Science Advisory Report 2010/061

A Complement to the 2005 Framework for Developing Science Advice on Recovery Targets in the Context of the Species At Risk Act

Summary

• The present advice aims to provide guidance for developing science advice through the RPA process, and more specifically science advice supporting the development of population and distribution objectives within SARA recovery strategies. It advances guidance that was provided five years ago based on limited experience in implementing SARA (DFO, 2005). Users of this 2010 advice are nevertheless encouraged to consult the 2005 advisory report as certain aspects dealt with in that report are not covered here.
• The RPA process may explore different management scenarios corresponding to a range of possible expected outcomes (i.e. goals) for species recovery strategies. Such outcomes shall include (1) improving the species’ status to “special concern”, but may also include (2) improving status to “not at risk”, (3) ensuring species survival through on-going management, and (4) significantly reducing the probability of extinction or extirpation. Population (including abundance) and distribution objectives associated with such outcomes would be developed.
• Management scenarios should be evaluated even for species whose survival is not technically or biologically feasible.  The capacity for lowering the probability of extirpation or extinction through specific management measures should be assessed.
• Key client sectors shall provide the required information and guidance for scenarios to be examined in the RPA.
• If a wildlife species has a range that extends outside Canadian jurisdiction, the rescue effect of populations outside Canada should be factored into the viability assessment of the Canadian population and in setting population and distribution objectives, while recognizing the purpose of SARA is to prevent extirpation from Canada.
• Even when data are limited, population and distribution objectives must be explored based on the best available information, including results of quantitative analyses, in light of the criteria and associated thresholds used by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) to assign species’ status.
• If available data and techniques are insufficient for enumeration/evaluation of population abundance, population objectives could be set using another metric - e.g. positive population trend over a given time period, productivity level required for a population increase, etc...
• Population and distribution objectives should be developed for each wildlife species (also referred to as Designatable Units by COSEWIC) and should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and results-focused, and time-bound (SMART). Focusing on results means that population and distribution objectives must be established within the context of the overall recovery goal for the species.
• If available, results of species-specific numerical analyses should be used to support the development of population and distribution objectives in preference to rules of thumb, provided that with associated uncertainty, analyses still yield useful results.
• For wildlife species for which there is credible scientific information suggesting the existence of demographically discrete populations, this population complexity shall be stated explicitly.  Distinct objectives may be developed for each discrete population, but in any event this situation must be taken into account in setting population and distribution objectives.
• For species where limited range is one of the key criteria used in the determination of risk status, expansion beyond recent historical range may be a scenario explored in the RPA, if requested by the client.
• It may be possible to attempt recovery of an extirpated wildlife species (e.g. at the population level) with individuals from another wildlife species (i.e. another population of the same biological species).  This scenario may be explored in the RPA, if requested by the client.
• When a given wildlife species at risk has hybridized with another wildlife species, a hybridized population could be included in population and distribution objectives; however, pure populations should be considered first in setting population and distribution objectives, and in the monitoring of progress towards the objectives.
• RPAs should qualify the ecological implications associated with different recovery scenarios and associated population and distribution objectives.
• If a multi-species or ecosystem recovery strategy is contemplated, population and distribution objectives may need to take into account ecological relationships between species at risk covered by the strategy and ecological functions that need to be preserved.

Complete document (PDF, 77 KB)

Accessibility Notice

This document is available in PDF format. If the document is not accessible to you, please contact the Secretariat to obtain another appropriate format, such as regular print, large print, Braille or audio version.