Applied Filters
- Science Applications Forum
- Conservation and SustainabilityRemove filter
Journal Title
Topics
Publication Date
Author
- Jacob, Aerin L3
- Cooke, Steven J2
- Favaro, Brett2
- Nowlan, Linda2
- Otto, Sarah P2
- Palen, Wendy J2
- Whitton, Jeannette2
- Angel, Eric1
- Baron, Nancy E1
- Benestan, Laura1
- Bennett, Joseph R1
- Bennett, Nathan J1
- Bittick, Sarah Joy1
- Boyce, Daniel G1
- Braun, Douglas C1
- Burnett, Nicholas J1
- Burton, Cole1
- Chan, Kai M A1
- Collins, Lynda1
- Coristine, Laura E1
- Darimont, Chris1
- Debertin, Allan1
- Dey, Cody1
- Dinning, Kristin M1
- Donaldson, Michael R1
Access Type
1 - 8of8
Save this search
Please login to be able to save your searches and receive alerts for new content matching your search criteria.
Filters
You do not have any saved searches
- OPEN ACCESS
- Michael R. Donaldson,
- Nicholas J. Burnett,
- Douglas C. Braun,
- Cory D. Suski,
- Scott G. Hinch,
- Steven J. Cooke, and
- Jeremy T. Kerr
While greater research on threatened species alone cannot ensure their protection, understanding taxonomic bias may be helpful to address knowledge gaps in order to identify research directions and inform policy. Using data for over 10 000 animal species listed on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List, we investigated taxonomic and geographic biodiversity conservation research trends worldwide. We found extreme bias in conservation research effort on threatened vertebrates compared with lesser-studied invertebrates in both terrestrial and aquatic habitats at a global scale. Based on an analysis of common threats affecting vertebrates and invertebrates, we suggest a path forward for narrowing the research gap between threatened vertebrates and invertebrates. - OPEN ACCESS
- Katrine Turgeon,
- Sarah C.F. Hawkshaw,
- Kristin M. Dinning,
- Brady K. Quinn,
- Danielle N. Edwards,
- Catarina Wor,
- Courtenay E. Parlee,
- Allan Debertin,
- Mike Hawkshaw,
- Benjamin W. Nelson,
- Fan Zhang,
- Laura Benestan,
- Eric Angel,
- Bryan L. Morse, and
- Daniel Mombourquette
Fisheries involve complex problems not easily addressed by a single discipline, methodology, or set of stakeholders. In 2010, the Canadian Fisheries Research Network (CFRN) was initiated to increase fisheries research capacity in Canada through interdisciplinary and inclusive research collaborations. As post-graduate students in the network, we reflected on the type of training necessary to tackle fisheries problems and reviewed opportunities available at Canadian universities to receive such training. This paper presents an overview of fisheries education currently available in Canada, reflects on our training within the CFRN, and proposes improvements to fisheries education and research. Our review of the subject revealed few dedicated fisheries programs, limited interdisciplinary programs, few specialized fisheries training programs, and a heavy reliance on academic supervisors to secure research opportunities in fisheries. In contrast, the CFRN enhanced our training by deliberately focusing on tools and techniques to address fisheries issues, providing venues to foster interdisciplinary and inclusive research collaborations, and exposing the realities of stakeholder collaborations. We call for post-graduate-level fisheries education and research that is interdisciplinary, collaborative, and inclusive to produce well-rounded scientists and managers, and we suggest ways that universities, researchers, and funding agencies can incorporate these themes into fisheries education and research. - OPEN ACCESS
- Laura E. Coristine,
- Aerin L. Jacob,
- Richard Schuster,
- Sarah P. Otto,
- Nancy E. Baron,
- Nathan J. Bennett,
- Sarah Joy Bittick,
- Cody Dey,
- Brett Favaro,
- Adam Ford,
- Linda Nowlan,
- Diane Orihel,
- Wendy J. Palen,
- Jean L. Polfus,
- David S. Shiffman,
- Oscar Venter, and
- Stephen Woodley
Biodiversity is intrinsically linked to the health of our planet—and its people. Yet, increasingly, human activities are causing the extinction of species, degrading ecosystems, and reducing nature’s resilience to climate change and other threats. As a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Canada has a legal responsibility to protect 17% of land and freshwater by 2020. Currently, Canada has protected ∼10% of its terrestrial lands, requiring a marked increase in the pace and focus of protection over the next three years.Given the distribution, extent, and geography of Canada’s current protected areas, systematic conservation planning would provide decision-makers with a ranking of the potential for new protected area sites to stem biodiversity loss and preserve functioning ecosystems. Here, we identify five key principles for identifying lands that are likely to make the greatest contribution to reversing biodiversity declines and ensuring biodiversity persistence into the future. We identify current gaps and integrate principles of protecting (i) species at risk, (ii) representative ecosystems, (iii) intact wilderness, (iv) connectivity, and (v) climate refugia. This spatially explicit assessment is intended as an ecological foundation that, when integrated with social, economic and governance considerations, would support evidence-based protected area decision-making in Canada. - OPEN ACCESSThe concept of sustainable phosphorus is studied in depth around the world, as the scientific community largely agrees that the non-renewable phosphorus reserves in the form of phosphorite ore must be used judiciously. Unfortunately, many developed countries, including Canada, have yet to implement a phosphorus management plan. The Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland can be heralded as success stories of effective, committed, cross-sector phosphorus management. We examine factors that contributed to their success and consider how these may be transferred to Canada. We also consider Canadian geographic and research factors and contrast the Canadian policy environment and phosphorus recycling efforts with those in the EU. Finally, we analyze active Canadian and North American phosphorus interest groups and seek to determine why their collective efforts have yet to coalesce around tangible action. Canada produces phosphorus fertilizer from imported deposits of phosphate rock. Canada produces potassium fertilizer from its rich potash mines, making it a global power in nutrient production. It is imperative that Canada earns a respected leadership role in efficient global phosphorus and potassium nutrient management and recycling.
- OPEN ACCESS
- Jonathan W. Moore,
- Linda Nowlan,
- Martin Olszynski,
- Aerin L. Jacob,
- Brett Favaro,
- Lynda Collins,
- G.L. Terri-Lynn Williams-Davidson, and
- Jill Weitz
Gaps between environmental science and environmental law may undermine sound environmental decision-making. We link perspectives and insights from science and law to highlight opportunities and challenges at the environmental science–law interface. The objectives of this paper are to assist scientists who wish to conduct and communicate science that informs environmental statutes, regulations, and associated operational policies (OPs), and to ensure the environmental lawyers (and others) working to ensure that these statutes, regulations, and OPs are appropriately informed by scientific evidence. We provide a conceptual model of how different kinds of science-based activities can feed into legislative and policy cycles, ranging from actionable science that can inform decision-making windows to retrospective analyses that can inform future regulations. We identify a series of major gaps and barriers that challenge the successful linking of environmental science and law. These include (1) the different time frames for science and law, (2) the different standards of proof for scientific and legal (un)certainty, (3) the need for effective scientific communication, (4) the multijurisdictional (federal, provincial, and Indigenous) nature of environmental law, and (5) the different ethical obligations of law and science. Addressing these challenges calls for bidirectional learning among scientists and lawyers and more intentional collaborations at the law–science interface. - OPEN ACCESS
- Alana R. Westwood,
- Sarah P. Otto,
- Arne Mooers,
- Chris Darimont,
- Karen E. Hodges,
- Chris Johnson,
- Brian M. Starzomski,
- Cole Burton,
- Kai M.A. Chan,
- Marco Festa-Bianchet,
- Shaun Fluker,
- Sumeet Gulati,
- Aerin L. Jacob,
- Dan Kraus,
- Tara G. Martin,
- Wendy J. Palen,
- John D. Reynolds, and
- Jeannette Whitton
British Columbia has the greatest biological diversity of any province or territory in Canada. Yet increasing numbers of species in British Columbia are threatened with extinction. The current patchwork of provincial laws and regulations has not effectively prevented species declines. Recently, the Provincial Government has committed to enacting an endangered species law. Drawing upon our scientific and legal expertise, we offer recommendations for key features of endangered species legislation that build upon strengths and avoid weaknesses observed elsewhere. We recommend striking an independent Oversight Committee to provide recommendations about listing species, organize Recovery Teams, and monitor the efficacy of actions taken. Recovery Teams would evaluate and prioritize potential actions for individual species or groups of species that face common threats or live in a common area, based on best available evidence (including natural and social science and Indigenous Knowledge). Our recommendations focus on implementing an adaptive approach, with ongoing and transparent monitoring and reporting, to reduce delays between determining when a species is at risk and taking effective actions to save it. We urge lawmakers to include this strong evidentiary basis for species recovery as they tackle the scientific and socioeconomic challenges of building an effective species at risk Act. - OPEN ACCESS
- Audrey Turcotte,
- Natalie Kermany,
- Sharla Foster,
- Caitlyn A. Proctor,
- Sydney M. Gilmour,
- Maria Doria,
- James Sebes,
- Jeannette Whitton,
- Steven J. Cooke, and
- Joseph R. Bennett
Since the implementation of the Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA) in 2003, deficiencies in SARA and its application have become clear. Legislative and policy inconsistencies among responsible federal agencies and the use of a subjective approach for prioritizing species protection lead to taxonomic biases in protection. Variations in legislation among provinces/territories and the reluctance of the federal government to take actions make SARA’s application often inefficient on nonfederally managed lands. Ambiguous key terms (e.g., critical habitat) and disregard for legislated deadlines in many steps impede the efficacy of SARA. Additionally, the failure to fully recognize Indigenous knowledge and to seek Indigenous cooperation in the species protection process leads to weaker government accountability, promotes inequity, and leads to missed opportunities for partnerships. New legislative amendments with well-defined and standardized steps, including an automatic listing process, a systematic prioritization program, and clearer demands (e.g., mandatory threshold to trigger safety net/emergency order) would improve the success of species at risk protection. Moreover, a more inclusive approach that brings Indigenous representatives and independent scientists together is necessary for improving SARA’s effectiveness. These changes have the potential to transform SARA into a more powerful act towards protecting Canada’s at-risk wildlife. (The graphical abstract follows.) - OPEN ACCESSClimate change affects virtually all marine life and is increasingly a dominant concern for fisheries, reinforcing the need to incorporate climate variability and change when managing fish stocks. Canada is expected to experience widespread climate-driven impacts on its fisheries but does not yet have a clear adaptation strategy. Here, we provide an overview of a project we are developing, the Climate Adaptation Framework for Fisheries, to address this need and support climate adaptation in Canadian marine fisheries. The framework seeks to quantitatively and flexibly evaluate species, fishing infrastructure, and the management and operation of fisheries to assess climate vulnerability comprehensively and provide outputs that can support climate adaptation planning across different sectors, agencies, and stakeholders. This new framework should allow future climate scenarios to be evaluated and identify actionable climate vulnerabilities related to the management of fisheries, creating a systematic approach to supporting climate adaptation in Canada’s fisheries.