Even with data uncertainty accounted for, the five most vulnerable species remain consistent, indicating future research and conservation could focus on these species.</div><div>This consistent framework makes use of accepted terminologies and can be used to develop vulnerability assessments for any migratory species group to any identified anthropogenic pressure. Outputs can be used to guide research efforts and support the implementation of conservation measures even if uncertainty in data remains. Comparisons between different assessments presented using this framework can be used by regulators to inform strategic planning decisions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55375,"journal":{"name":"Biological Conservation","volume":"307 ","pages":"Article 111118"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320725001557","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Animals are having to adapt to increasing anthropogenic activities and the pressures these create. The impacts experienced when encountering novel pressures on migration may be particularly acute compared to those routinely experienced in other parts of the annual cycle. To mitigate avoidable population declines, stakeholders must rigorously assess which species are vulnerable to these pressures and develop effective management solutions accordingly. However, inconsistent approaches to these assessments often hinder regulatory efficiency and decisions.
Here we present a consistent assessment framework for quantifying vulnerability to an identified spatially explicit pressure that might impact populations during migration. Standardised terminologies, methods for consistently scoring sensitivity and exposure, and for quantifying and assessing the role of uncertainty on the vulnerability index, are outlined. The framework is demonstrated using the 29 populations of Anatidae that migrate over UK waters annually and may be exposed to collision risk from offshore wind farms. Sawbills and sea ducks were more vulnerable than swans, geese and other ducks. Even with data uncertainty accounted for, the five most vulnerable species remain consistent, indicating future research and conservation could focus on these species.
This consistent framework makes use of accepted terminologies and can be used to develop vulnerability assessments for any migratory species group to any identified anthropogenic pressure. Outputs can be used to guide research efforts and support the implementation of conservation measures even if uncertainty in data remains. Comparisons between different assessments presented using this framework can be used by regulators to inform strategic planning decisions.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Biological Conservation
Biological Conservation 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.20
自引率
3.40%
发文量
295
审稿时长
61 days
期刊介绍: Biological Conservation is an international leading journal in the discipline of conservation biology. The journal publishes articles spanning a diverse range of fields that contribute to the biological, sociological, and economic dimensions of conservation and natural resource management. The primary aim of Biological Conservation is the publication of high-quality papers that advance the science and practice of conservation, or which demonstrate the application of conservation principles for natural resource management and policy. Therefore it will be of interest to a broad international readership.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信