Habitat management decisions for conservation: a conceptual framework

The focus of this selection of papers is the linkage of habitat and population dynamics for the purpose of conservation. We thus provide a general framework for making conservation decisions, emphasizing how knowledge of habitat–population linkages fits into this framework. We begin by describing structured decision-making (SDM) as a general approach to making conservation decisions. SDM requires the development of the following elements: objectives, actions, model(s), monitoring, and decision algorithm. We then describe adaptive resource management (ARM), a specific type of SDM developed for recurrent decisions characterized by potentially resolvable uncertainty. Many different classes of actions can be used to influence animal population dynamics, and modification of habitat is one class of action that is frequently used. Habitat management requires models for predicting responses of the managed system to management actions, and these models are based on our knowledge of habitat–population linkages. Frequently, these models are decomposed into two submodels: one used to predict habitat changes expected to result from management actions and another used to predict population responses to habitat changes. This latter modeling focuses generally on the influence of habitat change on vital rates governing the dynamics of population state variables (variables such as population size or density that describe the status or health of a population). Specific recommendations depend on 1) the vital rates and state variable(s) being considered, 2) the relative spatial scales of animal movement and habitat measurement, and 3) the relative temporal scales of habitat change and vital rate estimation. Finally, we present an example of an ARM program for habitat management, highlighting the role of habitat-linked population modeling in this effort.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Conservation Science
Published
2024-10-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fcosc.2024.1450000
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Economic and Environmental Valuation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.90
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Habitat management decisions for conservation: a conceptual framework

Doug P. Armstrong, David R. Breininger, Robert C. Lacy, James D. Nichols
7 citations
Frontiers in Conservation Science
Economic and Environmental Valuation
7.90
article

Habitat management decisions for conservation: a conceptual framework

Doug P. Armstrong, David R. Breininger, Robert C. Lacy, James D. Nichols
article en
7 citations

Abstract

The focus of this selection of papers is the linkage of habitat and population dynamics for the purpose of conservation. We thus provide a general framework for making conservation decisions, emphasizing how knowledge of habitat–population linkages fits into this framework. We begin by describing structured decision-making (SDM) as a general approach to making conservation decisions. SDM requires the development of the following elements: objectives, actions, model(s), monitoring, and decision algorithm. We then describe adaptive resource management (ARM), a specific type of SDM developed for recurrent decisions characterized by potentially resolvable uncertainty. Many different classes of actions can be used to influence animal population dynamics, and modification of habitat is one class of action that is frequently used. Habitat management requires models for predicting responses of the managed system to management actions, and these models are based on our knowledge of habitat–population linkages. Frequently, these models are decomposed into two submodels: one used to predict habitat changes expected to result from management actions and another used to predict population responses to habitat changes. This latter modeling focuses generally on the influence of habitat change on vital rates governing the dynamics of population state variables (variables such as population size or density that describe the status or health of a population). Specific recommendations depend on 1) the vital rates and state variable(s) being considered, 2) the relative spatial scales of animal movement and habitat measurement, and 3) the relative temporal scales of habitat change and vital rate estimation. Finally, we present an example of an ARM program for habitat management, highlighting the role of habitat-linked population modeling in this effort.

Frontiers in Conservation ScienceVol. 5
University of Central Florida (US), University of Florida (US), Massey University (NZ)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Economic and Environmental Valuation
7.90
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.