Anglia Ruskin Research Online (ARRO)
Browse
fevo-04-00128.pdf (1.06 MB)

Stakeholder Perspectives on Triage in Wildlife Monitoring in a Rapidly Changing Arctic

Download (1.06 MB)
journal contribution
posted on 2023-07-26, 14:26 authored by Helen C. Wheeler, Dominique Berteaux, Chris Furgal, Brenda Parlee, Nigel G. Yoccoz, David Grémillet
Monitoring activities provide a core contribution to wildlife conservation in the Arctic. Effective monitoring which allows changes in population status to be detected early provides opportunities to mitigate pressures driving declines. Monitoring triage involves decisions about how and where to prioritize activities in species and ecosystem based monitoring. In particular, monitoring triage examines whether to divert resources away from species where there is high likelihood of extinction in the near-future in favor of species where monitoring activities may produce greater conservation benefits. As a place facing both rapid change with a high likelihood of population extinctions, and serious logistic and financial challenges for field data acquisition, the Arctic provides a good context in which to examine attitudes toward triage in monitoring. For effective decision-making to emerge from monitoring, multiple stakeholders must be involved in defining aims and priorities. We conducted semi-structured interviews with stakeholders in arctic wildlife monitoring (either contributing to observation and recording of wildlife, using information from wildlife observation and recording, or using wildlife as a resource) to elicit their perspectives on triage in wildlife monitoring in the Arctic. The majority (56%) of our 23 participants were predominantly in opposition to triage, 26% were in support of triage and 17% were undecided. Representatives of Indigenous organizations were more likely to be opposed to triage than scientists, and those involved in decision-making showed greatest support for triage amongst the scientist participants. Responses to the concept of triage included that: (1) The species-focussed approach associated with triage did not match their more systems-based view (5 participants), (2) Important information is generated through monitoring threatened species, which advances understanding of the drivers of change, responses and ecosystem consequences (5 participants), (3) There is an obligation to try to monitor and conserve threatened species (4 participants), and (4) Monitoring needs to address local people's needs, which may be overlooked under triage (3 participants). The complexity of decision-making to create monitoring programmes that maximize benefits to biodiversity and people makes prioritization with simple models difficult. Using scenarios to identify desirable trajectories of Arctic stewardship may be an effective means of identifying monitoring needs.

History

Refereed

  • Yes

Volume

4

Issue number

128

Publication title

Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution

ISSN

2296-701X

Publisher

Frontiers Media

File version

  • Published version

Language

  • eng

Legacy posted date

2018-09-21

Legacy creation date

2018-09-21

Legacy Faculty/School/Department

ARCHIVED Faculty of Science & Technology (until September 2018)

Usage metrics

    ARU Outputs

    Categories

    No categories selected

    Licence

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC