Stuart Butchart

Question 1

Analyses on state of nature and pressures

Answer 1

and solution

Question 2

Diagnosing threats

Answer 2

urgent actions and setting targets

Question 3

Rats, pigs

Answer 3

and mosquitoes and habitat loss

Question 4

Stephen’s island NZ

Answer 4

tibbles the cat bred and killed wren, wiped out

Question 5

Passenger pigeon

Answer 5

flock of 3.6 billion over 14 hours.

Hunted to death in 15 years

Question 6

Romeo effect

Answer 6

giving up before knowing it’s the end

Question 7

Lazarus effect

Answer 7

bringing back extinct species too often undermines categrorisation

Question 8

Modelling decline

Answer 8

over elevated probability of decline. Search range, competent surveyors, how cryptic are the species. Estimating threats, probability of bird being correctly identified

Question 9

Agriculture, hunting, and traffic

Answer 9

Illegal hunting 43M birds taken or killed. 10M in EU every year

Question 10

Reasons for illegal killing

Answer 10

Food, sport, pest control

Question 11

Types of illegality

Answer 11

trapping, shooting

Question 12

Policy

Answer 12

task force against killing
site protection
education and awareness
species specific protection

Question 13

Seabird population native pacific island

Answer 13

251 eradications of invasive species on mammals, birds bounce back

Question 14

Aichi targets

Answer 14

major conservation orgs rallying behind same goal.

Question 15

Need smart targets that are

Answer 15

specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and timebound

Question 16

Global Biodiversity: Indicators of Recent Declines

Butchart 2010

Answer 16

In 2002, world leaders committed, through the Convention on Biological Diversity, to achieve a significant reduction in the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010. We compiled 31 indicators to report on progress toward this target. Most indicators of the state of biodiversity (covering species’ population trends, extinction risk, habitat extent and condition, and community composition) showed declines, with no significant recent reductions in rate, whereas indicators of pressures on biodiversity (including resource consumption, invasive alien species, nitrogen pollution, overexploitation, and climate change impacts) showed increases. Despite some local successes and increasing responses (including extent and biodiversity coverage of protected areas, sustainable forest management, policy responses to invasive alien species, and biodiversity-related aid), the rate of biodiversity loss does not appear to be slowing.

Question 17

An assessment of threats to terrestrial protected areas

Schulze et al., 2017

Answer 17

Protected areas (PAs) represent a cornerstone of efforts to safeguard biodiversity, and if effective should reduce threats to biodiversity. We present the most comprehensive assessment of threats to terrestrial PAs, based on in situ data from 1,961 PAs across 149 countries, assessed by PA managers and local stakeholders. Unsustainable hunting was the most commonly reported threat and occurred in 61% of all PAs, followed by disturbance from recreational activities occurring in 55%, and natural system modifications from fire or its suppression in 49%. The number of reported threats was lower in PAs with greater remoteness, higher control of corruption, and lower human development scores. The main reported threats in developing countries were linked to overexploitation for resource extraction, while negative impacts from recreational activities dominated in developed countries. Our results show that many of the most serious threats to PAs are difficult to monitor with remote sensing, and highlight the importance of in situ threat data to inform the implementation of more effective biodiversity conservation in the global protected area estate.

Question 18

Creation of forest edges has a global impact on forest vertebrates
Pfeifer et al., 2017

Answer 18

Forest edges influence more than half of the world’s forests and contribute to worldwide declines in biodiversity and ecosystem functions. However, predicting these declines is challenging in heterogeneous fragmented landscapes. Here we assembled a global dataset on species responses to fragmentation and developed a statistical approach for quantifying edge impacts in heterogeneous landscapes to quantify edge-determined changes in abundance of 1,673 vertebrate species. We show that the abundances of 85% of species are affected, either positively or negatively, by forest edges. Species that live in the centre of the forest (forest core), that were more likely to be listed as threatened by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), reached peak abundances only at sites farther than 200–400 m from sharp high-contrast forest edges. Smaller-bodied amphibians, larger reptiles and medium-sized non-volant mammals experienced a larger reduction in suitable habitat than other forest-core species. Our results highlight the pervasive ability of forest edges to restructure ecological communities on a global scale.

Question 19

Identifying the World’s Most Climate Change Vulnerable Species: A Systematic Trait-Based Assessment of all Birds, Amphibians and Corals

Foden et al., 2013

Framework to assess the impacts of climate change on species.
Combinations of the three dimensions of climate change vulnerability, namely sensitivity, exposure and low adaptive capacity describe four distinct classes of climate change vulnerable species, each with particular implications for conservation prioritisation and strategic planning. Species that are ‘highly climate change vulnerable’ (1), being sensitive, exposed and of low adaptive capacity, are of greatest concern. They are the first priority for monitoring responses to climate change and for assessment of the interventions needed to support them. ‘Potential adapters’ (2) are sensitive and exposed (but high adaptive capacity) species that may be able to mitigate negative climate change impacts by dispersal or microevolution, although close monitoring is needed to verify this. ‘Potential persisters’ (3) have low adaptive capacity and are exposed (but are not sensitive) so may be able to withstand climate change in situ by themselves, but again, monitoring is needed to ensure that the assumptions about insensitivity are realized in practice. Finally, species of ‘high latent risk’ (4) have low adaptive capacity and are sensitive (but are not exposed). Although not of immediate concern if climate change projections and emissions scenarios are accurate, they could become climate change vulnerable if exposed beyond selected time frames (e.g., 2050).

Answer 19

Climate change will have far-reaching impacts on biodiversity, including increasing extinction rates. Current approaches to quantifying such impacts focus on measuring exposure to climatic change and largely ignore the biological differences between species that may significantly increase or reduce their vulnerability. To address this, we present a framework for assessing three dimensions of climate change vulnerability, namely sensitivity, exposure and adaptive capacity; this draws on species’ biological traits and their modeled exposure to projected climatic changes. In the largest such assessment to date, we applied this approach to each of the world’s birds, amphibians and corals (16,857 species). The resulting assessments identify the species with greatest relative vulnerability to climate change and the geographic areas in which they are concentrated, including the Amazon basin for amphibians and birds, and the central Indo-west Pacific (Coral Triangle) for corals. We found that high concentration areas for species with traits conferring highest sensitivity and lowest adaptive capacity differ from those of highly exposed species, and we identify areas where exposure-based assessments alone may over or under-estimate climate change impacts. We found that 608–851 bird (6–9%), 670–933 amphibian (11–15%), and 47–73 coral species (6–9%) are both highly climate change vulnerable and already threatened with extinction on the IUCN Red List. The remaining highly climate change vulnerable species represent new priorities for conservation. Fewer species are highly climate change vulnerable under lower IPCC SRES emissions scenarios, indicating that reducing greenhouse emissions will reduce climate change driven extinctions. Our study answers the growing call for a more biologically and ecologically inclusive approach to assessing climate change vulnerability. By facilitating independent assessment of the three dimensions of climate change vulnerability, our approach can be used to devise species and area-specific conservation interventions and indices. The priorities we identify will strengthen global strategies to mitigate climate change impacts.