Browsing by Author "Turner, Andrew A."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    In a rough spot: Declines in Arthroleptella rugosa calling densities are explained by invasive pine trees
    (Wiley, 2023) Angus, Oliver; Turner, Andrew A.; Measey, John
    Basing conservation interventions on evidence is important for justifying their associated cost and gauging their effectiveness. For amphibians, the number of studies available to support conservation action plans is limited. Here, we sought to determine the effect of invasive pine trees on the calling densities of a Critically Endangered frog species, endemic to the Western Cape province in South Africa. The Rough Moss frog, Arthroleptella rugosa, is an anuran restricted to a small patch of fire-driven fynbos habitat prone to invasion by Cluster Pines, Pinus pinaster. We use acoustic spatially explicit capture–recapture methods to estimate frog densities at multiple sites (n = 12) over ten years. Sites were clas-sified as invaded or uninvaded by P. pinaster, and this information, along with the time since the last fire, were used as explanatory variables for frog density in a generalized linear mixed model. Frog densities were found to be significantly affected by P. pinaster invasion status.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Progress towards the control of invasive alien species in the Cape Floristic Region’s protected areas
    (Springer, 2025) Turner, Andrew A.; van Wilgen, Brian W.; Cole, Nicholas S
    This paper assesses progress towards the control of biological invasions in 18 protected areas (PAs) covering 677 584 ha in the Cape Floristic Region (CFR), and whether progress has been sufficient to achieve Target 6 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. We used eight indicators for assessing the inputs (quality of the regulatory framework, money spent and planning coverage for species and protected areas), outputs (species and protected areas treated), and outcomes (effectiveness of species and protected area treatments) of management. The estimated money spent over 13 years (2010–2022) was ZAR 976 million, or ZAR 75 million per year. Management plans for PAs were assessed as adequate over 78.5% of the area, but only six out of 226 regulated invasive species had species-specific control plans in place. A total of 567 alien species occurred in the CFR’s PAs, 226 of which were regulated species (i.e. species that had to be controlled), 126 (55.8%) of which received some management. Spending was highly skewed, with over 60% of all funding spent on trees and shrubs in the genus Acacia. Management efforts reached 24% of the land within the CFR’s protected areas, with higher coverage in national parks (60%) than in provincial nature reserves (9%). Management effectiveness was assessed as either permanent, effective or partially effective for 29 species (20 due to biological control), and ineffective for 25; for the remainder, there was either no management or effectiveness could not be evaluated. We conclude that some progress has been made with respect to controlling invasive alien species in the CFR, but that insufficient and declining funding remains a significant barrier to effective management. To increase efficiency, it will be necessary to secure additional funding from more diversified sources, make more use of biological control and prescribed fire, and regularly monitor the outcomes of management.