评估鸟类与风力涡轮机碰撞对种群影响的方法:重要视角

IF 2.2 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Thierry Chambert, Olivier Duriez, Aurélien Besnard
{"title":"评估鸟类与风力涡轮机碰撞对种群影响的方法:重要视角","authors":"Thierry Chambert, Olivier Duriez, Aurélien Besnard","doi":"10.1017/s0376892923000346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary Wind energy is a source of collision fatalities for birds and bats. To evaluate the risk that wind power development projects might pose to the conservation of protected species, it is essential to quantify the impact of collisions on the dynamics of wild populations. To address this challenge, two approaches are primarily employed: potential biological removal (PBR) and population projection analysis (PPA). PBR is a decision rule designed to calculate a sustainable fatality limit for a given population, whereas PPA relies on simulation-based modelling to forecast a population’s future trajectory under various scenarios. In the context of environmental impact assessments (EIAs), we argue that PPA offers a more suitable method than PBR for evaluating population-level impacts resulting from collisions with wind turbines. Unlike PBR, PPA can be focused on a single source of disturbance, aligning with the perspective of the EIA process. By contrast, PBR necessarily adopts a population-centred perspective and is therefore only relevant when considering all sources of mortality that jointly affect a population. Furthermore, robust utilization of the PBR approach requires the definition of quantitative conservation objectives and the implementation of a comprehensive management strategy evaluation, neither of which is ever undertaken within the context of an EIA.","PeriodicalId":50517,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Conservation","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methodological approaches to assessing population-level impacts of bird collisions with wind turbines: a critical perspective\",\"authors\":\"Thierry Chambert, Olivier Duriez, Aurélien Besnard\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0376892923000346\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Summary Wind energy is a source of collision fatalities for birds and bats. To evaluate the risk that wind power development projects might pose to the conservation of protected species, it is essential to quantify the impact of collisions on the dynamics of wild populations. To address this challenge, two approaches are primarily employed: potential biological removal (PBR) and population projection analysis (PPA). PBR is a decision rule designed to calculate a sustainable fatality limit for a given population, whereas PPA relies on simulation-based modelling to forecast a population’s future trajectory under various scenarios. In the context of environmental impact assessments (EIAs), we argue that PPA offers a more suitable method than PBR for evaluating population-level impacts resulting from collisions with wind turbines. Unlike PBR, PPA can be focused on a single source of disturbance, aligning with the perspective of the EIA process. By contrast, PBR necessarily adopts a population-centred perspective and is therefore only relevant when considering all sources of mortality that jointly affect a population. Furthermore, robust utilization of the PBR approach requires the definition of quantitative conservation objectives and the implementation of a comprehensive management strategy evaluation, neither of which is ever undertaken within the context of an EIA.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50517,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Conservation\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Conservation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0376892923000346\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Conservation","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0376892923000346","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 风能是造成鸟类和蝙蝠碰撞死亡的一个原因。为了评估风能开发项目对受保护物种的保护可能带来的风险,必须量化碰撞对野生种群动态的影响。为应对这一挑战,主要采用了两种方法:潜在生物清除(PBR)和种群预测分析(PPA)。PBR 是一种决策规则,旨在计算特定种群的可持续死亡率极限,而 PPA 则依赖于模拟建模,预测各种情况下种群的未来轨迹。在环境影响评估 (EIA) 中,我们认为 PPA 比 PBR 更适合用于评估风力涡轮机碰撞对人口造成的影响。与 PBR 不同,PPA 可专注于单一干扰源,与环境影响评估过程的视角一致。相比之下,PBR 必须采用以种群为中心的视角,因此只有在考虑共同影响种群的所有死亡源时才具有相关性。此外,要有效利用 PBR 方法,就必须确定量化的保护目标,并实施全面的管理战略评估,而这两项工作在环境影响评估中都不可能进行。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Methodological approaches to assessing population-level impacts of bird collisions with wind turbines: a critical perspective
Summary Wind energy is a source of collision fatalities for birds and bats. To evaluate the risk that wind power development projects might pose to the conservation of protected species, it is essential to quantify the impact of collisions on the dynamics of wild populations. To address this challenge, two approaches are primarily employed: potential biological removal (PBR) and population projection analysis (PPA). PBR is a decision rule designed to calculate a sustainable fatality limit for a given population, whereas PPA relies on simulation-based modelling to forecast a population’s future trajectory under various scenarios. In the context of environmental impact assessments (EIAs), we argue that PPA offers a more suitable method than PBR for evaluating population-level impacts resulting from collisions with wind turbines. Unlike PBR, PPA can be focused on a single source of disturbance, aligning with the perspective of the EIA process. By contrast, PBR necessarily adopts a population-centred perspective and is therefore only relevant when considering all sources of mortality that jointly affect a population. Furthermore, robust utilization of the PBR approach requires the definition of quantitative conservation objectives and the implementation of a comprehensive management strategy evaluation, neither of which is ever undertaken within the context of an EIA.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Conservation
Environmental Conservation 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
43
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: Environmental Conservation is one of the longest-standing, most highly-cited of the interdisciplinary environmental science journals. It includes research papers, reports, comments, subject reviews, and book reviews addressing environmental policy, practice, and natural and social science of environmental concern at the global level, informed by rigorous local level case studies. The journal"s scope is very broad, including issues in human institutions, ecosystem change, resource utilisation, terrestrial biomes, aquatic systems, and coastal and land use management. Environmental Conservation is essential reading for all environmentalists, managers, consultants, agency workers and scientists wishing to keep abreast of current developments in environmental science.
×
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