Red deer habitat management in the Highlands: Consequences for invertebrates

In Scotland, the well documented increase in the red deer population is widely regarded as a cause for concern, due to potentially detrimental impacts of grazing. This has lead to conflicting objectives between conservation and deer managers, despite the extent of the increase and the resulting impact both being hotly debated issues. Upland heather moorland is of international conservation importance while woodland habitats are some of the most stable ecosystems in anthropogenic landscapes. In the UK oak woodland plays a crucial role in the maintenance of biodiversity, and both heather moorland and oak woodland may be subject to degradation or decline due to grazing. This study is based in north-west Scotland, and investigates the consequences of two deer management strategies, in two habitat types, for invertebrates. An observational study of heather moorland under two extremes of grazing pressure provided little evidence for negative impacts of grazing on invertebrates on the more heavily grazed Letterewe Estate, suggesting that the deer population is not a cause for concern in terms of invertebrate biodiversity. An experimental study of grazed and un-grazed oak woodland found some positive effects, and no instances of negative grazing impacts on invertebrate biodiversity, and no effect on guild structure. This work highlights the need for science to inform land management policy that must often seek to balance conservation objectives with economic interests, and supports the notion that a red deer herd of a size consistent with viable stalking interests can be integral to the maintenance of biodiversity and the natural heritage

Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) Conference and Expo

Meeting Abstracts: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) Conference and Expo Clearwater Beach, FL, USA. 9-11 June 201

Red deer habitat management in the Highlands : consequences for invertebrates

In Scotland, the well documented increase in the red deer population is widely regarded as a cause for concern, due to potentially detrimental impacts of grazing. This has lead to conflicting objectives between conservation and deer managers, despite the extent of the increase and the resulting impact both being hotly debated issues. Upland heather moorland is of international conservation importance while woodland habitats are some of the most stable ecosystems in anthropogenic landscapes. In the UK oak woodland plays a crucial role in the maintenance of biodiversity, and both heather moorland and oak woodland may be subject to degradation or decline due to grazing. This study is based in north-west Scotland, and investigates the consequences of two deer management strategies, in two habitat types, for invertebrates. An observational study of heather moorland under two extremes of grazing pressure provided little evidence for negative impacts of grazing on invertebrates on the more heavily grazed Letterewe Estate, suggesting that the deer population is not a cause for concern in terms of invertebrate biodiversity. An experimental study of grazed and un-grazed oak woodland found some positive effects, and no instances of negative grazing impacts on invertebrate biodiversity, and no effect on guild structure. This work highlights the need for science to inform land management policy that must often seek to balance conservation objectives with economic interests, and supports the notion that a red deer herd of a size consistent with viable stalking interests can be integral to the maintenance of biodiversity and the natural heritage.EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceVan Vlissingen familyGBUnited Kingdo

A practical conservation tool to combine diverse types of evidence for transparent evidence-based decision-making

Making the reasoning and evidence behind conservation management decisions clear and transparent is a key challenge for the conservation community. Similarly, combining evidence from diverse sources (e.g., scientific and local knowledge) into decision-making is also difficult. Our group of conservation researchers and practitioners has co-produced an intuitive tool and template (Evidence-to-Decision [E2D] tool: www.evidence2decisiontool.com) to guide practitioners through a structured process to transparently document and report the evidence and reasoning behind decisions. The tool has three major steps: (1). Define the Decision Context; (2). Gather Evidence; and (3). Make an Evidence-Based Decision. In each step, practitioners enter information (e.g., from the scientific literature, practitioner knowledge and experience, and costs) to inform their decision-making and document their reasoning. The tool packages this information into a customized downloadable report (or is documented if using the offline template), which we hope can stimulate the exchange of information on decisions within and between organizations. By enabling practitioners to revisit how and why past decisions were made, and integrate diverse forms of evidence, we believe our open-access tool's template can help increase the transparency and quality of decision-making in conservation

Introducing a common taxonomy to support learning from failure in conservation.

Conservation practitioners are increasingly interested in the lessons gained through failure. While other sectors have made significant progress in learning from failure, there is currently limited consensus on how a similar transition could best be achieved in conservation, and what is required to facilitate this. One of the key enabling conditions for other sectors is a widely accepted and standardized classification system for identifying and analyzing root causes of failure. In this paper, we propose a comprehensive taxonomy of root causes of failure affecting conservation projects. To develop this, we solicited examples of real-life conservation efforts that were deemed to have failed in some way, identified their underlying root causes of failure and used these to develop a generic, three-tier taxonomy of the ways in which projects fail. We subsequently tested the taxonomy by asking conservation practitioners to use it to classify the causes of failure for conservation efforts they had been involved in. No significant gaps or redundancies were identified during this testing phase. We then analyzed the frequency that particular root causes were encountered by projects within this test sample, which suggested that some root causes may be more likely to be reported in projects implementing particular types of conservation action, while others may frequently occur across a range of different project types. We propose that this taxonomy could be used to help improve identification, analysis and subsequent learning from failed conservation efforts, address some of the barriers that currently limit the ability of conservation practitioners to learn from failure, and contribute to establishing an effective culture of learning from failure within conservation. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Introducing a common taxonomy to support learning from failure in conservation.

Conservation practitioners are increasingly interested in the lessons gained through failure. While other sectors have made significant progress in learning from failure, there is currently limited consensus on how a similar transition could best be achieved in conservation, and what is required to facilitate this. One of the key enabling conditions for other sectors is a widely accepted and standardized classification system for identifying and analyzing root causes of failure. In this paper, we propose a comprehensive taxonomy of root causes of failure affecting conservation projects. To develop this, we solicited examples of real-life conservation efforts that were deemed to have failed in some way, identified their underlying root causes of failure and used these to develop a generic, three-tier taxonomy of the ways in which projects fail. We subsequently tested the taxonomy by asking conservation practitioners to use it to classify the causes of failure for conservation efforts they had been involved in. No significant gaps or redundancies were identified during this testing phase. We then analyzed the frequency that particular root causes were encountered by projects within this test sample, which suggested that some root causes may be more likely to be reported in projects implementing particular types of conservation action, while others may frequently occur across a range of different project types. We propose that this taxonomy could be used to help improve identification, analysis and subsequent learning from failed conservation efforts, address some of the barriers that currently limit the ability of conservation practitioners to learn from failure, and contribute to establishing an effective culture of learning from failure within conservation. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Co‐designing a toolkit for evidence‐based decision making in conservation: Processes and lessons

Funder: Arcadia Fund; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100012088Funder: MAVA Foundation; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100013324Improving the effectiveness of conservation practice requires better use of evidence. Since 2004, researchers from the Conservation Evidence group (University of Cambridge) have engaged with over 1100 named practitioners, policymakers, funders and other academics from across the world to identify needs and develop a range of principles, tools and resources to embed evidence in decision making. The goal of this engagement (the Conservation Evidence Programme) was to deliver improved conservation practice leading to benefits for nature and society. Together, we developed a theory of change with five key strategies for delivering change, alongside a freely available Evidence Toolkit to support decision makers in achieving that change. The authors describe the toolkit, a collection of freely available tools and resources developed by the collaborative programme, and how co‐design, employing different levels of partner engagement, enabled its development. Reflecting on our experiences highlighted a number of insights and recommendations, including the need to identify where deep engagement is a necessary condition for success; the importance of collective agreement of the roles of different partners; the need to consider how to facilitate uptake of new tools or practices, particularly where that requires changes to organisational practices or culture; and the importance of establishing processes/channels for ongoing engagement with stakeholders, with a willingness to be flexible and open to incorporating new suggestions and perspectives as needed. The Conservation Evidence Programme has enabled practitioners, funders and policymakers to become part of a network of forward‐thinking organisations that is working collaboratively to help drive more effective conservation practice through improved evidence use