Search

Indicator species approaches are widely used in conservation as a shortcut to measuring attributes of species and ecosystems. A variety of indicator species concepts are in use and are applicable to a range of situations. Indicator species are increasingly being used in environmental reporting to evaluate trends in environmental attributes quantitatively. We use the most recent State of the Environment report from New Zealand as a case study to evaluate: (1) how indicator species concepts are being applied to environmental reporting and (2) the selection of individual species as indicators. At present indicator species used in environmental reporting in New Zealand reflect biases in national monitoring data towards forest-dwelling, terrestrial vertebrates that are vulnerable to predation by introduced mammals. Scientific literature generally supports links between selected taxa and the aspect of ecosystem health they are purported to indicate, but their roles as long-term indicators of environmental health have yet to be evaluated. A primary goal of State of the Environment reporting is to set a benchmark against which environmental outcomes can be monitored over time; thus it is recognized that taxa reported should represent a broader range of environmental attributes. However, selection of taxa for environmental reporting is severely constrained by limited national species monitoring data. A strategic approach to national measurement, storage and analysis of long-term monitoring data is required to support selection of representative species for environmental reporting. We support current initiatives to select taxa for future measurement and reporting in an objective, transparent manner and recommend that they encompass representation of: (1) taxonomic diversity, (2) ecosystem types, (3) key environmental pressures and (4) threat status.

In their book Effective Ecological Monitoring, David Lindenmayer and Gene Likens set out to demonstrate the importance of long-term ecological monitoring programmes, as well as presenting what they propose to be a new paradigm, ?adaptive monitoring?. In a brief introduction, they set up a framework for discussing ecological monitoring by arguing that monitoring can be categorized into one of three main types, curiosity-driven (passive) monitoring, mandated monitoring or question-driven monitoring, the latter of which they strongly suggest has the most merit. The book is then structured around three main chapters, ?Why monitoring fails?, ?What makes long-term monitoring effective?? and ?The problematic, the effective and the ugly ? some case studies?, and rounded off with a concluding chapter.