Prioritizing recovery funding to maximize conservation of endangered species
Tara G. Martin, Laura Kehoe, Chrystal Mantyka‐Pringle, Iadine Chadès, Scott Wilson, Robin G. Bloom, Stephen K. Davis, Ryan J. Fisher, Jeff Keith, Katherine R. Mehl, Beatriz Prieto Diaz, Mark Wayland, Troy I. Wellicome, Karl P. Zimmer, Paul A. Smith
Abstract
The absence of a rigorous mechanism for prioritizing investment in endangered species management is a major implementation hurdle affecting recovery. Here, we present a method for prioritizing strategies for endangered species management based on the likelihood of achieving species' recovery goals per dollar invested. We demonstrate our approach for 15 species listed under Canada's Species at Risk Act that co-occur in Southwestern Saskatchewan. Without management, only two species have >50% probability of meeting recovery objectives; whereas, with management, 13 species exceed the >50% threshold with the implementation of just five complementary strategies at a cost of $126m over 20 years. The likelihood of meeting recovery objectives rarely exceeded 70% and two species failed to reach the >50% threshold. Our findings underscore the need to consider the cost, benefit, and feasibility of management strategies when developing recovery plans in order to prioritize implementation in a timely and cost-effective manner.- Cite:
- Tara G. Martin, Laura Kehoe, Chrystal Mantyka‐Pringle, Iadine Chadès, Scott Wilson, Robin G. Bloom, Stephen K. Davis, Ryan J. Fisher, Jeff Keith, Katherine R. Mehl, Beatriz Prieto Diaz, Mark Wayland, Troy I. Wellicome, Karl P. Zimmer, and Paul A. Smith. 2018. Prioritizing recovery funding to maximize conservation of endangered species. Conservation Letters, Volume 11, Issue 6, 11(6):e12604.
- Copy Citation:
Export citation
@article{Martin-2018-Prioritizing,
title = "Prioritizing recovery funding to maximize conservation of endangered species",
author = "Martin, Tara G. and
Kehoe, Laura and
Mantyka‐Pringle, Chrystal and
Chad{\`e}s, Iadine and
Wilson, Scott and
Bloom, Robin G. and
Davis, Stephen K. and
Fisher, Ryan J. and
Keith, Jeff and
Mehl, Katherine R. and
Diaz, Beatriz Prieto and
Wayland, Mark and
Wellicome, Troy I. and
Zimmer, Karl P. and
Smith, Paul A.",
journal = "Conservation Letters, Volume 11, Issue 6",
volume = "11",
number = "6",
year = "2018",
publisher = "Wiley",
url = "https://gwf-uwaterloo.github.io/gwf-publications/G18-79001",
doi = "10.1111/conl.12604",
pages = "e12604",
abstract = "The absence of a rigorous mechanism for prioritizing investment in endangered species management is a major implementation hurdle affecting recovery. Here, we present a method for prioritizing strategies for endangered species management based on the likelihood of achieving species' recovery goals per dollar invested. We demonstrate our approach for 15 species listed under Canada's Species at Risk Act that co-occur in Southwestern Saskatchewan. Without management, only two species have {\textgreater}50{\%} probability of meeting recovery objectives; whereas, with management, 13 species exceed the {\textgreater}50{\%} threshold with the implementation of just five complementary strategies at a cost of {\$}126m over 20 years. The likelihood of meeting recovery objectives rarely exceeded 70{\%} and two species failed to reach the {\textgreater}50{\%} threshold. Our findings underscore the need to consider the cost, benefit, and feasibility of management strategies when developing recovery plans in order to prioritize implementation in a timely and cost-effective manner.",
}
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="Martin-2018-Prioritizing">
<titleInfo>
<title>Prioritizing recovery funding to maximize conservation of endangered species</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Tara</namePart>
<namePart type="given">G</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Martin</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Laura</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Kehoe</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Chrystal</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Mantyka‐Pringle</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Iadine</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Chadès</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Scott</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Wilson</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Robin</namePart>
<namePart type="given">G</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Bloom</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Stephen</namePart>
<namePart type="given">K</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Davis</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Ryan</namePart>
<namePart type="given">J</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Fisher</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jeff</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Keith</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Katherine</namePart>
<namePart type="given">R</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Mehl</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Beatriz</namePart>
<namePart type="given">Prieto</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Diaz</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Mark</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Wayland</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Troy</namePart>
<namePart type="given">I</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Wellicome</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Karl</namePart>
<namePart type="given">P</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Zimmer</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Paul</namePart>
<namePart type="given">A</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Smith</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2018</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre authority="bibutilsgt">journal article</genre>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Conservation Letters, Volume 11, Issue 6</title>
</titleInfo>
<originInfo>
<issuance>continuing</issuance>
<publisher>Wiley</publisher>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
<genre authority="bibutilsgt">academic journal</genre>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>The absence of a rigorous mechanism for prioritizing investment in endangered species management is a major implementation hurdle affecting recovery. Here, we present a method for prioritizing strategies for endangered species management based on the likelihood of achieving species’ recovery goals per dollar invested. We demonstrate our approach for 15 species listed under Canada’s Species at Risk Act that co-occur in Southwestern Saskatchewan. Without management, only two species have \textgreater50% probability of meeting recovery objectives; whereas, with management, 13 species exceed the \textgreater50% threshold with the implementation of just five complementary strategies at a cost of $126m over 20 years. The likelihood of meeting recovery objectives rarely exceeded 70% and two species failed to reach the \textgreater50% threshold. Our findings underscore the need to consider the cost, benefit, and feasibility of management strategies when developing recovery plans in order to prioritize implementation in a timely and cost-effective manner.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">Martin-2018-Prioritizing</identifier>
<identifier type="doi">10.1111/conl.12604</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://gwf-uwaterloo.github.io/gwf-publications/G18-79001</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2018</date>
<detail type="volume"><number>11</number></detail>
<detail type="issue"><number>6</number></detail>
<detail type="page"><number>e12604</number></detail>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Journal Article %T Prioritizing recovery funding to maximize conservation of endangered species %A Martin, Tara G. %A Kehoe, Laura %A Mantyka‐Pringle, Chrystal %A Chadès, Iadine %A Wilson, Scott %A Bloom, Robin G. %A Davis, Stephen K. %A Fisher, Ryan J. %A Keith, Jeff %A Mehl, Katherine R. %A Diaz, Beatriz Prieto %A Wayland, Mark %A Wellicome, Troy I. %A Zimmer, Karl P. %A Smith, Paul A. %J Conservation Letters, Volume 11, Issue 6 %D 2018 %V 11 %N 6 %I Wiley %F Martin-2018-Prioritizing %X The absence of a rigorous mechanism for prioritizing investment in endangered species management is a major implementation hurdle affecting recovery. Here, we present a method for prioritizing strategies for endangered species management based on the likelihood of achieving species’ recovery goals per dollar invested. We demonstrate our approach for 15 species listed under Canada’s Species at Risk Act that co-occur in Southwestern Saskatchewan. Without management, only two species have \textgreater50% probability of meeting recovery objectives; whereas, with management, 13 species exceed the \textgreater50% threshold with the implementation of just five complementary strategies at a cost of $126m over 20 years. The likelihood of meeting recovery objectives rarely exceeded 70% and two species failed to reach the \textgreater50% threshold. Our findings underscore the need to consider the cost, benefit, and feasibility of management strategies when developing recovery plans in order to prioritize implementation in a timely and cost-effective manner. %R 10.1111/conl.12604 %U https://gwf-uwaterloo.github.io/gwf-publications/G18-79001 %U https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12604 %P e12604
Markdown (Informal)
[Prioritizing recovery funding to maximize conservation of endangered species](https://gwf-uwaterloo.github.io/gwf-publications/G18-79001) (Martin et al., GWF 2018)
- Prioritizing recovery funding to maximize conservation of endangered species (Martin et al., GWF 2018)
ACL
- Tara G. Martin, Laura Kehoe, Chrystal Mantyka‐Pringle, Iadine Chadès, Scott Wilson, Robin G. Bloom, Stephen K. Davis, Ryan J. Fisher, Jeff Keith, Katherine R. Mehl, Beatriz Prieto Diaz, Mark Wayland, Troy I. Wellicome, Karl P. Zimmer, and Paul A. Smith. 2018. Prioritizing recovery funding to maximize conservation of endangered species. Conservation Letters, Volume 11, Issue 6, 11(6):e12604.