Abstract

Abstract The balance between economic growth and wildlife conservation is a priority for many governments. Enhancing realism in assessment of population‐level impacts of anthropogenic mortality can help achieve this balance. Population Viability Analysis (PVA) is commonly applied to investigate population vulnerability, but outcomes of PVA are sensitive to formulations of density‐dependence, environmental stochasticity and life history. Current practice in marine assessments is to use precautionary models that assume no compensation from density‐dependence or rescue‐effects via “re‐seeding” from other colonies. However, if we could empirically quantify regulatory population processes, the responses of populations to additional anthropogenic mortality may be assessed with more realism in PVA. Using Bayesian state‐space models fitted to population time series from three sympatric seabird populations, selected for varied life histories, we inferred the extent to which their dynamics are driven by environmental stochasticity and density‐dependence. Based on these inferences, we conducted an exhaustive PVA across credible parameterizations for intrinsic and extrinsic population regulation, simulated as a closed and re‐seeded system. Scenarios of anthropogenic mortality, along a sliding scale of precaution, were applied both proportionally and as a fixed quota using Potential Biological Removal (PBR). Baseline results from fitting revealed clear environmental regulation in two of our three species. Crucially, we found that for our empirically derived, realistic model parameterizations there are risks of decline to real populations even under very precautionary mortality scenarios. We find that PBR is dubious in application as a sustainable tool for population assessment when we account for regulation. Closed versus re‐seeded models showed a large divergence in outcomes, with sharper declines in closed simulations. Fixed‐quota mortality typically induced greater population declines comparative to proportional mortality, subject to regulation and re‐seeding. Synthesis and applications. Practitioners using arbitrary formulations of population regulation risk over‐precaution (economic constraint) or under‐precaution (endangering populations). The demands of increased economic development and preservation of wildlife require that methodologies apply techniques that confer reality and rigour to assessment. The current practice of employing models lacking density‐dependence and empirical environmental information imposes limitations in the efficacy of estimating impacts. Here, we provide a method to quantify the conditions that predominantly regulate a population and exacerbate the risk of decline from anthropogenic mortality. It is in the interests of both developers and conservationists to apply methods in population impact assessments that capture realism in the processes driving population dynamics.

Highlights

  • Many species are facing decline and potential extinction from anthropogenic activities (Murphy & Romanuk, 2014; Ripple et al, 2016)

  • We find that Potential Biological Removal (PBR) is dubious in application as a sustainable tool for population assessment when we account for regulation

  • Seabird populations are at risk from additional anthropogenic mortality from by‐catch, oiling, harvesting and marine renewables (Croxall et al, 2012)

Read more

Summary

| INTRODUCTION

Many species are facing decline and potential extinction from anthropogenic activities (Murphy & Romanuk, 2014; Ripple et al, 2016). We aimed to assess how several levels of anthropogenic mortality can impact real seabird populations (both closed and open to a rescue‐effect), operating under empirically derived estimates of environmental stochasticity and density‐dependence. We used Bayesian methods to fit a state‐space population model to historical data from sympatric populations of three well‐studied UK seabird species with divergent life histories: Northern gannet Morus bassanus L., black‐legged kittiwake Rissa tridactyla L. and common guillemot Uria aalge Pontoppidan This provided posterior credible intervals for density‐dependence and environmental stochasticity for each population. To assess risk from additional mortality we utilized PBR as a tool providing a range of values across a precautionary gradient, allowing a general approach to visualizing 25‐year mortality impact Populations were modelled both under assumed closedness and under the possibility of annual rescue‐effects from immigration

| MATERIALS AND METHODS
| DISCUSSION
| CONCLUSIONS

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.