Resilient structure of nature-based extension programs facilitates transition to online delivery and maintains participant satisfaction.

Restrictions on public gatherings in early 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in cancelation of in-person outreach programs offered by the Florida Master Naturalist Program and Natural Areas Training Academy, two successful University of Florida extension programs that provide natural history and resource management training to lay and professional audiences. In response, both programs rapidly transitioned to blended or 100% online educational methods to continue offering courses and maintain program operations. To assess participant responses to these changes, we used surveys and course registry data to evaluate and compare course enrollment, satisfaction, and outcomes among courses with new online formats to courses offered prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. We also examined logistical challenges and key programmatic elements that facilitated the transition of both programs to increased reliance on online education. Course participants responded favorably to classes offered online. Our results revealed an audience exists for online programming, that satisfaction with online courses was high and comparable to that measured for in-person courses, and that online approaches effectively transferred knowledge and promoted behavior change in participants. The transition to online programming required investments of time, energy, and in some cases, direct costs. However, this transition was greatly facilitated by the existence of well-defined program protocols, educational curricula, strong partnerships, and feedback mechanisms for both programs. Long-term investments in program structure, partnerships, and support systems enabled both programs to be resilient and adaptable and successfully implement online programming in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Priorities for improving the scientific foundation of conservation policy in North America.

The Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) can enhance conservation of biodiversity in North America by increasing its engagement in public policy. Toward this end, the North America Section of SCB is establishing partnerships with other professional organizations in order to speak more powerfully to decision makers and taking other actions--such as increasing interaction with chapters--geared to engage members more substantively in science-policy issues. Additionally, the section is developing a North American Biodiversity Blueprint, which spans the continental United States and Canada and is informed by natural and social science. This blueprint is intended to clarify the policy challenges for protecting continental biodiversity, to foster bilateral collaboration to resolve common problems, and to suggest rational alternative policies and practices that are more likely than current practices to sustain North America's natural heritage. Conservation scientists and practitioners can play a key role by drawing policy makers' attention to ultimate, as well as proximate, causes of biodiversity decline and to the ecological and economic consequences of not addressing these threats.

Reconciling competing ecological explanations for sexual segregation in ungulates.

Sexual segregation in ungulates has important conservation and theoretical implications, but despite numerous studies, the impetus for this behavioral pattern remains a topic of debate. Sexual segregation hypotheses can be broadly grouped into social and ecological explanations, but only ecological explanations can adequately describe why sexes use different areas and habitats. The reproductive strategy hypothesis (RSH) and forage selection hypothesis (FSH) are leading ecological explanations, and although both have received support in the literature, neither the collective basis for that support nor overlap between these hypotheses has been adequately evaluated. This review analyzed seasonal sex comparisons of habitat forage quantity (n=66), quality (n=67), and diet (n=63) from peer-reviewed studies of north temperate ruminants to test predictions of each hypothesis. Empirical data supported predictions of the RSH, but did not support two of three key predictions of the FSH. Males used habitats with greater forage quantity significantly more than females. But, contrary to predictions of the FSH, females did not use habitats with superior forage quality nor consume higher-quality diets more than males. Sexes typically used habitats and consumed diets of similar quality, and when differences were reported, males used higher-quality habitats significantly more than females. Results refute FSH arguments that differences in dietary requirements associated with sexual dimorphism are a universal explanation for sexual segregation in ungulates, but the physiological mechanism on which the FSH is predicated may explain why males consume poorer-quality diets when high-quality forage is scarce. The FSH, therefore, operates at a proximate level because it explains diet and habitat selection by males under certain environmental conditions, but multiple environmental factors may influence sexual segregation, and no single proximate explanation adequately describes this behavioral pattern. The RSH explains sexual segregation as the evolutionary response to differences in reproductive strategies: males choose habitats to maximize energy gains in preparation for rut, and females select habitats with combinations of resources that contribute to offspring survival. Consequently, the RSH provides an ultimate explanation that can be used to explain and interpret studies of sexual segregation in ungulates.

A Conservation-Based Approach to Compensation for Livestock Depredation: The Florida Panther Case Study.

Calf (Bos taurus) depredation by the federally endangered Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi) on ranches in southwest Florida is an important issue because ranches represent mixed landscapes that provide habitat critical to panther recovery. The objectives of this study were to (1) quantify calf depredation by panthers on two ranches in southwest Florida, and (2) develop a habitat suitability model to evaluate the quality of panther hunting habitat on ranchlands, assess whether the model could predict predation risk to calves, and discuss its potential to be incorporated into an incentive-based compensation program. We ear-tagged 409 calves with VHF transmitters on two ranches during 2011-2013 to document calf mortality. We developed a model to evaluate the quality of panther hunting habitat on private lands in southwest Florida using environmental variables obtained from the Florida Natural Areas Inventory (FNAI) Cooperative Landcover Database and nocturnal GPS locations of panthers provided by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). We then tested whether the model could predict the location of calf depredation sites. Tagged calf loss to panthers varied between the two ranches (0.5%/yr to 5.3%/yr) and may have been influenced by the amount of panther hunting habitat on each ranch as the ranch that experienced higher depredation rates contained a significantly higher probability of panther presence. Depredation sites of tagged calves had a significantly greater probability of panther presence than depredation sites of untagged calves that were found by ranchers in open pastures. This suggests that there may be more calves killed in high risk environments than are being found and reported by ranchers and that panthers can hunt effectively in open environments. It also suggests that the model may provide a means for evaluating the quality of panther hunting habitat and the corresponding risk of depredation to livestock across the landscape. We suggest that our approach could be applied to prioritize and categorize private lands for participation in a Payment for Ecosystem Services program that compensates landowners for livestock loss and incentivizes conserving high quality habitat for large carnivores where livestock depredation is a concern.