Top-down effects of repatriating bald eagles hinder jointly recovering competitors.

The recovery of piscivorous birds around the world is touted as one of the great conservation successes of the 21st century, but for some species, this success was short-lived. Bald eagles, ospreys and great blue herons began repatriating Voyageurs National Park, USA, in the mid-20th century. However, after 1990, only eagles continued their recovery, while osprey and heron recovery failed for unknown reasons. We aimed to evaluate whether top-down effects of bald eagles and bottom-up effects of inclement weather, habitat quality and fish resources contributed to the failed recovery of ospreys and herons in a protected area. We quantified the relative influence of top-down and bottom-up factors on nest colonization, persistence (i.e., nest reuse) and success for ospreys, and occurrence and size of heronries using 26 years (1986-2012) of spatially explicit monitoring data coupled with multi-response hierarchical models and Bayesian variable selection approaches. Bald eagles were previously shown to recover faster due to intensive nest protection and management. Increased numbers of eagles were associated with a reduction in the numbers of osprey nests, their nesting success and heronry size, while higher local densities of nesting eagles deterred heronries nearby. We found little evidence of bottom-up limitations on the failed recovery of herons and ospreys. We present a conservation conundrum: bald eagles are top predators and a flagship species of conservation that have benefited from intensive protection, but this likely hindered the recovery of ospreys and herons. Returning top predators, or rewilding, is widely promoted as a conservation strategy for top-down ecosystem recovery, but managing top predators in isolation of jointly recovering species can halt or reverse ecosystem recovery. Previous studies warn of the potential consequences of ignoring biotic interactions amongst recovering species, but we go further by quantifying how these interactions contributed to failed recoveries via impacts on the nesting demography of jointly recovering species. Multi-species management is paramount to realizing the ecosystem benefits of top predator recovery.

Can fire atlas data improve species distribution model projections?

Correlative species distribution models (SDMs) are widely used in studies of climate change impacts, yet are often criticized for failing to incorporate disturbance processes that can influence species distributions. Here we use two temporally independent data sets of vascular plant distributions, climate data, and fire atlas data to examine the influence of disturbance history on SDM projection accuracy through time in the mountain ranges of California, USA. We used hierarchical partitioning to examine the influence of fire occurrence on the distribution of 144 vascular plant species and built a suite of SDMs to examine how the inclusion of fire-related predictors (fire occurrence and departure from historical fire return intervals) affects SDM projection accuracy. Fire occurrence provided the least explanatory power among predictor variables for predicting species' distributions, but provided improved explanatory power for species whose regeneration is tied closely to fire. A measure of the departure from historic fire return interval had greater explanatory power for calibrating modern SDMs than fire occurrence. This variable did not improve internal model accuracy for most species, although it did provide marginal improvement to models for species adapted to high-frequency fire regimes. Fire occurrence and fire return interval departure were strongly related to the climatic covariates used in SDM development, suggesting that improvements in model accuracy may not be expected due to limited additional explanatory power. Our results suggest that the inclusion of coarse-scale measures of disturbance in SDMs may not be necessary to predict species distributions under climate change, particularly for disturbance processes that are largely mediated by climate.

Changes in climatic water balance drive downhill shifts in plant species' optimum elevations.

Uphill shifts of species' distributions in response to historical warming are well documented, which leads to widespread expectations of continued uphill shifts under future warming. Conversely, downhill shifts are often considered anomalous and unrelated to climate change. By comparing the altitudinal distributions of 64 plant species between the 1930s and the present day within California, we show that climate changes have resulted in a significant downward shift in species' optimum elevations. This downhill shift is counter to what would be expected given 20th-century warming but is readily explained by species' niche tracking of regional changes in climatic water balance rather than temperature. Similar downhill shifts can be expected to occur where future climate change scenarios project increases in water availability that outpace evaporative demand.