A gap analysis of reconnaissance surveys assessing the impact of the 2019–20 wildfires on vertebrates in Australia. (June 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Southwell, Darren; Wilkinson, David; Hao, Tianxiao; Valavi, Roozbeh; Smart, Adam; Wintle, Brendan
• Is Part Of: Biological conservation. Volume 270(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-06
• Subjects: Monitoring -- Prioritisation -- Species distribution models -- Threatened species -- Wildfire -- Zonation; Conservation of natural resources -- Periodicals; Nature conservation -- Periodicals; Ecology -- Periodicals; Environment -- Periodicals; Environmental Pollution -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 333.9516
• DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109573
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0006-3207

Abstract

Abstract: Large-scale disturbance events are forecast to increase in severity and frequency due to climate change. On-ground surveys are crucial for assessing the immediate impact of disturbances on biodiversity and for informing management responses. However, there are few examples where quantitative tools have guided post-disturbance survey design. In this study, we integrated species distribution modelling and spatial prioritisation to identify taxonomic and spatial gaps in surveys for 92 priority vertebrates 6 months after the 2019–20 wildfires in Australia. We predicted the pre-fire distribution of priority species, mapped locations of post-wildfire surveys that were already underway, and integrated this information with remotely-sensed fire severity maps in the tool, Zonation, to prioritise locations for new surveys across three fire severity classes (unburnt, low severity, high severity). Our results suggest that 6 months after the wildfires, surveys by government agencies had targeted 17 of 20 mammals (85%); 11 of 17 birds (65%); 10 of 17 frogs (59%); 10 of 23 reptiles (43%) and 5 of 17 fish (29%). We developed species distribution models for 63 of these species after collating 120, 118 occurrence records from 6 data repositories. By predicting their distribution before the wildfires, we most efficiently identified gaps in survey effort while ensuring representation across species and fire severity classes. Our analysis provided an important 'stocktake' of the response effort to the 2019–20 wildfires in Australia and helped inform the allocation of government-funded wildfire recovery programs. Although we focus on wildfire, our approach could assess gaps in survey effort following any large-scale disturbance. Highlights: Post-fire survey effort was inconsistent across taxonomic groups. There was little national coordination of post-fire surveys. The representation of surveys could be drastically increased with small amounts of additional effort. Many species and regions are yet to be surveyed after the 2019–20 megafires.