Lessons Learned for Pre-Emptive Capture Management as a Tool for Wildlife Conservation during Oil Spills and Eradication Events.

Pre-emptive capture or translocation of wildlife during oil spills and prior to pest eradication poison applications are very specific conservation goals within the field of conservation translocation/reintroduction. Protection of wildlife from contamination events occurs during either planned operations such as pest eradication poison applications, or unplanned events such as pollution or oil spills. The aim in both incidences is to protect at-risk wildlife species, ensuring the survival of a threatened regional population or entire species, by excluding wildlife from entering affected areas and therefore preventing impacts on the protected wildlife. If pre-emptive capture does not occur, wildlife may unintentionally be affected and could either die or will need capture, cleaning, and/or medical care and rehabilitation before being released back into a cleared environment. This paper reviews information from pre-emptive captures and translocations of threatened wildlife undertaken during past oil spills and island pest eradications, to assess criteria for species captured, techniques used, outcomes of responses, and lessons learned. From these case studies, the considerations and planning needs for pre-emptive capture are described and recommendations made to allow better use and preparedness for pre-emptive capture as a preventative wildlife conservation tool.

Globally important islands where eradicating invasive mammals will benefit highly threatened vertebrates.

Invasive alien species are a major threat to native insular species. Eradicating invasive mammals from islands is a feasible and proven approach to prevent biodiversity loss. We developed a conceptual framework to identify globally important islands for invasive mammal eradications to prevent imminent extinctions of highly threatened species using biogeographic and technical factors, plus a novel approach to consider socio-political feasibility. We applied this framework using a comprehensive dataset describing the distribution of 1,184 highly threatened native vertebrate species (i.e. those listed as Critically Endangered or Endangered on the IUCN Red List) and 184 non-native mammals on 1,279 islands worldwide. Based on extinction risk, irreplaceability, severity of impact from invasive species, and technical feasibility of eradication, we identified and ranked 292 of the most important islands where eradicating invasive mammals would benefit highly threatened vertebrates. When socio-political feasibility was considered, we identified 169 of these islands where eradication planning or operation could be initiated by 2020 or 2030 and would improve the survival prospects of 9.4% of the Earth's most highly threatened terrestrial insular vertebrates (111 of 1,184 species). Of these, 107 islands were in 34 countries and territories and could have eradication projects initiated by 2020. Concentrating efforts to eradicate invasive mammals on these 107 islands would benefit 151 populations of 80 highly threatened vertebrates and make a major contribution towards achieving global conservation targets adopted by the world's nations.