Menu
×
West Ashley Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 766-6635
Wando Mount Pleasant Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 805-6888
Village Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 884-9741
St. Paul's/Hollywood Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 889-3300
Otranto Road Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 572-4094
Mt. Pleasant Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 849-6161
McClellanville Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 887-3699
Keith Summey North Charleston Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 744-2489
John's Island Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 559-1945
Hurd/St. Andrews Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 766-2546
Folly Beach Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 588-2001
Edisto Island Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 869-2355
Dorchester Road Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 552-6466
John L. Dart Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 722-7550
Baxter-Patrick James Island
Closed
Phone: (843) 795-6679
Main Library
2 p.m. – 5 p.m.
Phone: (843) 805-6930
Bees Ferry West Ashley Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 805-6892
Edgar Allan Poe/Sullivan's Island Library
Closed for renovations
Phone: (843) 883-3914
Mobile Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 805-6909
Today's Hours
West Ashley Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 766-6635
Wando Mount Pleasant Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 805-6888
Village Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 884-9741
St. Paul's/Hollywood Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 889-3300
Otranto Road Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 572-4094
Mt. Pleasant Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 849-6161
McClellanville Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 887-3699
Keith Summey North Charleston Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 744-2489
John's Island Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 559-1945
Hurd/St. Andrews Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 766-2546
Folly Beach Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 588-2001
Edisto Island Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 869-2355
Dorchester Road Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 552-6466
John L. Dart Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 722-7550
Baxter-Patrick James Island
Closed
Phone: (843) 795-6679
Main Library
2 p.m. – 5 p.m.
Phone: (843) 805-6930
Bees Ferry West Ashley Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 805-6892
Edgar Allan Poe/Sullivan's Island Library
Closed for renovations
Phone: (843) 883-3914
Mobile Library
Closed
Phone: (843) 805-6909
Patron Login
menu
Item request has been placed!
×
Item request cannot be made.
×
Processing Request
Assessing the value of monitoring to biological inference and expected management performance for a European goose population.
Item request has been placed!
×
Item request cannot be made.
×
Processing Request
- Author(s): Johnson, Fred A.1 (AUTHOR) ; Madsen, Jesper1 (AUTHOR); Clausen, Kevin K.1 (AUTHOR); Frederiksen, Morten2 (AUTHOR); Jensen, Gitte H.1 (AUTHOR)
- Source:
Journal of Applied Ecology. Jan2023, Vol. 60 Issue 1, p132-145. 14p.- Subject Terms:
- Source:
- Additional Information
- Abstract: Informed conservation and management of wildlife require sufficient monitoring to understand population dynamics and to direct conservation actions. Because resources available for monitoring are limited, conservation practitioners must strive to make monitoring as cost‐effective as possible.Our focus was on assessing the value of monitoring to the adaptive harvest management (AHM) programme for pink‐footed geese Anser brachyrhynchus. We conducted a retrospective analysis to assess the costs and benefits of a capture–mark–resight (CMR) programme, a productivity survey and biannual population censuses. Using all available data, we fit an integrated population model (IPM) and assumed that inference derived from it represented the benchmark against which reduced monitoring was to be judged. We then fit IPMs to reduced sets of monitoring data and compared their estimates of demographic parameters and expected management performance against the benchmark IPM.Costs and the precision and accuracy of key demographic parameters decreased with the elimination of monitoring data. Eliminating the CMR programme, while maintaining other monitoring instruments, resulted in the greatest cost savings, usually with small effects on inferential reliability. Productivity surveys were also expensive and some reduction in survey effort may be warranted. The biannual censuses were inexpensive and generally increased inferential reliability.The expected performance of AHM strategies was surprisingly robust to a loss of monitoring data. We attribute this result to explicit consideration of parametric uncertainty in harvest‐strategy optimization and the fact that a broad range of population sizes is acceptable to stakeholders.Synthesis and applications. Our study suggests that existing or potential monitoring instruments for wildlife populations should be scrutinized as to their cost‐effectiveness for improving biological inference and management performance. Using Svalbard pink‐footed geese as a case study, we show that the loss of some existing monitoring instruments may not be as adverse as commonly assumed if data are jointly analysed in an IPM. Finally, regardless of the monitoring data available, we suggest that conservation strategies that explicitly account for uncertainty in demography are more likely to be successful than those that do not. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Abstract: Copyright of Journal of Applied Ecology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
- Abstract:
Contact CCPL
Copyright 2022 Charleston County Public Library Powered By EBSCO Stacks 3.3.0 [350.3] | Staff Login
No Comments.