Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Safety in numbers? Supplanting data quality with fanciful models in wildlife monitoring and conservation

  • Brief Communication
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ecologists and conservation biologists seem increasingly attracted to sophisticated modelling approaches, sometimes at the expense of attention to data quality and appropriateness of fieldwork design. This dissociation may lead to a loss of perspective promoting biological unrealities as conclusions, which may be used in conservation applications. We illustrate this concern by focusing on recent attempts to estimate population size of breeding birds at large scales without any explicit testing of the reliability of the predictions through comparison with direct counts. Disconnection of analysts from “nature” can lead to cases of biological unrealities such as that used here to illustrate such trends. To counter this risk, we encourage investment in well-rounded scientists or more collaborative, multi-disciplinary teams capable of integrating sophisticated analyses with in-depth knowledge of the natural history of their study subjects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andersen DE (2007) Survey techniques. In: Bird DM, Bildstein KL (eds) Raptor research and management techniques. Hancock House Publishers, Blaine, pp 89–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Araújo MB, Guilhaumon F, Neto DR, Pozo I, Calmaestra R (2011). Impactos, vulnerabilidad y adaptación al cambio climático de la biodiversidad española. 2 Fauna de vertebrados. Dirección General de Medio Natural y Política Forestal. Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, y Medio Rural y Marino, Madrid, p 640. http://www.ibiochange.mncn.csic.es/atlascc/. Accessed 26 Dec 2011

  • Baillie JEM, Collen B, Amin R, Akcakaya HRA, Butchart SHM, Brummitt N, Meagher TR, Ram M, Hilton-Taylor C, Mace GM (2008) Towards monitoring global biodiversity. Conserv Lett. doi:10.1111/j.1755-263X.2008.00009.x

    Google Scholar 

  • Belovsky GE, Botkin DB, Crowl TA, Cummins KW, Franklin JF, Hunter MLJ, Joern A, Lindenmayer DB, Macmahon JA, Margules CR, Scott JM (2004) Ten suggestions to strengthen the science of ecology. Bioscience 54:345–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardiel I (2006) El Milano Real en España. II censo nacional. SEO/BirdLife, Madrid

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrascal L, Palomino D (2008) Las aves comunes reproductoras en España. Población en 2004–2006. SEO/BirdLife, Madrid

    Google Scholar 

  • Dayton P (2003) The importance of the natural sciences to conservation. Am Nat 162:1–13

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Doak DF, Mills LS (1994) A useful role for theory in conservation. Ecology 75:615–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elphick CS (2008) How you count counts: the importance of methods research in applied ecology. J Appl Ecol 45:1313–1320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Futuyma D (1998) Wherefore and whither the naturalist? Am Nat 151:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene HW (2005) Organisms in nature as a central focus for biology. Trends Ecol Evol 20:23–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood JJD (2007) Citizens, science and bird conservation. J Ornithol 148:77–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthery FS (2008a) A primer on natural resource science. Texas University Press, College Station

    Google Scholar 

  • Guthery FS (2008b) Statistical ritual versus knowledge accrual in wildlife science. J Wildl Manag 72:1872–1875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardey J, Crick H, Wernham C, Riley H, Etheridge B, Thompson D (2009) Raptors: a field guide to surveys and monitoring. The Stationery Office, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris JBC, Haskell DG (2007). Land cover sampling biases associated with roadside bird surveys. Avian Conserv Ecol 2(2):12. http://www.ace-eco.org/vol2/iss2/art12/. Accessed 15 Feb 2012

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrando S, Brotons L, Estrada J, Pedrocchi V (2008) The catalan common bird survey (SOCC): a tool to estimate species population numbers. Revista Catalana d′Ornitologia 24:138–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindenmayer DB, Likens GE (2009) Adaptive monitoring: a new paradigm for long-term research and monitoring. Trends Ecol Evol 24:482–486

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Murgui E (2011) How many common breeding birds are there in Spain? A comparison of census methods and national population size estimates. Ardeola 58:343–364

    Google Scholar 

  • Murtaugh PA (2007) Simplicity and complexity in ecological data analysis. Ecology 88:56–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Newson SE, Woodburn RJW, Noble DG, Baillie SR, Gregory RD (2005) Evaluating the breeding bird survey for producing national population size and density estimates. Bird Study 52:42–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newton I, Davies PE, Moss D (1994) Philopatry and population growth of red kites Milvus milvus, in Wales. Proc R Soc B 257:317–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols JD, Williams BK (2006) Monitoring for conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 21:668–673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Norman D, Harris RJ, Newson SE (2011) Producing regional estimates of population size for common and widespread breeding birds from national monitoring data. Bird Study. doi:10.1080/00063657.2011.623766

    Google Scholar 

  • Palomino D,Valls J (2011) Las rapaces forestales en España. Población reproductora en 2009–2010 y método de censo. SEO/BirdLife, Madrid. http://www.seo.org/media/docs/36mono.pdf. Accessed 16 Aug 2011

  • Pereira HM, Cooper HD (2006) Towards the global monitoring of biodiversity change. Trends Ecol Evol 21:123–129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock KH, Nichols JD, Simonst TR, Farnsworth GL, Bailey L, Sauer JR (2002) Large scale wildlife monitoring studies: statistical methods for design and analysis. Environmetrics 13:105–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roviralta F, Tello J, Alcobendas G, Lopez-Septiem JL Traverso JM, Pontón Ó (2004) Censo de abejero europeo (Pernis apivorus) en la Comunidad de Madrid, 2003. Anuario Ornitológico de Madrid 2003, p 86–93

  • SCV (2003) Censo de parejas reproductoras de milano real (Milvus milvus) en la Comunidad de Madrid, año 2001. http://es.geocities.com/scv_conservacion/milanoreal/milanoreal.html. Accessed 16 Dec 2011

  • Sierdsema H, Van Loon EE (2008) Filling the gaps: using count survey data to predict density distribution patterns and estimate population sizes. Revista Catalana d′Ornitologia 24:88–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavecchia G, Adrover J, Muñoz Navarro A, Pradel R (2011) Modelling mortality causes in longitudinal data in the presence of tag loss: application to raptor poisoning and electrocution. J Appl Ecol. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02074.x

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson WL (2004) Sampling rare and elusive species. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Viñuela J, Martí R, Ruiz A (1999) El Milano Real en España, Monografía nº6. SEO/BirdLife, Madrid

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson EO (2004) On human nature. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuberogoitia I, Castillo I, Zabala J, Iraeta A, Azkona A (2011) Population trends of diurnal forest raptors in Biscay. In: Zuberogoitia I, Martínez JE (eds) Ecology and conservation of european forest-dwelling raptors. Diputación Foral de Bizkaia, Bilbao, pp 70–80

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Evolutionary Ecology, National Museum of Natural History (CSIC), c/José Gutierrez Abascal 2, 28006, Madrid, Spain

    Guillermo Blanco & Oscar Frías

  2. Department of Conservation Biology, Estación Biológica de Doñana (CSIC), c/Americo Vespucio s/n, 41092, Seville, Spain

    Fabrizio Sergio & Fernando Hiraldo

  3. Department of Applied Biology, University Miguel Hernández, Ctra. Beniel Km 3.2, 33012, Orihuela, Alicante, Spain

    José A. Sanchéz-Zapata, Juan M. Pérez-García & Francisco Botella

  4. Sociedad para la Conservación de los Vertebrados, Avda. de los Pinos 17, 5ºB, 28914, Leganés, Madrid, Spain

    Félix Martínez & Federico Roviralta

  5. Estudios Medioambientales Icarus S.L., Pintor Sorolla 6, 1ºC, 26007, Logroño, La Rioja, Spain

    Iñigo Zuberogoitia

  6. Departamento de Ecología e Hidrología, Universidad de Murcia, Campus de Espinardo, 30100, Espinardo, Murcia, Spain

    José E. Martínez

Authors
  1. Guillermo Blanco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fabrizio Sergio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. José A. Sanchéz-Zapata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Juan M. Pérez-García
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Francisco Botella
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Félix Martínez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Iñigo Zuberogoitia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Oscar Frías
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Federico Roviralta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. José E. Martínez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Fernando Hiraldo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guillermo Blanco.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blanco, G., Sergio, F., Sanchéz-Zapata, J.A. et al. Safety in numbers? Supplanting data quality with fanciful models in wildlife monitoring and conservation. Biodivers Conserv 21, 3269–3276 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-012-0344-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-012-0344-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation