Population Viability Analysis for Bird Conservation: Prediction, Heuristics, Monitoring and Psychology

References

• Adams, J. 1995. Risk. UCL Press, London.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, M.B. 1983. Sensitivity analysis, calibration and validation. Pp 425–447 in Mathematical Modelling of Water Quality: Streams, Lakes, and Reservoirs. Ed. G.T. Orlob. International Series on Applied Systems Analysis, Vol. 12. Wiley, Chichester.
   Google Scholar
• Beissinger, S.R. & Westphal, M.I. 1998. On the use of demographic models of population viability in endangered species management. Journal of Wildlife Management 62, 821–841.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breininger, D.R., Burgman, M.A. & Stith, B.M. 1999. Influence of habitat, catastrophes, and population size on extinction risk of Florida Scrub-Jay populations. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27, 810–822.
   Google Scholar
• Breininger, D.R., Burgman, M.A., Akçakaya, H.R. & O'Connell, M.A. (in press). Use of metapopulations in conservation planning. In, Concepts and Applications of Landscape Ecology in Biological Conservation. Ed. K. Gutzwiller. Springer-Verlag, New York.
   Google Scholar
• Brooker, L.C. & Brooker, M.G. 1994. A model for the effect of fire and fragmentation on the population viability of the Splendid Fairy-Wren. Pacific Conservation Biology 1, 344–358.
   Google Scholar
• Boyce, M.S. 1992 Population viability analysis. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23, 481–506.
   Google Scholar
• Brook, B.W. & Kikkawa, J. 1998. Examining threats faced by island birds: a population viability analysis on the Capricorn Silvereye using long-term data. Journal of Applied Ecology 35, 491–503.
   Google Scholar
• Brook, B.W., O'Grady, J.J., Chapman, A.P., Burgman, M.A., Akçakaya, H.R. & Frankham, R. 2000. How accurate are the predictions of population viability analysis for endangered species conservation? Nature 404, 385–387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgman, M.A. 2000. Are Australian standards for risk analysis good enough? Conserving snails and managing genetically modified plants in fragmented landscapes. Australian Biologist 13, 17–29.
   Google Scholar
• Burgman, M.A., Ferson, S. & Akçakaya, H.R. 1993. Risk assessment in conservation biology. Chapman and Hall, London.
   Google Scholar
• Burgman, M.A., Ades, P., Hickey, J., Williams, M., Davies, C. & Maillardet, R. 1998. Methodological guidelines for the utility and statistical validity of survey and monitoring programs. Report to the Forest and Wood Products Research and Development Corporation, Bond University, Queensland.
   Google Scholar
• Capen, E.C. 1976. The difficulty of assessing uncertainty. Journal of Petroleum Technology, August, 1976, 843–850.
   Google Scholar
• Drechsler, M., Burgman, M.A. & Menkhorst, P.W. 1998. Uncertainty in population dynamics and its consequences for the management of the Orange-bellied Parrot Neophema chrysogaster. Biological Conservation 84, 269–281.
   Google Scholar
• Fairweather, P.G. 1991. Statistical power and design requirements for environmental monitoring. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 42, 555–567.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferson, S. 1996. What Monte Carlo methods cannot do. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 2, 990–1007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischhoff, B. 1995. Risk perception and communication unplugged: twenty years of progress. Risk Analysis 15, 137–145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S.L. & Keeney, R.L. 1981. Acceptable Risk. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P. & Lichtenstein, S. 1982. Lay foibles and expert fables in judgements about risk. American Statistician 36, 240–255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frey, H.C. & Rhodes, D.S. 1996. Characterizing, simulating, and analyzing variability and uncertainty: an illustration of methods using an air toxics emissions example. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 2, 762–797.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, R.H. 1995. Aspects of power analysis in environmental monitoring. pp. 173–182 in Statistics in Ecology and Environmental Monitoring. Eds D.J. Fletcher & B.J.F. Manly. Otago Conference Series No. 2. University of Otago Press, Dunedin.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. 1984. Choices, values and frames. American Psychologist 39, 342–347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kavanagh, R.P. 1997. Ecology and management of large forest owls in south-eastern Australia. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Sydney.
   Google Scholar
• Mapstone, B.D. 1995. Scaleable decision rules for environmental impact studies: Effect size, Type I and Type II Errors. Ecological Applications 5, 401–410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCallum, H., Kikkawa, J. & Catterall, C. 2000. Density dependence in an island population of silvereyes. Ecology Letters 3, 95–100.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, M.A. 1996. Extinction dynamics of the Helmeted Honeyeater: effects of demography, stochasticity, inbreeding and spatial structure. Ecological Modelling 85, 151–163.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy, M.A., Webster, A., Loyn, R.H. & Lowe, K.W. 1999. Uncertainty in assessing the viability of the Powerful Owl Ninox strenua in Victoria, Australia. Pacific Conservation Biology 5, 144–154.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan, M.G. 1993. Risk analysis and management. Scientific American 269, 32–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peterman, R.M. 1990. Statistical power analysis can improve fisheries research and management. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 47, 2–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Possingham, H.P., Lindenmayer, D.B. & Norton, T.W. 1993. A framework for improved threatened species management using Population Viability Analysis. Pacific Conservation Biology 1, 39–45.
   Google Scholar
• Rohrmann, B. 1998. The risk notion: epistemological and empiricial considerations. pp. 39–46 in Integrated Risk Assessment. Eds M.G. Stewart & R.E. Melchers. Balkema, Rotterdam.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, B.L. 1995. The reliability of using population viability analysis for risk classification of species. Conservation Biology 9, 551–558.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. 1974. Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 211, 453–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. 1982. Belief in the law of small numbers. pp. 23–30 in Judgement Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Eds D. Kahneman, P. Slovic & A. Tversky. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
   Google Scholar
• Zeckhauser, R.J. & Viscusi, W.K. 1990. Risk within reason. Science 248, 559–564.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar