Leadership and management influences the outcome of wildlife reintroduction programs: findings from the Sea Eagle Recovery Project.

Alexandra E Sutton

doi:10.7717/peerj.1012

Abstract

Wildlife reintroductions and translocations are statistically unlikely to succeed. Nevertheless, they remain a critical part of conservation because they are the only way to actively restore a species into a habitat from which it has been extirpated. Past efforts to improve these practices have attributed the low success rate to failures in the biological knowledge (e.g., ignorance of social behavior, poor release site selection), or to the inherent challenges of reinstating a species into an area where threats have already driven it to local extinction. Such research presumes that the only way to improve reintroduction outcomes is through improved biological knowledge. This emphasis on biological solutions may have caused researchers to overlook the potential influence of other factors on reintroduction outcomes. I employed a grounded theory approach to study the leadership and management of a successful reintroduction program (the Sea Eagle Recovery Project in Scotland, UK) and identify four critical managerial elements that I theorize may have contributed to the successful outcome of this 50-year reintroduction. These elements are: 1. Leadership & Management: Small, dedicated team of accessible experts who provide strong political and scientific advocacy (“champions”) for the project. 2. Hierarchy & Autonomy: Hierarchical management structure that nevertheless permits high individual autonomy. 3. Goals & Evaluation: Formalized goal-setting and regular, critical evaluation of the project’s progress toward those goals. 4. Adaptive Public Relations: Adaptive outreach campaigns that are open, transparent, inclusive (esp. linguistically), and culturally relevant.

Highlights

Wildlife reintroductions are complex, expensive, and time-consuming
Broadcasting Service, 2010; British Broadcasting Company, 2013), conservation literature (Whitfield et al, 2009; van Wieren, 2012), and government leaders (Scottish Natural Heritage, 2014; National Farmers Union of Scotland, 2014) all agreed that the project had been a success
In the study presented here, I explore some of the ways in which human and organizational factors (: leadership and management) of the recovery project may have contributed to this successful outcome

Summary

Introduction

Worse, they are statistically unlikely to succeed, as repeated audits have shown (Clark & Westrum, 1989; Griffith et al, 1989; Kleiman, 1989; Fischer & Lindenmayer, 2000; Reading, Clark & Kellert, 2002; Lipsey & Child, 2007; Seddon, Armstrong & Maloney, 2007; Reading, Miller & Shepherdson, 2013). They are statistically unlikely to succeed, as repeated audits have shown (Clark & Westrum, 1989; Griffith et al, 1989; Kleiman, 1989; Fischer & Lindenmayer, 2000; Reading, Clark & Kellert, 2002; Lipsey & Child, 2007; Seddon, Armstrong & Maloney, 2007; Reading, Miller & Shepherdson, 2013) They are the only way to restore an extirpated species to its prior home in cases where natural recolonization is impossible or unlikely, and for this reason, How to cite this article Sutton (2015), Leadership and management influences the outcome of wildlife reintroduction programs: findings from the Sea Eagle Recovery Project. If this were the case, reintroductions of data-rich species (e.g., wolves, lions) would be reliably more successful; they are not

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion