A framework to measure the wildness of managed large vertebrate populations

As landscapes continue to fall under human influence through habitat loss and fragmentation, fencing is increasingly being used to mitigate anthropogenic threats and enhance the commercial value of wildlife. Subsequent intensification of management potentially erodes wildness by disembodying populations from landscape‐level processes, thereby disconnecting species from natural selection. Tools are needed to measure the degree to which populations of large vertebrate species in formally protected and privately owned wildlife areas are self‐sustaining and free to adapt. We devised a framework to measure such wildness based on 6 attributes relating to the evolutionary and ecological dynamics of vertebrates (space, disease and parasite resistance, exposure to predation, exposure to limitations and fluctuations of food and water supply, and reproduction). For each attribute, we set empirical, species‐specific thresholds between 5 wildness states based on quantifiable management interventions. We analysed data from 205 private wildlife properties with management objectives spanning ecotourism to consumptive utilization to test the framework on 6 herbivore species representing a range of conservation statuses and commercial values. Wildness scores among species differed significantly, and the proportion of populations identified as wild ranged from 12% to 84%, which indicates the tool detected site‐scale differences both among populations of different species and populations of the same species under different management regimes. By quantifying wildness, this framework provides practitioners with standardized measurement units that link biodiversity with the sustainable use of wildlife. Applications include informing species management plans at local scales; standardizing the inclusion of managed populations in red‐list assessments; and providing a platform for certification and regulation of wildlife‐based economies. Applying this framework may help embed wildness as a normative value in policy and mitigate the shifting baseline of what it means to truly conserve a species.The South African National Biodiversity Institute, the Department of Environmental Affairs, E Oppenheimer & Son and De Beers Group of Companies, and the Endangered Wildlife Trust that funded the national Mammal Red List project. The University of Pretoria and the South African National Biodiversity Institute provided M.C. with funding.https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/152317392020-10-01hj2019Centre for Wildlife ManagementMammal Research InstituteZoology and Entomolog

A framework to measure the wildness of managed large vertebrate populations

As landscapes continue to fall under human influence through habitat loss and fragmentation, fencing is increasingly being used to mitigate anthropogenic threats and enhance the commercial value of wildlife. Subsequent intensification of management potentially erodes wildness by disembodying populations from landscape‐level processes, thereby disconnecting species from natural selection. Tools are needed to measure the degree to which populations of large vertebrate species in formally protected and privately owned wildlife areas are self‐sustaining and free to adapt. We devised a framework to measure such wildness based on 6 attributes relating to the evolutionary and ecological dynamics of vertebrates (space, disease and parasite resistance, exposure to predation, exposure to limitations and fluctuations of food and water supply, and reproduction). For each attribute, we set empirical, species‐specific thresholds between 5 wildness states based on quantifiable management interventions. We analysed data from 205 private wildlife properties with management objectives spanning ecotourism to consumptive utilization to test the framework on 6 herbivore species representing a range of conservation statuses and commercial values. Wildness scores among species differed significantly, and the proportion of populations identified as wild ranged from 12% to 84%, which indicates the tool detected site‐scale differences both among populations of different species and populations of the same species under different management regimes. By quantifying wildness, this framework provides practitioners with standardized measurement units that link biodiversity with the sustainable use of wildlife. Applications include informing species management plans at local scales; standardizing the inclusion of managed populations in red‐list assessments; and providing a platform for certification and regulation of wildlife‐based economies. Applying this framework may help embed wildness as a normative value in policy and mitigate the shifting baseline of what it means to truly conserve a species.The South African National Biodiversity Institute, the Department of Environmental Affairs, E Oppenheimer & Son and De Beers Group of Companies, and the Endangered Wildlife Trust that funded the national Mammal Red List project. The University of Pretoria and the South African National Biodiversity Institute provided M.C. with funding.https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/152317392020-10-01hj2019Centre for Wildlife ManagementMammal Research InstituteZoology and Entomolog

Spatial patterns of large African cats : a large-scale study on density, home range size, and home range overlap of lions Panthera leo and leopards Panthera pardus

Spatial patterns of and competition for resources by territorial carnivores are typically explained by two hypotheses: 1) the territorial defence hypothesis and 2) the searching efficiency hypothesis. According to the territorial defence hypothesis, when food resources are abundant, carnivore densities will be high and home ranges small. In addition, carnivores can maximise their necessary energy intake with minimal territorial defence. At medium resource levels, larger ranges will be needed, and it will become more economically beneficial to defend resources against a lower density of competitors. At low resource levels, carnivore densities will be low and home ranges large, but resources will be too scarce to make it beneficial to defend such large territories. Thus, home range overlap will be minimal at intermediate carnivore densities. According to the searching efficiency hypothesis, there is a cost to knowing a home range. Larger areas are harder to learn and easier to forget, so carnivores constantly need to keep their cognitive map updated by regularly revisiting parts of their home ranges. Consequently, when resources are scarce, carnivores require larger home ranges to acquire sufficient food. These larger home ranges lead to more overlap among individuals' ranges, so that overlap in home ranges is largest when food availability is the lowest. Since conspecific density is low when food availability is low, this hypothesis predicts that overlap is largest when densities are the lowest. We measured home range overlap and used a novel method to compare intraspecific home range overlaps for lions Panthera leo (n = 149) and leopards Panthera pardus (n = 111) in Africa. We estimated home range sizes from telemetry location data and gathered carnivore density data from the literature. Our results did not support the territorial defence hypothesis for either species. Lion prides increased their home range overlap at conspecific lower densities whereas leopards did not. Lion pride changes in overlap were primarily due to increases in group size at lower densities. By contrast, the unique dispersal strategies of leopards led to reduced overlap at lower densities. However, when human-caused mortality was higher, leopards increased their home range overlap. Although lions and leopards are territorial, their territorial behaviour was less important than the acquisition of food in determining their space use. Such information is crucial for the future conservation of these two iconic African carnivores

bi4africa dataset - open source

The bii4africa dataset is presented in a multi-spreadsheet .ods file. The raw data spreadsheet (‘Scores_Raw’) includes 31,313 individual expert estimates of the impact of a sub-Saharan African land use on a species response group of terrestrial vertebrates or vascular plants. Estimates are reported as intactness scores - the remaining proportion of an ‘intact’ reference (pre-industrial or contemporary wilderness area) population of a species response group in a land use, on a scale from 0 (no individuals remain) through 0.5 (half the individuals remain), to 1 (same as the reference population) and, in limited cases, to 2 (two or more times the reference population). For species that thrive in human-modified landscapes, scores could be greater than 1 but not exceeding 2 to avoid extremely large scores biasing aggregation exercises. Expert comments are included alongside respective estimates

bii4africa dataset

The bii4africa dataset is presented in a multi-spreadsheet .xlsx file. The raw data spreadsheet (‘Scores_Raw’) includes 31,313 individual expert estimates of the impact of a sub-Saharan African land use on a species response group of terrestrial vertebrates or vascular plants. Estimates are reported as intactness scores - the remaining proportion of an ‘intact’ reference (pre-industrial or contemporary wilderness area) population of a species response group in a land use, on a scale from 0 (no individuals remain) through 0.5 (half the individuals remain), to 1 (same as the reference population) and, in limited cases, to 2 (two or more times the reference population). For species that thrive in human-modified landscapes, scores could be greater than 1 but not exceeding 2 to avoid extremely large scores biasing aggregation exercises. Expert comments are included alongside respective estimates