TY - JOUR
T1 - Achieving conservation outcomes in plant mitigation translocations
T2 - the need for global standards
AU - Doyle, Chantelle A.T.
AU - Abeli, Thomas
AU - Albrecht, Matthew A.
AU - Bellis, Joe
AU - Colas, Bruno
AU - Dalrymple, Sarah E.
AU - Ensslin, Andreas
AU - Espejo, Jaime
AU - Erftemeijer, Paul L.A.
AU - Julien, Margaux
AU - Lewandrowski, Wolfgang
AU - Liu, Hong
AU - Moehrenschlager, Axel
AU - Ooi, Mark K.J.
AU - Reynolds, Deborah M.
AU - Schatz, Bertrand
AU - Sild, Mari
AU - Wills, Timothy J.
AU - Papuga, Guillaume
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, The Author(s).
PY - 2023/9
Y1 - 2023/9
N2 - Many countries have legislation intended to limit or offset the impact of anthropogenic disturbance and development on threatened plants. Translocations are often integral to those mitigation policies. When translocation is used exclusively to mitigate development impacts, it is often termed a ‘mitigation translocation.’ However, both the terminology and processes vary regarding interpretation and application, resulting in inconsistent standards, often leading to poorly planned and implemented projects. These mitigation projects rarely achieve the intended ‘no net loss’ of protected species due to issues with timelines and procedures that result in the mortality of translocated individuals. Instead, such projects are often process driven, focused on meeting legislative requirements which enable the development to proceed, rather than meaningful attempts to minimise the ecological impact of developments and demonstrate conservation outcomes. Here, we propose to reframe mitigation translocations as conservation driven, ensuring best practice implementation and hence, a quantified no net loss for impacted species. These methods include redefining the term mitigation translocation to include conservation objectives and outlining issues associated with the mitigation translocation processes worldwide. We also nominate global standards of practice to which all proposals should adhere, to ensure each project follows a trajectory towards quantified success, with genuine impact mitigation. These proposed standards focus on building efficient translocation plans and improving governance to facilitate a transition from project centred to ecology-driven translocation. Employment of these standards is relevant to development proponents, government regulators, researchers, and translocation practitioners and will increase the likelihood of conservation gains within the mitigation translocation sector.
AB - Many countries have legislation intended to limit or offset the impact of anthropogenic disturbance and development on threatened plants. Translocations are often integral to those mitigation policies. When translocation is used exclusively to mitigate development impacts, it is often termed a ‘mitigation translocation.’ However, both the terminology and processes vary regarding interpretation and application, resulting in inconsistent standards, often leading to poorly planned and implemented projects. These mitigation projects rarely achieve the intended ‘no net loss’ of protected species due to issues with timelines and procedures that result in the mortality of translocated individuals. Instead, such projects are often process driven, focused on meeting legislative requirements which enable the development to proceed, rather than meaningful attempts to minimise the ecological impact of developments and demonstrate conservation outcomes. Here, we propose to reframe mitigation translocations as conservation driven, ensuring best practice implementation and hence, a quantified no net loss for impacted species. These methods include redefining the term mitigation translocation to include conservation objectives and outlining issues associated with the mitigation translocation processes worldwide. We also nominate global standards of practice to which all proposals should adhere, to ensure each project follows a trajectory towards quantified success, with genuine impact mitigation. These proposed standards focus on building efficient translocation plans and improving governance to facilitate a transition from project centred to ecology-driven translocation. Employment of these standards is relevant to development proponents, government regulators, researchers, and translocation practitioners and will increase the likelihood of conservation gains within the mitigation translocation sector.
KW - Compensation
KW - Conservation translocation
KW - Environmental legislation
KW - Environmental offsetting
KW - Plant conservation
KW - Plant ecology
KW - Salvage
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85158124309&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11258-023-01310-8
DO - 10.1007/s11258-023-01310-8
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85158124309
SN - 1385-0237
VL - 224
SP - 745
EP - 763
JO - Plant Ecology
JF - Plant Ecology
IS - 9
ER -