Wildlife Population Restoration - Session 6 Flashcards
Define ‘Umbrella Species’
Species whose conservation confers a protective umbrella to numerous co-occuring species
Define ‘Indicator Species’
Species whose distribution, abundance, or population dynamics can serve as substitute measures of the status of other species or environmental attributes
Define ‘Keystone Species’
Species that significantly affects one or more key ecological processes or elements to an extent that greatly exceeds what would be predicted from its abundance or biomass
Define ‘Ecosystem Engineer’
Species that, via morphology or behaviour, modifies, maintains and creates habitat for itself and other organisms
Define ‘Flagship Species’
Charismatic species that serves as a symbol to generate conservation awareness and action
Define ‘Focal Species’
Species used, for any reason, to help understand, manage, or conserve ecosystem composition, structure, or function
Define ‘Surrogate Species’
Concept that species can serve as reliable/cost-effective measures of other, difficult to measure variables, including:
- total species richness
- diversity and,
- various ecosystem functions
What sources can be used to assist with this reconstruction (be as complete as possible, including local examples)?
- The USGS-Biological Resources Division → coordinates the nationwide Breeding Bird Surveys (BBS)
- The National Audubon Society → coordinates an annual bird-counting effort in December → Christmas Bird Count (CBC)
- The B.C. Conservation Data Centre
- Museum records → UBC’s Beaty Biodiversity Museum
Royal BC Natural History Museum - Literature
What are some of the concerns/uncertainties about using the (data) sources mentioned in question 2?
- W/o direct observations of a species on a restoration site, we don’t know if it will be successful
- Even if a species did occur on site we usually don’t know their status
–> did it actually breed, survive, and produce viable offspring?
What factors should you consider when evaluating these data? (question 2 part 2)
Factors to consider:
- Age of data source
- Distance from data source
- Quantity and quality of data sources:
- One record versus numerous records
- Records from brief time period versus sample across time
- Actual specimens versus visual observations
- Completeness of data record
- Reputation of data source
Why does the focal species approach often fail?
- Focal species =/= surrogates
- High social bias of selected species
- The assumption that threatening processes are independent is false,
- Don’t know enough about every species to correctly choose focal species
- Empirical testing of the response of species to management actions is minimal
- Species seldom have overlapping niche requirements
Explain the assumption of nested-niche requirements?
- That different species have similar responses to perturbations
- If species are not nested, responses to perturbations could be very dissimilar
Why does the coarse-filter approach usually fail to protect a large number of native species?
The CF approach does not necessarily meet the niche requirements of many species
What are some key assumptions of using a focal species approach?
The assumption of the nested subset (niche)
What are some questions you need to ask before trying to restore a specific species (desired vs ultimate)
- Can you create/provide the critical limiting resources?
- Is immigration/emigration/dispersal possible?
- Are the influences of predators/competitors/exotic species manageable?
- Can you create a ‘source’ population? Or will it be a ‘sink’?
- Can you manage/control the abiotic conditions?