Science, Policy, and Species at Risk in Canada

Public opinion on the conflict between the conservation of at-risk species and the extraction of natural resources: The case of caribou in boreal forest

Conflicts between economic development and conservation are increasingly hampering efforts to restore imperiled wildlife populations. Public opinion can influence how these conflicts translate into conservation actions, encouraging stakeholders to express their views through various public channels. The outcome of these campaigns typically remains unknown. Via an online survey, we collected to the opinion of 1000 citizens of Québec, Canada, regarding the ongoing conflict between logging and the conservation of at-risk caribou populations (Rangifer tarandus). We found that people expect conservation actions that are sufficient to recover caribou populations, even if millions of government investment are required and jobs are lost in the process. When respondents learned that academic caribou researchers indicated that the two management strategies being studied by government would be insufficient for population recovery, one-third withdrew their support for either strategy. Age, gender and education all explain variation in public opinion, but it was the region of residence that most consistently explained variation in opinion. Residents of caribou-inhabited regions were less concerned about caribou conservation and more supportive of forestry than residents of other regions, reflecting regional differences in expected economic impacts of conservation, not negative interactions with caribou. In fact, most people supported strong conservation actions for the recovery of caribou populations, regardless of their socio-demographics. Our analysis provides general insights into how public opinion on the trade-off between conservation and economy is influenced by socio-demographics and scientific conclusions. We found that current government conservation actions (or lack thereof) are not in line with mainstream public opinion. Moreover, we show that making species at-risk lists does not ensure that the species will benefit from strong conservation actions without lengthy delays, even for a high-profile, flagship species like caribou. This observation echoes concerns about the fate of less charismatic, at-risk species, and thus about future biodiversity conservation efforts.

Mapping nationally and globally at-risk species to identify hotspots for (and gaps in) conservation

Protecting habitat of species at risk is critical to their recovery, but can be contentious. For example, protecting species that are locally imperilled but globally common is often thought to distract from protecting globally imperilled species. However, such perceived trade-offs are based on the assumption that threatened groups have little spatial overlap, which is rarely quantified. We compiled range maps of terrestrial species at risk in Canada to assess the geographic overlap of nationally and globally at-risk species with each other, among taxonomic groups, and with protected areas. While many nationally at-risk taxa only occur in Canada at their northern range edge, they are not significantly more peripheral in Canada than globally at-risk species. Further, 56% of hotspots of nationally at-risk taxa are also hotspots of globally at-risk species, undercutting the perceived trade-off in their protection. While strong spatial overlap across threat levels and taxa should facilitate efficient habitat protection, less than 7% of the area in Canada's at-risk hotspots is protected, and two-thirds of nationally and globally at-risk species in Canada have less than 10% of their Canadian range protected. Our results counter the perception that protecting nationally versus globally at-risk species are at odds, and identify critical areas to target as Canada strives to increase its protected areas and promote recovery of species at risk.

Incorporating Evidence into Collaborative Ecosystem Restoration: A Content Analysis of Bibliographic References and their Use in Salmon Recovery Plans

Collaborative environmental management draws on a wide range of information, from a variety of stakeholders, to inform policy. Scientific information is particularly relevant for ecosystem restoration plans, such as those created for recovering species on the brink of extinction. This study examines use of evidence in salmon recovery plans in Puget Sound, USA. Across 12 plans, coders characterized 1104 references to identify their source, recency, domain, and context. Subsequently, 11 plans were analyzed in-depth to identify how each reference was used to support particular kinds of claims. Results indicate the most frequent source of information cited in salmon recovery plans is government agencies, especially from national and state governments, followed by peer reviewed journal articles and scientific books. Journal articles come predominantly from high impact (top quartile) journals, although these articles are on average 15 years old. Sources are almost exclusively from the domain of natural sciences (97%), with just 1% social sciences and 2% non-scientific. More references come from beyond than within the local watershed. Different reference sources are used to support different kinds of claims, with government agency sources positively associated with claims about species status/trends, and peer reviewed journal articles positively associated with claims about causes of species decline. Overall, the lack of social science references, and lack of references to support claims about levels of community support, reduce managers' abilities to incorporate features of social systems into species recovery planning.

CAN-SAR: A database of Canadian species at risk information

Threatened species lists describe the conservation status of species and are key tools used to inform decisions for biodiversity conservation. These lists are rich in information obtained during status assessment and recovery planning processes, ranging from biological attributes to actions that support recovery. Data compiled from species lists allow for analyses, including assessing trends in threats, prioritizing actions, and identifying barriers to achieving recovery objectives. For legally protected species at risk of extinction in Canada, such analyses are challenging owing to a lack of comprehensive and accessible data reflecting information compiled from listing and recovery documents. To encourage ongoing synthesis and minimise duplication of efforts, we initiated CAN-SAR: a database of Canadian Species at Risk information. This transparent, open-access, and searchable database contains information transcribed from listing documents, including listing date, and derived variables. Derived variables required interpretation for which we developed standardised criteria to record information, including classification of recovery actions. The CAN-SAR database is updateable, and will contribute towards improved recovery planning to safeguard species of conservation concern.

Measurement(s)	threatened species • threat classes • recovery actions
Technology Type(s)	document review
Sample Characteristic - Organism	multiple
Sample Characteristic - Location	Canada

Behavioural responses of wild Pacific salmon and herring to boat noise

There is growing concern about impacts of ship and small boat noise on marine wildlife. Few studies have quantified impacts of anthropogenic noise on ecologically, economically, and culturally important fish. We conducted open net pen experiments to measure Pacific herring (Clupea pallasii) and juvenile salmon (pink, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha, and chum, Oncorhynchus keta) behavioural response to noise generated by three boats travelling at different speeds. Dose-response curves for herring and salmon estimated 50% probability of eliciting a response at broadband received levels of 123 and 140 dB (re 1 μPa), respectively. Composite responses (yes/no behaviour change) were evaluated. Both genera spent more time exhibiting behaviours consistent with anti-predator response during boat passings. Repeated elicitation of vigilance or anti-predatory responses could result in increased energy expenditure or decreased foraging. These experiments form an important step toward assessing population-level consequences of noise, and its ecological costs and benefits to predators and prey.

Macrofungal conservation in Canada and target species for assessment: a starting point

Despite the ecological importance of fungi, we still know little about their diversity in Canada. One of the largest hurdles to implementing fungal conservation initiatives is the lack of fungal distribution data. As anthropogenic impacts accelerate the speed of environmental change, it is imperative that we fill this major information gap, critical for fungal protection. To gain insight on the conservation status of Canadian macrofungi, we took advantage of the large and growing body of fungal biodiversity data from government research ( Wild Species 2020), citizen science, trained independent mycologists, university, and museum biodiversity research. The majority of macrofungi are data deficient; we do not know their geographic distribution or habitat requirements, occurrence, or abundance in Canada. For mushrooms that fruit only a few days of the year and are often difficult to positively identify, there is a lot of work to overcome the uncertainty of distinguishing under-sampling from rarity. Our work stresses the importance of building a strong network of professional and amateur mycologists to develop resources, disseminate information to make educated decisions, and advance conservation actions. We found that several fungi can be prioritized; we present a short list for consideration for formal conservation assessment.

Ten bridges on the road to recovering Canada’s endangered species

Wildlife is declining around the world. Many developed nations have enacted legislation on endangered species protection and provide funding for wildlife recovery. Protecting endangered species is also supported by the public and judiciary. Yet, despite what appear as enabling conditions, wild species continue to decline. Our paper explores pathways to endangered species recovery by analyzing the barriers that have been identified in Canada, the United States, and Australia. We summarize these findings based on Canada’s Species at Risk Conservation Cycle (assessment, protection, recovery planning, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation) and then identify 10 “bridges” that could help overcome these barriers and bend our current trajectory of wildlife loss to recovery. These bridges include ecosystem approaches to recovery, building capacity for community co-governance, linking wildlife recovery to ecosystem services, and improving our storytelling about the loss and recovery of wildlife. The focus of our conclusions is the Canadian setting, but our findings can be applied in other national and subnational settings to reverse the decline of wildlife and halt extinction.

Fixing the Canadian Species at Risk Act: identifying major issues and recommendations for increasing accountability and efficiency

Since the implementation of the Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA) in 2003, deficiencies in SARA and its application have become clear. Legislative and policy inconsistencies among responsible federal agencies and the use of a subjective approach for prioritizing species protection lead to taxonomic biases in protection. Variations in legislation among provinces/territories and the reluctance of the federal government to take actions make SARA’s application often inefficient on nonfederally managed lands. Ambiguous key terms (e.g., critical habitat) and disregard for legislated deadlines in many steps impede the efficacy of SARA. Additionally, the failure to fully recognize Indigenous knowledge and to seek Indigenous cooperation in the species protection process leads to weaker government accountability, promotes inequity, and leads to missed opportunities for partnerships. New legislative amendments with well-defined and standardized steps, including an automatic listing process, a systematic prioritization program, and clearer demands (e.g., mandatory threshold to trigger safety net/emergency order) would improve the success of species at risk protection. Moreover, a more inclusive approach that brings Indigenous representatives and independent scientists together is necessary for improving SARA’s effectiveness. These changes have the potential to transform SARA into a more powerful act towards protecting Canada’s at-risk wildlife. (The graphical abstract follows.)

When the protection of a threatened species depends on the economy of a foreign nation

A significant challenge of conservation biology is to preserve species in places where their critical habitat also attracts significant economic interest. The problem is compounded when species distributions occur across large spatial extents. Threatened boreal caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) epitomize this problem: their critical habitat encompasses a vast expanse of forest that also supplies much of Canada’s merchantable timber. Boreal caribou were protected under the Canada Species at Risk Act in 2003. We investigated putative drivers of reduced disturbance for caribou habitat since then. Where the cumulative logging footprint slowed within caribou habitat, this has resulted neither from decreases in annual allowable cut of timber nor the creation or expansion of protected areas. Rather, it has fluctuated with the American economy relative to that of Canada. For each $0.05 US lost over the $CAD, 129 km² of caribou habitat was not disturbed by logging in a given year. Recent population declines have been occurring even though logging typically remained at <70% of allowed levels. Our study raises concerns about how caribou are functionally being conserved under the current application of existing legislation. In this globalized world, the economy of foreign nations is increasingly likely to govern national conservation objectives.

Conserving plant species at risk in Canada: land tenure, threats, and representation in federal programs

Fully 37% of species listed under Canada’s Species at Risk Act (SARA) are plants or lichens. The law does not automatically protect species on private land, and it is unknown how many at-risk plants grow mainly on private land. We analyzed official status reports and related documents for 234 plant species at risk to determine land tenure and evaluated differences in threats and changes in status. We also assessed how well plants were represented in two federal programs: the Natural Areas Conservation Program (NACP) and the Habitat Stewardship Program (HSP). Of SARA-listed plant species, 35% have the majority of their known populations on private land while <10% occur mostly on federal land. Species growing mainly on private land were no more or less likely to decline in status over time compared with others. Plant species at risk were less likely than other taxonomic groups to be found on land protected under the NACP. The proportion of HSP projects targeting plants is well below the expected proportion based on the number of listed species. We recommend that policy-makers promote and prioritize actions to increase the representation of plant species in federally funded programs, especially on private lands.

Raising the bar: Recovery ambition for species at risk in Canada and the US

Routinely crossing international borders and/or persisting in populations across multiple countries, species are commonly subject to a patchwork of endangered species legislation. Canada and the United States share numerous endangered species; their respective acts, the Species at Risk Act (SARA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA), require documents that outline requirements for species recovery. Although there are many priorities for improving endangered species legislation effectiveness, species recovery goals are a crucial component. We compared recovery goal quality, as measured by goal quantitativeness and ambition, for species listed under SARA and ESA. By comparing across ESA and SARA, the intent of the study was to identify differences and similarities that could support the development of stronger species' recovery goals under both legislations. Our results indicated that: (1) overall, only 38% of recovery goals were quantitative, 41% had high ambition, and 26% were both quantitative and with high ambition; (2) recovery goals had higher quantitativeness and ambition under ESA than SARA; (3) recovery goals for endangered species had higher ambition than threatened species under ESA and SARA, and; (4) no recovery goal aimed to restore populations to historic levels. Combined, these findings provide guidance to strengthen recovery goals and improve subsequent conservation outcomes. In particular, species at risk planners should seek to attain higher recovery goal ambition, particularly for SARA-listed species, and include quantitative recovery goals wherever possible.

The Recovery Illusion: What Is Delaying the Rescue of Imperiled Species?

With unprecedented losses in biodiversity, the need for stronger environmental policy has emerged as a conservation priority. Yet recovery planning for imperiled species remains a cumbersome, slow legislative process. In the present article, we examine features of recovery planning for species listed under Canada's Species at Risk Act to determine those influencing recovery planning duration. We found that the time to completion of recovery strategies increases with the number of jurisdictions concurrently listing the species, greater land tenure diversity, species population size, and road density. Species at risk in Canada with no listing status in the United States also suffered longer delays. To achieve a more efficient, timely, and defensible implementation of recovery planning, we recommend that governments prioritize recovery planning on the basis of risk level, promote transjurisdictional collaboration among listing agencies, anticipate and mitigate conservation challenges associated with multitenured and developed landscapes, and adopt procedures that enhance compliance with legislated timelines for recovery planning.

Evidence-based decision-making in Canada’s protected areas organizations: Implications for management effectiveness

Aichi Biodiversity Target 19 calls on Parties to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) to improve, share, transfer, and apply knowledge. In this study, we provide an initial assessment of the state of evidence-based decision-making in Canada’s protected areas organizations by examining (1) the value and use of various forms of evidence by managers and (2) the extent to which institutional conditions enable or inhibit the use of evidence in decision-making. Results revealed that although managers value and use many forms of evidence in their decision-making, information produced by staff and their organizations are given priority. Other forms of evidence, such as Indigenous knowledge and peer-reviewed information, are valued and used less. The most significant barriers to evidence-based decision-making were limited financial resources, lack of staff, inadequate timeframes for decision-making, a lack of monitoring programs, and a disconnect between researchers and decision-makers. Overall, our results suggest that the potential benefits of evidence-based approaches are not being maximized in Canada’s protected areas organizations. We propose several recommendations to introduce or improve the use of diverse forms of evidence to enhance management effectiveness of Canada’s protected areas and by extension conservation outcomes.

Informing Canada’s commitment to biodiversity conservation: A science-based framework to help guide protected areas designation through Target 1 and beyond

Biodiversity is intrinsically linked to the health of our planet—and its people. Yet, increasingly, human activities are causing the extinction of species, degrading ecosystems, and reducing nature’s resilience to climate change and other threats. As a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Canada has a legal responsibility to protect 17% of land and freshwater by 2020. Currently, Canada has protected ∼10% of its terrestrial lands, requiring a marked increase in the pace and focus of protection over the next three years.

Given the distribution, extent, and geography of Canada’s current protected areas, systematic conservation planning would provide decision-makers with a ranking of the potential for new protected area sites to stem biodiversity loss and preserve functioning ecosystems. Here, we identify five key principles for identifying lands that are likely to make the greatest contribution to reversing biodiversity declines and ensuring biodiversity persistence into the future. We identify current gaps and integrate principles of protecting ( i) species at risk, ( ii) representative ecosystems, ( iii) intact wilderness, ( iv) connectivity, and ( v) climate refugia. This spatially explicit assessment is intended as an ecological foundation that, when integrated with social, economic and governance considerations, would support evidence-based protected area decision-making in Canada.

Identifying the critical habitat of Canadian vertebrate species at risk

Identification of critical habitat is central to major conservation laws protecting endangered species in North America and around the world. Yet the actual ecological research that is required to identify which habitats are critical to the survival or recovery of species is rarely discussed and poorly documented. Here we quantitatively assess the information and methods used to identify critical habitat in the recovery strategies of 53 vertebrates at risk in Canada. Of the critical habitat identifications assessed, 17% were based on habitat occupancy information, 28% on habitat characteristics and (or) functions, and 40% assessed habitat suitability by linking functional use and biophysical characteristics. However, only 15% of the recovery strategies we evaluated examined relationships between habitat and population viability, abundance, individual fitness, or survival. Furthermore, the breadth of evidence used to assess critical habitats was weaker among long-lived taxa and did not improve over time. Hence, although any approach used to identify critical habitat is likely to be a step in the right direction in minimally protecting and maintaining habitats supporting critical life-cycle processes, there is a persistent gap between the widely recognized importance of critical habitat and our ability to quantitatively link habitats to population trends and individual fitness.

Assessing public commitment to endangered species protection: A Canadian case study

Preventing the extinction of species will require limiting human activities in key areas, but it is unclear to what extent the public is committed to these limits and the associated costs. We commissioned an online survey of 1000 Canadians and asked them if it is important to prevent the extinction of wild species in Canada. We used specific scenarios illustrating the need for limits to personal activities, private property rights, and industrial development to further test their support. The respondents were strongly committed to species conservation in principle (89% agree), including the need to limit industrial development (80% agree). There was less support for limiting private property rights (63% agree), and more uncertainty when scenarios suggested potential loss of property rights and industry-based jobs. This highlights the high level of public concern regarding the economic impacts of preventing extinctions, and the need for more programs to encourage voluntary stewardship of endangered species on private land. Opinion polls that measure public support for conservation without acknowledging the concessions required may result in overly optimistic estimates of the level of support. Most Canadians in our sample supported endangered species conservation even when the necessity of limiting human activities was explicitly stated.

Species-level persistence probabilities for recovery and conservation status assessment

Recovery planning for species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act has been hampered by a lack of consistency and transparency, which can be improved by implementing a standardized approach for evaluating species status and developing measurable recovery criteria. However, managers lack an assessment method that integrates threat abatement and can be used when demographic data are limited. To help meet these needs, we demonstrated an approach for evaluating species status based on habitat configuration data. We applied 3 established persistence measures (patch occupancy, metapopulation capacity, and proportion of population lost) to compare 2 conservation strategies (critical habitat designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Forest Service's Carbonate Habitat Management Strategy) and 2 threat scenarios (maximum limestone mining, removal of all habitat in areas with mining claims; minimum mining, removal of habitat only in areas with existing operations and high-quality ore) against a baseline of existing habitat for 3 federally listed plant species. Protecting all area within the designated critical habitat maintained a similar level (83.9-99.9%) of species persistence as the baseline, whereas maximum mining greatly reduced persistence (0.51-38.4% maintained). The 3 persistence measures provided complementary insights reflecting different aspects of habitat availability (total area, number of patches, patch size, and connectivity). These measures can be used to link recovery criteria developed following the 3 R principles (representation, redundancy, and resilience) to the resulting improvements in species viability. By focusing on amount and distribution of habitat, our method provides a means of assessing the status of data-poor species to inform decision making under the Endangered Species Act.

Grizzly Bear Noninvasive Genetic Tagging Surveys: Estimating the Magnitude of Missed Detections

Sound wildlife conservation decisions require sound information, and scientists increasingly rely on remotely collected data over large spatial scales, such as noninvasive genetic tagging (NGT). Grizzly bears (Ursus arctos), for example, are difficult to study at population scales except with noninvasive data, and NGT via hair trapping informs management over much of grizzly bears’ range. Considerable statistical effort has gone into estimating sources of heterogeneity, but detection error–arising when a visiting bear fails to leave a hair sample–has not been independently estimated. We used camera traps to survey grizzly bear occurrence at fixed hair traps and multi-method hierarchical occupancy models to estimate the probability that a visiting bear actually leaves a hair sample with viable DNA. We surveyed grizzly bears via hair trapping and camera trapping for 8 monthly surveys at 50 (2012) and 76 (2013) sites in the Rocky Mountains of Alberta, Canada. We used multi-method occupancy models to estimate site occupancy, probability of detection, and conditional occupancy at a hair trap. We tested the prediction that detection error in NGT studies could be induced by temporal variability within season, leading to underestimation of occupancy. NGT via hair trapping consistently underestimated grizzly bear occupancy at a site when compared to camera trapping. At best occupancy was underestimated by 50%; at worst, by 95%. Probability of false absence was reduced through successive surveys, but this mainly accounts for error imparted by movement among repeated surveys, not necessarily missed detections by extant bears. The implications of missed detections and biased occupancy estimates for density estimation–which form the crux of management plans–require consideration. We suggest hair-trap NGT studies should estimate and correct detection error using independent survey methods such as cameras, to ensure the reliability of the data upon which species management and conservation actions are based.

Non-use Economic Values for Little-Known Aquatic Species at Risk: Comparing Choice Experiment Results from Surveys Focused on Species, Guilds, and Ecosystems

Accounting for non-market economic values of biological diversity is important to fully assess the benefits of environmental policies and regulations. This study used three choice experiments (species-, guild-, and ecosystem-based surveys) in parallel to quantify non-use values for little-known aquatic species at risk in southern Ontario. Mean willingness-to-pay (WTP) ranged from $9.45 to $21.41 per listing status increment under Canada's Species at Risk Act for both named and unnamed little-known species. Given the broad range of valuable ecosystem services likely to accrue to residents from substantial increases in water quality and the rehabilitation of coastal wetlands, the difference in WTP between species- and ecosystem-based surveys seemed implausibly small. It appeared that naming species-the 'iconization' of species in two of the three surveys-had an important effect on WTP. The results suggest that reasonable annual household-level WTP values for little-known aquatic species may be $10 to $25 per species or $10 to $20 per listing status increment. The results highlighted the utility of using parallel surveys to triangulate on non-use economic values for little-known species at risk.

Current practices in the identification of critical habitat for threatened species

The term critical habitat is used to describe the subset of habitat that is essential to the survival and recovery of species. Some countries legally require that critical habitat of listed threatened and endangered species be identified and protected. However, there is little evidence to suggest that the identification of critical habitat has had much impact on species recovery. We hypothesized that this may be due at least partly to a mismatch between the intent of critical habitat identification, which is to protect sufficient habitat for species persistence and recovery, and its practice. We used content analysis to systematically review critical habitat documents from the United States, Canada, and Australia. In particular, we identified the major trends in type of information used to identify critical habitat and in occupancy of habitat identified as critical. Information about population viability was used to identify critical habitat for only 1% of the species reviewed, and for most species, designated critical habitat did not include unoccupied habitat. Without reference to population viability, it is difficult to determine how much of a species' occupied and unoccupied habitat will be required for persistence. We therefore conclude that the identification of critical habitat remains inconsistent with the goal of protecting sufficient habitat to support persistence and recovery of the species. Ensuring that critical habitat identification aligns more closely with its intent will improve the accuracy of the designations and may therefore help improve the benefits to species recovery when combined with adequate implementation and enforcement of legal protections.

Wildlife parasites in a One Health world

•

One Health emphasizes the interdependence of human, animal, and environmental health.

•

Wildlife parasites are ubiquitous; how do we decide which are One Health issues?

•

We propose questions to help to prioritize wildlife parasites in a One Health context.

•

We suggest principles for taking action on wildlife parasites with One Health significance.

One Health has gained a remarkable profile in the animal and public health communities, in part owing to the pressing issues of emerging infectious diseases of wildlife origin. Wildlife parasitology can offer insights into One Health, and likewise One Health can provide justification to study and act on wildlife parasites. But how do we decide which wildlife parasites are One Health issues? We explore toxoplasmosis in wildlife in the Canadian Arctic as an example of a parasite that poses a risk to human health, and that also has potential to adversely affect wildlife populations of conservation concern and importance for food security and cultural well-being. This One Health framework can help communities, researchers, and policymakers prioritize issues for action in a resource-limited world.

Trends in extinction risk for imperiled species in Canada

Protecting and promoting recovery of species at risk of extinction is a critical component of biodiversity conservation. In Canada, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) determines whether species are at risk of extinction or extirpation, and has conducted these assessments since 1977. We examined trends in COSEWIC assessments to identify whether at-risk species that have been assessed more than once tended to improve, remain constant, or deteriorate in status, as a way of assessing the effectiveness of biodiversity conservation in Canada. Of 369 species that met our criteria for examination, 115 deteriorated, 202 remained unchanged, and 52 improved in status. Only 20 species (5.4%) improved to the point where they were ‘not at risk’, and five of those were due to increased sampling efforts rather than an increase in population size. Species outcomes were also dependent on the severity of their initial assessment; for example, 47% of species that were initially listed as special concern deteriorated between assessments. After receiving an at-risk assessment by COSEWIC, a species is considered for listing under the federal Species at Risk Act (SARA), which is the primary national tool that mandates protection for at-risk species. We examined whether SARA-listing was associated with improved COSEWIC assessment outcomes relative to unlisted species. Of 305 species that had multiple assessments and were SARA-listed, 221 were listed at a level that required identification and protection of critical habitat; however, critical habitat was fully identified for only 56 of these species. We suggest that the Canadian government should formally identify and protect critical habitat, as is required by existing legislation. In addition, our finding that at-risk species in Canada rarely recover leads us to recommend that every effort be made to actively prevent species from becoming at-risk in the first place.

Seventy-one important questions for the conservation of marine biodiversity

The ocean provides food, economic activity, and cultural value for a large proportion of humanity. Our knowledge of marine ecosystems lags behind that of terrestrial ecosystems, limiting effective protection of marine resources. We describe the outcome of 2 workshops in 2011 and 2012 to establish a list of important questions, which, if answered, would substantially improve our ability to conserve and manage the world's marine resources. Participants included individuals from academia, government, and nongovernment organizations with broad experience across disciplines, marine ecosystems, and countries that vary in levels of development. Contributors from the fields of science, conservation, industry, and government submitted questions to our workshops, which we distilled into a list of priority research questions. Through this process, we identified 71 key questions. We grouped these into 8 subject categories, each pertaining to a broad component of marine conservation: fisheries, climate change, other anthropogenic threats, ecosystems, marine citizenship, policy, societal and cultural considerations, and scientific enterprise. Our questions address many issues that are specific to marine conservation, and will serve as a road map to funders and researchers to develop programs that can greatly benefit marine conservation.

A conceptual framework for the emerging discipline of conservation physiology

Current rates of biodiversity decline are unprecedented and largely attributed to anthropogenic influences. Given the scope and magnitude of conservation issues, policy and management interventions must maximize efficiency and efficacy. The relatively new field of conservation physiology reveals the physiological mechanisms associated with population declines, animal-environment relationships and population or species tolerance thresholds, particularly where these relate to anthropogenic factors that necessitate conservation action. We propose a framework that demonstrates an integrative approach between physiology, conservation and policy, where each can inform the design, conduct and implementation of the other. Each junction of the conservation physiology process has the capacity to foster dialogue that contributes to effective implementation, monitoring, assessment and evaluation. This approach enables effective evaluation and implementation of evidence-based conservation policy and management decisions through a process of ongoing refinement, but may require that scientists (from the disciplines of both physiology and conservation) and policy-makers bridge interdisciplinary knowledge gaps. Here, we outline a conceptual framework that can guide and lead developments in conservation physiology, as well as promote innovative research that fosters conservation-motivated policy.

Marine mammals and ocean noise: future directions and information needs with respect to science, policy and law in Canada

Marine mammals are ecologically and culturally important species, and various countries have specific legislation to protect the welfare of individual marine mammals and the conservation of their populations. Anthropogenic noise represents a particular challenge for conservation and management. There is a large and growing body of research to support the conclusion that anthropogenic noise can affect marine mammal behavior, energetics, and physiology. The legal, policy, and management issues surrounding marine mammals and noise are similarly complex. Our objective is twofold. First, we discuss how policy and legal frameworks in Canada have some important differences from other jurisdictions covered in previous reviews, and provide a useful general case study. Secondly, we highlight some priority research areas that will improve marine mammal conservation and management. Our examples focus on the research needed to meet stated conservation objectives for marine mammal species in waters under Canadian jurisdiction.

Less specific recovery strategy targets for threatened and non-charismatic species at risk in Canada

Recovery strategies for species at risk have been criticized for a lack of specificity (i.e. measurable and quantifiable criteria) as well as for taxonomic biases, both of which may ultimately affect species’ recovery. However, it is unknown whether the clarity and specificity of written statements within recovery strategies can also influence recovery efforts for certain species at risk. To assess this we examined the variation in semantic uncertainty in the target statements of recovery strategies for Canadian species at risk at the federal and provincial levels. We quantified the lexical density and readability of recovery target statements and examined them for differences according to taxonomic grouping, jurisdiction and degree of endangerment. Recovery statements for the category threatened species had greater semantic uncertainty than those for higher (endangered) and lower (special concern) categories, which is likely to be a function of the fact that threatened species are less abundant than special concern species but are subject to greater errors in population estimates than endangered species. We also found that recovery statements for non-charismatic species (e.g. plants and invertebrates) had greater semantic uncertainty than those for other taxa, which may be related to the resources available for studying and conserving them. Our results suggest a need for greater specificity in recovery targets for threatened and non-charismatic species, and that more focused data collection on these species’ populations is warranted.

Critical habitat for threatened and endangered species: how should the economic costs be evaluated?

The designation of critical habitat is a feature of endangered species protection laws in many countries. Under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, economics cannot enter into decisions to list species as threatened or endangered, but can be considered when critical habitat is designated. Areas can be excluded from proposed critical habitat if the economic cost of including them is determined to exceed the benefits of inclusion, and exclusion would not result in extinction of the species. The economic analysis done to support critical habitat exclusions has been controversial, and the focus of much litigation. We evaluate a sample of these analyses, and discuss the exclusions that were made in each case. We discuss how the methodology used to measure economic costs of critical habitat has changed over time and provide a critique of these alternative methods. We find that the approach currently in use is sound from an economic perspective. Nevertheless, quantification of the costs of critical habitat faces numerous challenges, including great uncertainty about future events, questions about the appropriate scale for the analysis, and the need to account for complex market feedbacks and values of non-market goods. For the studies we reviewed, there was no evidence that the results of the economic analyses provided information that was useful for making decisions about exemptions from critical habitat designations. If economics is to play a meaningful role in determining endangered species protections, an alternative would be to allow listing decisions to be based on economic as well as biological factors, as is typical for species conservation laws in other countries.