Reverse EU's growing greenlash.

After several weeks of violent protests, European farmers have achieved a tactical triumph that does not bode well for the future of environmental policies. In response to the demonstrations, the European Commission has enacted a derogation in the European Union's (EU's) Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to set aside 4% of farmland for biodiversity and landscape protection, withdrawn a bill to halve pesticide use, removed a target to reduce agriculture emissions by 30% by 2040, and called for further changes in the CAP to loosen environmental requirements. These retreats reflect a lack of political commitment to policies aimed at greening European agriculture. Appeasing this "greenlash" surely will not help Europe meet its environmental and climate challenges.

Transboundary Monitoring of the Wolf Alpine Population over 21 Years and Seven Countries.

Wolves have large spatial requirements and their expansion in Europe is occurring over national boundaries, hence the need to develop monitoring programs at the population level. Wolves in the Alps are defined as a functional population and management unit. The range of this wolf Alpine population now covers seven countries: Italy, France, Austria, Switzerland, Slovenia, Liechtenstein and Germany, making the development of a joint and coordinated monitoring program particularly challenging. In the framework of the Wolf Alpine Group (WAG), researchers developed uniform criteria for the assessment and interpretation of field data collected in the frame of different national monitoring programs. This standardization allowed for data comparability across borders and the joint evaluation of distribution and consistency at the population level. We documented the increase in the number of wolf reproductive units (packs and pairs) over 21 years, from 1 in 1993-1994 up to 243 units in 2020-2021, and examined the pattern of expansion over the Alps. This long-term and large-scale approach is a successful example of transboundary monitoring of a large carnivore population that, despite administrative fragmentation, provides robust indexes of population size and distribution that are of relevance for wolf conservation and management at the transnational Alpine scale.

Anthropogenic edge effects and aging errors by hunters can affect the sustainability of lion trophy hunting.

Many large predator populations are in decline globally with significant implications for ecosystem integrity and function. Understanding the drivers of their decline is required to adequately mitigate threats. Trophy hunting is often cited as a tool to conserve large mammal populations but may also have negative impacts if not well managed. Here we use a spatially implicit, individual based model to investigate the threats posed to African lion populations by poorly managed trophy hunting and additive anthropogenic mortality such as poaching and retaliatory killing. We confirm the results of previous studies that show that lion trophy hunting can be sustainable if only older male lions are hunted, but demonstrate that hunting becomes unsustainable when populations are exposed to additional anthropogenic mortality, as is the case for most free ranging populations. We show that edge effects can be a critical determinant of population viability and populations that encompass well protected source areas are more robust than those without. Finally, errors in aging of hunted lions by professional trophy hunters may undermine the sustainability of the age-based quota setting strategies that are now widely used to manage lion trophy hunting. The effect of aging errors was most detrimental to population persistence in the ≥ 6 and ≥ 7 year-old age thresholds that are frequently used to define suitably aged lions for hunting. Resource managers should limit offtakes to older demographics and additionally take a precautionary approach when setting hunting quotas for large carnivore populations that are affected by other sources of anthropogenic mortality, such as bush-meat poaching, retaliatory killing and problem animal control.

Seasonal variation in daily activity patterns of snow leopards and their prey.

The daily and seasonal activity patterns of snow leopards (Panthera uncia) are poorly understood, limiting our ecological understanding and hampering our ability to mitigate threats such as climate change and retaliatory killing in response to livestock predation. We fitted GPS-collars with activity loggers to snow leopards, Siberian ibex (Capra sibirica: their main prey), and domestic goats (Capra hircus: common livestock prey) in Mongolia between 2009 and 2020. Snow leopards were facultatively nocturnal with season-specific crepuscular activity peaks: seasonal activity shifted towards night-sunrise during summer, and day-sunset in winter. Snow leopard activity was in contrast to their prey, which were consistently diurnal. We interpret these results in relation to: (1) darkness as concealment for snow leopards when stalking in an open landscape (nocturnal activity), (2) low-intermediate light preferred for predatory ambush in steep rocky terrain (dawn and dusk activity), and (3) seasonal activity adjustments to facilitate thermoregulation in an extreme environment. These patterns suggest that to minimise human-wildlife conflict, livestock should be corralled at night and dawn in summer, and dusk in winter. It is likely that climate change will intensify seasonal effects on the snow leopard's daily temporal niche for thermoregulation in the future.

What is an emergency? Neonicotinoids and emergency situations in plant protection in the EU.

Actions potentially harmful to the environment that are otherwise illegal are sometimes permitted in cases of emergency. How to define an emergency can therefore be both controversial and highly consequential. In this article, we explore one such contemporary controversy: when the use of neonicotinoid pesticides, banned in the EU, can nevertheless be granted an emergency authorization. We analyse several questions, currently before the EU Court of Justice in the ongoing Pesticide Action Network Europe and Others case, that will determine the scope of an "emergency" in the context of derogating from the Pesticide Regulation, and that may impact how "emergencies" are defined in other legal contexts. We argue that the circumstances do not support a legal finding that emergency authorization is justified in this case, and that, in general, "emergencies" must be narrowly defined when justifying measures that involve risks to human health and the environment.

Testing a global standard for quantifying species recovery and assessing conservation impact.

Recognizing the imperative to evaluate species recovery and conservation impact, in 2012 the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) called for development of a "Green List of Species" (now the IUCN Green Status of Species). A draft Green Status framework for assessing species' progress toward recovery, published in 2018, proposed 2 separate but interlinked components: a standardized method (i.e., measurement against benchmarks of species' viability, functionality, and preimpact distribution) to determine current species recovery status (herein species recovery score) and application of that method to estimate past and potential future impacts of conservation based on 4 metrics (conservation legacy, conservation dependence, conservation gain, and recovery potential). We tested the framework with 181 species representing diverse taxa, life histories, biomes, and IUCN Red List categories (extinction risk). Based on the observed distribution of species' recovery scores, we propose the following species recovery categories: fully recovered, slightly depleted, moderately depleted, largely depleted, critically depleted, extinct in the wild, and indeterminate. Fifty-nine percent of tested species were considered largely or critically depleted. Although there was a negative relationship between extinction risk and species recovery score, variation was considerable. Some species in lower risk categories were assessed as farther from recovery than those at higher risk. This emphasizes that species recovery is conceptually different from extinction risk and reinforces the utility of the IUCN Green Status of Species to more fully understand species conservation status. Although extinction risk did not predict conservation legacy, conservation dependence, or conservation gain, it was positively correlated with recovery potential. Only 1.7% of tested species were categorized as zero across all 4 of these conservation impact metrics, indicating that conservation has, or will, play a role in improving or maintaining species status for the vast majority of these species. Based on our results, we devised an updated assessment framework that introduces the option of using a dynamic baseline to assess future impacts of conservation over the short term to avoid misleading results which were generated in a small number of cases, and redefines short term as 10 years to better align with conservation planning. These changes are reflected in the IUCN Green Status of Species Standard.

RESUMEN: Reconociendo que era imperativo evaluar la recuperación de especies y el impacto de la conservación, la Unión Internacional para la Conservación de la Naturaleza (UICN) convocó en 2012 al desarrollo de una "Lista Verde de Especies" (ahora el Estatus Verde de las Especies de la UICN). Un marco de referencia preliminar de una Lista Verde de Especies para evaluar el progreso de las especies hacia la recuperación, publicado en 2018, proponía 2 componentes separados pero interconectados: un método estandarizado (i.e., medición en relación con puntos de referencia de la viabilidad de especies, funcionalidad y distribución antes del impacto) para determinar el estatus de recuperación actual (puntuación de recuperación de la especie) y la aplicación de ese método para estimar impactos en el pasado y potenciales de conservación basados en 4 medidas (legado de conservación, dependencia de conservación, ganancia de conservación y potencial de recuperación). Probamos el marco de referencia con 181 especies representantes de diversos taxa, historias de vida, biomas, y categorías (riesgo de extinción) en la Lista Roja de la IUCN. Con base en la distribución observada de la puntuación de recuperación de las especies, proponemos las siguientes categorías de recuperación de la especie: totalmente recuperada, ligeramente mermada, moderadamente mermada, mayormente mermada, gravemente mermada, extinta en estado silvestre, e inderterminada. Cincuenta y nueve por ciento de las especies se consideraron mayormente o gravemente mermada. Aunque hubo una relación negativa entre el riesgo de extinción y la puntuación de recuperación de la especie, la variación fue considerable. Algunas especies en las categorías de riesgo bajas fueron evaluadas como más lejos de recuperarse que aquellas con alto riesgo. Esto enfatiza que la recuperación de especies es diferente conceptualmente al riesgo de extinción y refuerza la utilidad del Estado Verde de las Especies de la UICN para comprender integralmente el estatus de conservación de especies. Aunque el riesgo de extinción no predijo el legado de conservación, la dependencia de conservación o la ganancia de conservación, se correlacionó positivamente con la potencial de recuperación. Solo 1.7% de las especies probadas fue categorizado como cero en los 4 indicadores de impacto de la conservación, lo que indica que la conservación ha jugado, o jugará, un papel en la mejoría o mantenimiento del estatus de la especie la gran mayoría de ellas. Con base en nuestros resultados, diseñamos una versión actualizada del marco de referencia para la evaluación que introduce la opción de utilizar una línea de base dinámica para evaluar los impactos futuros de la conservación en el corto plazo y redefine corto plazo como 10 años.

The place of nature in conservation conflicts.

Conservation conflicts are gaining importance in contemporary conservation scholarship such that conservation may have entered a conflict hype. We attempted to uncover and deconstruct the normative assumptions behind such studies by raising several questions: what are conservation conflicts, what justifies the attention they receive, do conservation-conflict studies limit wildlife conservation, is scientific knowledge stacked against wildlife in conservation conflicts, do conservation-conflict studies adopt a specific view of democracy, can laws be used to force conservation outcomes, why is flexibility needed in managing conservation conflicts, can conservation conflicts be managed by promoting tolerance, and who needs to compromise in conservation conflicts? We suggest that many of the intellectual premises in the field may defang conservation and prevent it from truly addressing the current conservation crisis as it accelerates. By framing conservation conflicts as conflicts between people about wildlife or nature, the field insidiously transfers guilt, whereby human activities are no longer blamed for causing species decline and extinctions but conservation is instead blamed for causing social conflicts. When the focus is on mitigating social conflicts without limiting in any powerful way human activities damaging to nature, conservation-conflict studies risk keeping conservation within the limits of human activities, instead of keeping human activities within the limits of nature. For conservation to successfully stop the biodiversity crisis, we suggest the alternative goal of recognizing nature's right to existence to maintenance of ecological functions and evolutionary processes. Nature being a rights bearer or legal person would imply its needs must be explicitly taken into account in conflict adjudication. If, even in conservation, nature's interests come second to human interests, it may be no surprise that conservation cannot succeed.

El Lugar de la Naturaleza en los Conflictos de Conservación Resumen Los conflictos de conservación están ganando importancia en los últimos años en la disciplina de la biología de la conservación de tal manera que puede ser que la conservación haya entrado en una exageración de conflictos. En este ensayo, hemos llevado a cabo un ejercicio de deconstrucción de las asunciones detrás de dichos estudios al formular varias preguntas: qué son los conflictos de conservación, qué justifica la atención que reciben, si los estudios sobre los conflictos de conservación pueden llegar a limitar la conservación de la fauna, si el conocimiento científico puede llegar a afectar la conservación cuando se involucra en los conflictos de conservación, si los estudios sobre los conflictos de conservación adoptan una visión específica de la democracia, si las leyes ambientales pueden usarse para forzar resultados positivos en conservación, por qué se requiere flexibilidad para gestionar los conflictos de conservación, si los conflictos de conservación pueden gestionarse con el objetivo de aumentar la tolerancia hacia las especies, y quién necesita ceder en los conflictos de conservación. Sugerimos que muchas de las premisas intelectuales detrás de este tipo de estudios pueden debilitar el objetivo de conservar la naturaleza de forma efectiva. Al enmarcar a los conflictos de conservación como conflictos entre personas en relación a la conservación de la naturaleza, se transfiere la culpa de manera más insidiosa, mientras que las actividades humanas dejan de ser culpables por originar el declive y extinción de las especies y, al mismo tiempo, la conservación de la naturaleza pasa a ser culpable de ocasionar conflictos sociales. Cuando el enfoque de los conflictos de conservación se centra en mitigar el conflicto social sin limitar de ninguna manera las actividades humanas que son dañinas para la naturaleza, los estudios sobre los conflictos de conservación corren el riesgo de enmarcar a la conservación de la naturaleza dentro de los límites de las actividades humanas, en lugar de mantener a las actividades humanas dentro de los límites de la naturaleza. Para que la conservación de la naturaleza se efectiva ante la actual crisis de la biodiversidad sugerimos el objetivo alternativo de reconocer el derecho de la naturaleza a su existencia, el mantenimiento de sus funciones ecológicas y los procesos evolutivos. Que la naturaleza tenga derechos o sea considerada como una persona legal implicaría que se deben considerar explícitamente sus necesidades durante la gestión de conflictos de conservación. Si por el contrario, dentro de la conservación los intereses de la naturaleza son subordinados por defecto a los intereses humanos, no debería sorprendernos que la conservación frecuentemente no sea exitosa.

The need for ecocentrism in biodiversity conservation.

Over the past 5 decades, scientists have been documenting negative anthropogenic environmental change, expressing increasing alarm, and urging dramatic socioecological transformation in response. A host of international meetings have been held, but the erosion of biological diversity continues to accelerate. Why, then, has no effective political action been taken? We contend that part of the answer may lie in the anthropocentric ethical premises and moral rhetoric typically deployed in the cause of conservation. We further argue that it is essential to advance moral arguments for biodiversity conservation that are not just based on perceived human interests but on ecocentric values, namely, convictions that species and ecosystems have value and interests that should be respected regardless of whether they serve human needs and aspirations. A broader array of moral rationales for biodiversity conservation, we conclude, would be more likely to lead to effective plans, adopted and enforced by governments, designed to conserve biological diversity. A good place to start in this regard would be to explicitly incorporate ecocentric values into the recommendations that will be made at the conclusion of the 15th meeting of the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, scheduled to be held in October 2020.

La Necesidad del Ecocentrismo en la Conservación de la Biodiversidad Resumen Durante las últimas cinco décadas, los científicos han estado documentando el cambio ambiental negativo causado por la actividad humana, expresando cada vez una mayor alarma e insistiendo por una transformación socio-ecológica dramática como respuesta. Se han realizado un número de reuniones internacionales pero la erosión de la diversidad biológica se sigue acelerando. Entonces, ¿por qué no se han tomado acciones políticas efectivas? Sostenemos que parte de la respuesta a esta pregunta puede estar en las premisas éticas antropocéntricas y en la retórica moral que típicamente se despliega para la causa de la conservación. Además, argumentamos que es esencial promover argumentos morales para la conservación de la biodiversidad que no estén solamente basados en los intereses humanos percibidos sino en los valores ecocéntricos, principalmente la convicción de que las especies y los ecosistemas tienen valor e intereses que deberían respetarse sin importar si sirven a las necesidades y aspiraciones humanas. Concluimos que un conjunto más amplio de justificaciones morales para la conservación de la biodiversidad tendría mayor probabilidad de guiar planes efectivos, adoptados y aplicados por los gobiernos, diseñados para conservar la diversidad biológica. Un buen punto de partida al respecto sería la incorporación explícita de los valores ecocéntricos dentro de las recomendaciones que se harán al concluir la decimoquinta reunión de las partes que forman al Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica, programada para octubre 2020.

Identification errors in camera-trap studies result in systematic population overestimation.

Reliable assessments of animal abundance are key for successful conservation of endangered species. For elusive animals with individually-unique markings, camera-trap surveys are a benchmark standard for estimating local and global population abundance. Central to the reliability of resulting abundance estimates is the assumption that individuals are accurately identified from photographic captures. To quantify the risk of individual misidentification and its impact on population abundance estimates we performed an experiment under controlled conditions in which 16 captive snow leopards (Panthera uncia) were camera-trapped on 40 occasions and eight observers independently identified individuals and recaptures. Observers misclassified 12.5% of all capture occasions, resulting in systematically inflated population abundance estimates on average by one third (mean ± SD = 35 ± 21%). Our results show that identifying individually-unique individuals from camera-trap photos may not be as reliable as previously believed, implying that elusive and endangered species could be less abundant than current estimates indicate.

Harvest models of small populations of a large carnivore using Bayesian forecasting.

Harvesting large carnivores can be a management tool for meeting politically set goals for their desired abundance. However, harvesting carnivores creates its own set of conflicts in both society and among conservation professionals, where one consequence is a need to demonstrate that management is sustainable, evidence-based, and guided by science. Furthermore, because large carnivores often also have high degrees of legal protection, harvest quotas have to be carefully justified and constantly adjusted to avoid damaging their conservation status. We developed a Bayesian state-space model to support adaptive management of Eurasian lynx harvesting in Scandinavia. The model uses data from the annual monitoring of lynx abundance and results from long-term field research on lynx biology, which has provided detailed estimates of key demographic parameters. We used the model to predict the probability that the forecasted population size will be below or above the management objectives when subjected to different harvest quotas. The model presented here informs decision makers about the policy risks of alternative harvest levels. Earlier versions of the model have been available for wildlife managers in both Sweden and Norway to guide lynx harvest quotas and the model predictions showed good agreement with observations. We combined monitoring data with data on vital rates and were able to estimate unobserved additional mortality rates, which are most probably due to poaching. In both countries, the past quota setting strategy suggests that there has been a de facto threshold strategy with increasing proportion, which means that there is no harvest below a certain population size, but above this threshold there is an increasing proportion of the population harvested as the population size increases. The annual assessment of the monitoring results, the use of forecasting models, and a threshold harvest approach to quota setting will all reduce the risk of lynx population sizes moving outside the desired goals. The approach we illustrate could be adapted to other populations of mammals worldwide.

Carnivore conservation needs evidence-based livestock protection.

Carnivore predation on livestock often leads people to retaliate. Persecution by humans has contributed strongly to global endangerment of carnivores. Preventing livestock losses would help to achieve three goals common to many human societies: preserve nature, protect animal welfare, and safeguard human livelihoods. Between 2016 and 2018, four independent reviews evaluated >40 years of research on lethal and nonlethal interventions for reducing predation on livestock. From 114 studies, we find a striking conclusion: scarce quantitative comparisons of interventions and scarce comparisons against experimental controls preclude strong inference about the effectiveness of methods. For wise investment of public resources in protecting livestock and carnivores, evidence of effectiveness should be a prerequisite to policy making or large-scale funding of any method or, at a minimum, should be measured during implementation. An appropriate evidence base is needed, and we recommend a coalition of scientists and managers be formed to establish and encourage use of consistent standards in future experimental evaluations.