An introduction to decision science for conservation.

Biodiversity conservation decisions are difficult, especially when they involve differing values, complex multidimensional objectives, scarce resources, urgency, and considerable uncertainty. Decision science embodies a theory about how to make difficult decisions and an extensive array of frameworks and tools that make that theory practical. We sought to improve conceptual clarity and practical application of decision science to help decision makers apply decision science to conservation problems. We addressed barriers to the uptake of decision science, including a lack of training and awareness of decision science; confusion over common terminology and which tools and frameworks to apply; and the mistaken impression that applying decision science must be time consuming, expensive, and complex. To aid in navigating the extensive and disparate decision science literature, we clarify meaning of common terms: decision science, decision theory, decision analysis, structured decision-making, and decision-support tools. Applying decision science does not have to be complex or time consuming; rather, it begins with knowing how to think through the components of a decision utilizing decision analysis (i.e., define the problem, elicit objectives, develop alternatives, estimate consequences, and perform trade-offs). This is best achieved by applying a rapid-prototyping approach. At each step, decision-support tools can provide additional insight and clarity, whereas decision-support frameworks (e.g., priority threat management and systematic conservation planning) can aid navigation of multiple steps of a decision analysis for particular contexts. We summarize key decision-support frameworks and tools and describe to which step of a decision analysis, and to which contexts, each is most useful to apply. Our introduction to decision science will aid in contextualizing current approaches and new developments, and help decision makers begin to apply decision science to conservation problems.

Las decisiones sobre la conservación de la biodiversidad son difíciles de tomar, especialmente cuando involucran diferentes valores, objetivos multidimensionales complejos, recursos limitados, urgencia y una incertidumbre considerable. Las ciencias de la decisión incorporan una teoría sobre cómo tomar decisiones difíciles y una variedad extensa de marcos de trabajo y herramientas que transforman esa teoría en práctica. Buscamos mejorar la claridad conceptual y la aplicación práctica de las ciencias de la decisión para ayudar al órgano decisorio a aplicar estas ciencias a los problemas de conservación. Nos enfocamos en las barreras para la aceptación de las ciencias de la decisión, incluyendo la falta de capacitación y de conciencia por estas ciencias; la confusión por la terminología común y cuáles herramientas y marcos de trabajo aplicar; y la impresión errónea de que la aplicación de estas ciencias consume tiempo y debe ser costosa y compleja. Para asistir en la navegación de la literatura extensa y dispar de las ciencias de la decisión, aclaramos el significado de varios términos comunes: ciencias de la decisión, teoría de la decisión, análisis de decisiones, toma estructurada de decisiones y herramientas de apoyo para las decisiones. La aplicación de las ciencias de la decisión no tiene que ser compleja ni debe llevar mucho tiempo; de hecho, todo comienza con saber cómo pensar detenidamente en los componentes de una decisión mediante el análisis de decisiones (es decir, definir el problema, producir objetivos, desarrollar alternativas, estimar consecuencias y realizar compensaciones). Lo anterior se logra de mejor manera mediante la aplicación de una estrategia prototipos rápidos. En cada paso, las herramientas de apoyo para las decisiones pueden proporcionar visión y claridad adicionales, mientras que los marcos de apoyo para las decisiones (p.ej.: gestión de amenazas prioritarias y planeación sistemática de la conservación) pueden asistir en la navegación de los diferentes pasos de un análisis de decisiones para contextos particulares. Resumimos los marcos de trabajo y las herramientas más importantes de apoyo para las decisiones y describimos el paso, y el contexto, del análisis de decisiones para el que es más útil aplicarlos. Nuestra introducción a las ciencias de la decisión apoyará en la contextualización de las estrategias actuales y los nuevos desarrollos, y ayudarán al órgano decisorio a comenzar a aplicar estas ciencias en los problemas de conservación.

Salmonid species diversity predicts salmon consumption by terrestrial wildlife.

Resource waves-spatial variation in resource phenology that extends feeding opportunities for mobile consumers-can affect the behaviour and productivity of recipient populations. Interspecific diversity among Pacific salmon species (Oncorhynchus spp.) creates staggered spawning events across space and time, thereby prolonging availability to terrestrial wildlife. We sought to understand how such variation might influence consumption by terrestrial predators compared with resource abundance and intra- and interspecific competition. Using stable isotope analysis, we investigated how the proportion of salmon in the annual diet of male black bears (Ursus americanus; n = 405) varies with species diversity and density of spawning salmon biomass, while also accounting for competition with sympatric black and grizzly bears (U. arctos horribilis), in coastal British Columbia, Canada. We found that the proportion of salmon in the annual diet of black bears was ≈40% higher in the absence of grizzly bears, but detected little effect of relative black bear density and salmon biomass density. Rather, salmon diversity had the largest positive effect on consumption. On average, increasing diversity from one salmon species to ~four (with equal biomass contributions) approximately triples the proportion of salmon in diet. Given the importance of salmon to bear life histories, this work provides early empirical support for how resource waves may increase the productivity of consumers at population and landscape scales. Accordingly, terrestrial wildlife management might consider maintaining not only salmon abundance but also diversity.

Human disturbance in riparian areas disrupts predator-prey interactions between grizzly bears and salmon.

Wildlife must increasingly balance trade-offs between the need to access important foods and the mortality risks associated with human-dominated landscapes. Human disturbance can profoundly influence wildlife behavior, but managers know little about the relationship between disturbance-behavior dynamics and associated consequences for foraging. We address this gap by empirically investigating the consequences of human activity on a keystone predator-prey interaction in a region with limited but varied industrial disturbance. Using stable isotope data from 226 hair samples of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) collected from 1995 to 2014 across 22 salmon-bearing watersheds (88,000 km2) in British Columbia, Canada, we examined how human activity influenced their consumption of spawning salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.), a fitness-related food. Accounting for the abundance of salmon and other foods, salmon consumption strongly decreased (up to 59% for females) with increasing human disturbance (as measured by the human footprint index) in riparian zones of salmon-bearing rivers. Declines in salmon consumption occurred with disturbance even in watersheds with low footprints. In a region currently among the least influenced by industrial activity, intensification of disturbance in river valleys is predicted to increasingly decouple bears from salmon, possibly driving associated reductions in population productivity and provisioning of salmon nutrients to terrestrial ecosystems. Accordingly, we draw on our results to make landscape-scale and access-related management recommendations beyond current streamside protection buffers. This work illustrates the interaction between habitat modification and food security for wildlife, highlighting the potential for unacknowledged interactions and cumulative effects in increasingly modified landscapes.

Accounting for direct and indirect cumulative effects of anthropogenic pressures on salmon- and herring-linked land and ocean ecosystems.

Salmon and herring support both land and ocean predators and are critical to ecosystem resilience. Their linkages across land and sea realms make them highly susceptible to human activities, which can have flow-on effects up the food web. We quantify and compare the potential cumulative effects of human-driven pressures on interdependent species in salmon- and herring-linked ecosystems of western Canada using a risk assessment methodology. Adding indirect risks resulted in 68% greater total risks for land species than for direct risk alone, versus 15% for marine species. Inclusion of climate change pressures resulted in the greatest change in risk for low trophic marine species and habitats (greater than 25% increase). Forestry-related pressures accounted for the highest risk to all species and projected management of these pressures resulted in a total reduction of risk across all ecosystem components that was more than 14% greater than management of fisheries pressures. Ignoring land food web linkages and pressures underestimated cumulative risk by more than 40% for salmon and herring. This simple framework can be used to evaluate potential risk of existing human uses and future change to inform immediate management of linked land-sea ecosystems and help species avoid the 'death by a thousand cuts'. This article is part of the theme issue 'Nurturing resilient marine ecosystems'.

Indigenous knowledge and science unite to reveal spatial and temporal dimensions of distributional shift in wildlife of conservation concern.

Range shifts among wildlife can occur rapidly and impose cascading ecological, economic, and cultural consequences. However, occurrence data used to define distributional limits derived from scientific approaches are often outdated for wide ranging and elusive species, especially in remote environments. Accordingly, our aim was to amalgamate indigenous and western scientific evidence of grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) records and detail a potential range shift on the central coast of British Columbia, Canada. In addition, we test the hypothesis that data from each method yield similar results, as well as illustrate the complementary nature of this coupled approach. Combining information from traditional and local ecological knowledge (TEK/LEK) interviews with remote camera, genetic, and hunting data revealed that grizzly bears are now present on 10 islands outside their current management boundary. LEK interview data suggested this expansion has accelerated over the last 10 years. Both approaches provided complementary details and primarily affirmed one another: all islands with scientific evidence for occupation had consistent TEK/LEK evidence. Moreover, our complementary methods approach enabled a more spatially and temporally detailed account than either method would have afforded alone. In many cases, knowledge already held by local indigenous people could provide timely and inexpensive data about changing ecological processes. However, verifying the accuracy of scientific and experiential knowledge by pairing sources at the same spatial scale allows for increased confidence and detail. A similarly coupled approach may be useful across taxa in many regions.