How to decide whether to move species threatened by climate change

PLoS One. 2013 Oct 16;8(10):e75814. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075814. eCollection 2013.

Abstract

Introducing species to areas outside their historical range to secure their future under climate change is a controversial strategy for preventing extinction. While the debate over the wisdom of this strategy continues, such introductions are already taking place. Previous frameworks for analysing the decision to introduce have lacked a quantifiable management objective and mathematically rigorous problem formulation. Here we develop the first rigorous quantitative framework for deciding whether or not a particular introduction should go ahead, which species to prioritize for introduction, and where and how to introduce them. It can also be used to compare introduction with alternative management actions, and to prioritise questions for future research. We apply the framework to a case study of tuatara (Sphenodon punctatus) in New Zealand. While simple and accessible, this framework can accommodate uncertainty in predictions and values. It provides essential support for the existing IUCN guidelines by presenting a quantitative process for better decision-making about conservation introductions.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Animal Distribution / ethics
  • Animals
  • Climate Change*
  • Computer Simulation
  • Conservation of Natural Resources / methods
  • Conservation of Natural Resources / trends*
  • Decision Making
  • Ecosystem
  • Extinction, Biological
  • Forecasting
  • Lizards / physiology*
  • Models, Statistical*
  • New Zealand
  • Population Dynamics
  • Uncertainty

Grants and funding

This work was supported by the Australian Research Council (www.arc.gov.au) through Australian Post-Doctoral Fellowships to TMR and EM-M, and the Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions (to HPP, TGM, and EM-M). It was also supported by the Australian Government's National Environmental Research Program (to HPP, TGM, and EM-M), and the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (through a Julius Career award to TGM). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.