Search

Abstract Addressing threats to biodiversity from pest species is a global challenge. One such challenge is to mitigate the impact of an overabundant Australian songbird, the noisy miner Manorina melanocephala, on woodland birds. The overabundance of noisy miners is listed as a key threatening process under federal biodiversity legislation, but current understanding of where and how noisy miner populations can be managed to yield conservation benefits is unclear. We evaluated the effectiveness of noisy miner removal across 12 treatment areas totaling 3913 ha and nine control areas totaling 1487 ha important for the critically endangered regent honeyeater Anthochaera phrygia. Removal of noisy miners significantly reduced their densities in all but one of the treatment areas. In 10 of the 12 treatment areas, noisy miner densities remained below an impact threshold of 0.65–0.83 birds ha−1 for at least 3 to more than 12 months. The percentage of suitable noisy miner habitat in the surrounding landscape was not a strong predictor of noisy miner management success. Regent honeyeaters occupied six treatment areas, nesting successfully in four. The abundance of other songbirds increased post‐miner removal in seven areas, decreased in three, and was mixed in two. Data from the control areas showed some variation in songbird numbers was independent of noisy miner management. We conclude that noisy miners can be managed in areas of high conservation value for a minimum cost of AUD $10 ha−1. Larger treatment areas may be more important than the broader landscape context in maintaining long‐term noisy miner suppression. Standardized, long‐term monitoring is crucial to identify not only the drivers of pest species recolonization but also locations where threats from pests on endangered species can be addressed effectively while minimizing animal welfare and financial costs.

Abstract Controlling problem species for conservation can be fraught, particularly when native species are subject to lethal control. The noisy miner (Manorina melanocephala), has been the target of numerous lethal control efforts. Outcomes of these noisy miner removals have varied substantially, so identifying the circumstances under which they are effective is essential for ethical and effective management. We compiled data for all identified noisy miner removals (n = 45), including both permit‐based and unofficial removals. We investigated whether methodological and ecological factors explained the effectiveness of removals in reducing noisy miner density or increasing woodland bird richness and abundance. The only predictor of any measure of success was time between first and final culls which was positively related to reduction in noisy miner density. Surprisingly, despite removals mainly failing to reduce noisy miner density to below a threshold above which noisy miners impact smaller birds, woodland birds usually still increased. Disrupted social structure as noisy miners recolonized may have led to less effective aggressive exclusion of small birds. Further removals may not need to reduce noisy miner density to below this threshold to benefit woodland birds, but consistent monitoring and reporting would support better evaluation of effectiveness and correlates of success.

Abstract The role of a conservation scientist has never been more challenging. Amidst the rapid degradation occurring across Earth's natural ecosystems and the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services, conservation scientists must learn new and effective ways to build trust and engage with the wider community. Here, we discuss the potential utility of a particular communication technique, Nonviolent Communication (also known as Compassionate Communication or Collaborative Communication), in conservation science. Nonviolent Communication is a structured form of communication, developed in the 1960s by Dr. Marshall Rosenberg, that seeks to foster interpersonal understanding and connection through communication of judgment‐free observations, recognition of people's feelings, needs and values, and requests for specific actions to meet those needs. It has delivered positive outcomes in diverse fields such as prisoner reform, health science, and social work, and holds great promise for conservation applications. While there is no single communication strategy that resonates with all people, we argue that Nonviolent Communication could be used by conservation scientists and practitioners when communicating with colleagues, politicians, and the general public about important and sometimes contentious environmental issues.