ArticlePDF Available

Abstract and Figures

The prosperity and well‐being of human societies relies on healthy ecosystems and the services they provide. However, the biodiversity crisis is undermining ecosystems services and functions. Vultures are among the most imperiled taxonomic groups on Earth, yet they have a fundamental ecosystem function. These obligate scavengers rapidly consume large amounts of carrion and human waste, a service that may aid in both disease prevention and control of mammalian scavengers, including feral dogs, which in turn threaten humans. We combined information about the distribution of all 15 vulture species found in Europe, Asia, and Africa with their threats and used detailed expert knowledge on threat intensity to prioritize critical areas for conserving vultures in Africa and Eurasia. Threats we identified included poisoning, mortality due to collision with wind energy infrastructures, and other anthropogenic activities related to human land use and influence. Areas important for vulture conservation were concentrated in southern and eastern Africa, South Asia, and the Iberian Peninsula, and over 80% of these areas were unprotected. Some vulture species required larger areas for protection than others. Finally, countries that had the largest share of all identified important priority areas for vulture conservation were those with the largest expenditures related to rabies burden (e.g., India, China, and Myanmar). Vulture populations have declined markedly in most of these countries. Restoring healthy vulture populations through targeted actions in the priority areas we identified may help restore the ecosystem services vultures provide, including sanitation and potentially prevention of diseases, such as rabies, a heavy burden afflicting fragile societies. Our findings may guide stakeholders to prioritize actions where they are needed most in order to achieve international goals for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development.
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Contributed Paper
Priority areas for conservation of Old World vultures
Andrea Santangeli ,1,2 Marco Girardello,3Evan Buechley,4, 5 Andre Botha,6
Enrico Di Minin ,2,7, 8 and Atte Moilanen9,10
1The Helsinki Lab of Ornithology, Finnish Museum of Natural History, University of Helsinki, Helsinki FI-00014, Finland
2Helsinki Institute of Sustainability Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki FI-00014, Finland
3cE3c - Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes/Azorean Biodiversity Group and Universidade. dos Ac¸ores Depto
de Ciˆ
encias e Engenharia do Ambiente, Angra do Hero´
ısmo, Ac¸ores, PT-9700-042, Portugal
4HawkWatch International, Salt Lake City, UT 84106, U.S.A.
5Department of Biology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, U.S.A.
6Endangered Wildlife Trust, Modderfontein 1609, South Africa
7Digital Geography Lab, Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, FI-00014, Finland
8School of Life Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 4000, South Africa
9Finnish Museum of Natural History Luomus, University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 17, Helsinki, FI-00014, Finland
10Department of Geosciences and Geography, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, FI-00014, Finland
Abstract: The prosperity and well-being of human societies relies on healthy ecosystems and the services
they provide. However, the biodiversity crisis is undermining ecosystems services and functions. Vultures are
among the most imperiled taxonomic groups on Earth, yet they have a fundamental ecosystem function. These
obligate scavengers rapidly consume large amounts of carrion and human waste, a service that may aid in
both disease prevention and control of mammalian scavengers, including feral dogs, which in turn threaten
humans. We combined information about the distribution of all 15 vulture species found in Europe, Asia, and
Africa with their threats and used detailed expert knowledge on threat intensity to prioritize critical areas for
conserving vultures in Africa and Eurasia. Threats we identified included poisoning, mortality due to collision
with wind energy infrastructures, and other anthropogenic activities related to human land use and influence.
Areas important for vulture conservation were concentrated in southern and eastern Africa, South Asia, and
the Iberian Peninsula, and over 80% of these areas were unprotected. Some vulture species required larger
areas for protection than others. Finally, countries that had the largest share of all identified important pri-
ority areas for vulture conservation were those with the largest expenditures related to rabies burden (e.g.,
India, China, and Myanmar). Vulture populations have declined markedly in most of these countries. Restor-
ing healthy vulture populations through targeted actions in the priority areas we identified may help restore
the ecosystem services vultures provide, including sanitation and potentially prevention of diseases, such as
rabies, a heavy burden afflicting fragile societies. Our findings may guide stakeholders to prioritize actions
where they are needed most in order to achieve international goals for biodiversity conservation and sustainable
development.
Keywords: African-Eurasian vultures, biodiversity benefits, ecosystem balance, ecosystem service, scavenger
conservation, Zonation software
´
Areas Prioritarias para la Conservaci´
on de Buitres del Viejo Mundo
Resumen: La prosperidad y el bienestar de la sociedad humana dependen de ecosistemas sanos y de los
servicios ambientales que ´
estos proporcionan. Sin embargo, la crisis de biodiversidad est´
a afectando a los servicios
ambientales y sus funciones. Los buitres se encuentran entre los grupos taxon´
omicos con mayor amenaza sobre
el planeta, a pesar de tener una funci´
on fundamental en los ecosistemas. Estos carro˜
neros obligados consumen
email andrea.santangeli@helsinki.fi
Article impact statement: Eighty percent of areas important for Old World vulture conservation are unprotected and in southern and eastern
Africa, South Asia, and Iberia.
Paper submitted April 7, 2018; revised manuscript accepted January 11, 2019.
This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction
in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
1056
Conservation Biology, Volume 33, No. 5, 1056–1065
C
2019 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology.
DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13282
Santangeli et al. 1057
r´
apidamente grandes cantidades de carro˜
na y desechos humanos, un servicio que puede ayudar en la prevenci´
on
de enfermedades y en el control de mam´
ıferos carro˜
neros, incluyendo a los perros ferales, los cuales pueden ser
un peligro para los humanos. Combinamos la informaci´
on sobre la distribuci´
on de las 15 especies de buitres
en Europa, Asia y ´
Africa con las amenazas que presentan y usamos el conocimiento detallado de expertos
sobre la intensidad de las amenazas para priorizar las ´
areas cr´
ıticas para la conservaci´
on de buitres en ´
Africa
y en Eurasia. Las amenazas que identificamos incluyeron el envenenamiento, la mortalidad por colisiones con
infraestructura e´
olica y otras actividades antropog´
enicas relacionadas con el uso de suelo y la influencia humana.
Las ´
areas importantes para la conservaci´
on de buitres estuvieron concentradas en el sur y el este de ´
Africa, el
sur de Asia y la Pen´
ınsula Ib´
erica, y m´
as del 80% de estas ´
areas no contaban con protecci´
on. Algunas especies
de buitres requirieron ´
areas m´
as grandes para su protecci´
on que otras especies. Finalmente, los pa´
ıses que
tuvieron la mayor porci´
on de todas las ´
areas prioritarias importantes e identificadas para la conservaci´
on de
buitres tambi´
en fueron aquellos con los mayores gastos relacionados con la carga de la rabia (por ejemplo,
India, China y Myanmar). Las poblaciones de buitres han declinado marcadamente en la mayor´
ıa de estos pa´
ıses.
La restauraci´
on de poblaciones sanas de buitres por medio de acciones enfocadas en las ´
areas prioritarias que
identificamos puede ayudar a restaurar los servicios ambientales que proporcionan los buitres, incluyendo el
saneamiento y la prevenci´
on potencial de enfermedades, como la rabia, una carga pesada que aflige a las sociedades
fr´
agiles. Nuestros resultados pueden guiar a los interesados hacia la priorizaci´
on de acciones en donde m´
as se
necesitan para poder alcanzar los objetivos internacionales para la conservaci´
on de la biodiversidad y el desarrollo
sustentable.
Palabras Clave: balance ambiental, beneficios de la biodiversidad, buitres africanos euroasi´
aticos, conservaci´
on
de carro˜
neros, servicio ambiental, software Zonation
:,
,
,,,
,
,
,
,80% ,
,
(), 
,,
,
,:;:
:-, Zonation ,,,,
Introduction
The health and well-being of human societies heav-
ily relies on the services that healthy ecosystems pro-
vide, which in turn depend on biodiversity (Bennett
et al. 2015). However, current unprecedented biodi-
versity loss can undermine the foundations of ecosys-
tems resilience and associated services (Cardinale et al.
2012). The agenda for averting biodiversity decline has
been internationally formalized through the Convention
on Biological Diversity’s 2020 Strategic Plan for Biodi-
versity (Aichi targets; Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity 2014), which is linked to the UN
2030 Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations
2015).
Not all species are equally important in maintaining
ecosystems resilience (D´
ıaz et al. 2006), and species
groups have widely different population statuses and
trends (Butchart et al. 2004). As the sole obligate scav-
engers, vultures comprise a unique functional guild
among vertebrates and play an unparalleled role in
maintaining ecosystem balance (Buechley & S¸ekercio˘
glu
2016). Yet, they are among the species most threatened
with extinction (Buechley & S¸ekercio˘
glu 2016; O’Bryan
et al. 2018). By efficiently consuming carrion (Ogada et al.
2012), vultures may help control the spread of disease
and of facultative scavenger species that can cause hu-
man injury or death, such as feral dogs (Markandya et al.
2008; Ogada et al. 2012). Vultures also play a key role
in terms of waste-disposal services and nutrient cycling
(e.g., Gangoso et al. 2013; Mole´
on et al. 2014). Replacing
these services could entail substantial costs and added
greenhouse gas emissions, for example, from incinera-
tion of carcasses (Markandya et al. 2008; Morales-Reyes
et al. 2017; O’Bryan et al. 2018). Vultures are threat-
ened by many anthropogenic drivers, such as poisons
and other dietary toxins, direct persecution, collision
with infrastructures and electrocution, disturbance, and
Conservation Biology
Volume 33, No. 5, 2019
1058 Old World Vultures
habitat loss and degradation (Buechley & S¸ekercio˘
glu
2016; Botha et al. 2017). More regionally, for example,
in Europe, vultures are also threatened by food short-
age following sanitary regulations (Margalida & Mole´
on
2016) or abandonment of traditional farming practices
(e.g., Olea & Mateo-Tom´
as 2009). The extent of these
threats and their consequences on vulture population
persistence varies across the world’s regions (Buechley &
S¸ekercio˘
glu 2016; Ogada et al. 2016b; Botha et al. 2017);
threats are most intense in the Old World, where most
vulture species are at high risk of extinction (Buechley &
S¸ekercio˘
glu 2016).
Preventing extinctions of Old World vultures is pos-
sible, as examples from Europe and Asia demonstrate
(Chaudhry et al. 2012; Moreno-Opo & Margalida 2013).
However, given an accelerating decline of vulture popula-
tions (Buechley & S¸ekercio˘
glu 2016; Ogada et al. 2016b),
there is an urgent need for action. Recently, a Multi-
Species Action Plan to Conserve African-Eurasian Vul-
tures (MSAP) has been formalized (Botha et al. 2017) that
lists effective actions to conserve African-Eurasian vul-
tures and brings them to the top of the international con-
servation policy agenda. Although commitments to act
and knowledge about threats have been established, lim-
ited resources impair wide-scale implementation. There-
fore, there is a need to identify priority areas for vulture
conservation through conservation planning approaches
(Moilanen et al. 2005). Such approaches require in-
formation about the distributions of biodiversity and
associated threats; however, such information is often
lacking (Joppa et al. 2016).
We combined spatially explicit data sets of relevant
threats with vulture distributions to provide novel and
timely insight into priority areas for vulture conserva-
tion across the Old World. We first identified priority
areas where vultures and major threats, such as poison-
ing, wind energy infrastructure, and other human pres-
sures, co-occur. Second, we assessed the relationship
between these priority areas and geopolitical (e.g., gov-
ernance) and biodiversity conservation characteristics of
the countries hosting those priorities. Governance and
other national indicators are strong correlates of national
investment into biodiversity conservation (Amano et al.
2017; Baynham-Herd et al. 2018). Third, we explored
the relationship between vulture priority areas identified
and the national incidence of rabies mortality and asso-
ciated costs. This was assessed because the decline of
vultures has been linked with simultaneous increases in
numbers of feral dogs and other mammalian scavengers
(Markandya et al. 2008; Ogada et al. 2012) that spread
diseases such as rabies. Potential linkage between loss
of vultures and increased human disease burden under-
scores a potential synergistic opportunity for conserv-
ing vultures while helping control disease (Markandya
et al. 2008; Hampson et al. 2015; O’Bryan et al.
2018).
Methods
Vulture Distributions
We focused on all vulture species of Africa and Eurasia,
excluding the palm nut vulture (Gypohierax angolen-
sis), which is not an obligate scavenger and faces differ-
ent threats compared with other vultures (Buechley &
S¸ekercio˘
glu 2016). Thus, we examined the 15 species
that are the focus of the MSAP (Botha et al. 2017). We
combined different data sources and used geostatistics to
derive spatial layers of vulture distributions and threats.
Details on how different spatial layers were derived are
given in Supporting Information.
We extracted the resident and breeding range of each
of the 15 vultures (BirdLife International and NatureServe
2015) and refined occurrence within those ranges with
a statistical species distribution modeling (SDM) frame-
work. We combined vulture occurrence data from the
Global Biodiversity Information Facility and from the
African Raptor DataBank from 1980 onward (Supporting
Information). We filtered out duplicates and occurrences
closer than 30 km from each other to minimize spatial
autocorrelation (Aiello-Lammens et al. 2015). Vulture ob-
servations were then correlated with environmental vari-
ables (e.g., climate, land-cover, and topography [details
given in Supporting Information]) with SDMs (including
generalized linear models, random forest, boosted regres-
sion trees, and Maxent). Finally, we used an ensemble of
the above SDMs (Urban et al. 2016) to derive consensus
occurrence probabilities within the breeding and resi-
dent distribution range of each species.
Unintentional and Intentional Poisoning
A major threat to vultures is unintentional poisoning, in
which vultures are killed as a side-effect when farmers
use poison to kill carnivores following livestock depreda-
tion (Mateo-Tomas et al. 2012; Buechley & S¸ekercio˘
glu
2016; Ogada et al. 2016b). To a lesser degree and in
specific regions (e.g., Europe), poisoning may also occur
when hunters attempt to regulate competitor carnivore
populations (Mateo-Tomas et al. 2012). Overall, human–
carnivore conflict is a strong determinant of unintentional
poisoning risk (Mateo-Tomas et al. 2012; Santangeli et al.
2016a).
Therefore, we derived a map showing the intensity
of potential human–carnivore conflict across the study
region by interacting distributions of carnivores (IUCN
2017) with those of selected livestock (Robinson et al.
2014) matched by body mass (i.e., carnivores were
matched with potential livestock prey species). Matching
was done by searching literature for reported predation
of each carnivore species on each of 3 livestock cate-
gories (poultry, including duck and chicken; small stock,
including sheep, goats, and pigs; large stock, including
Conservation Biology
Volume 33, No. 5, 2019
Santangeli et al. 1059
cattle and buffalo) (Supporting Information). This liter-
ature search suggested that poultry could be predated
on by any carnivore, small stock by carnivores 2kg,
and large stock by carnivores 10 kg. We then multi-
plied the density of each of the 3 livestock classes with
the average per-pixel (10 ×10 km grid cell) body mass
of selected carnivores, resulting in 3 maps (Supporting
Information). We used average body mass of selected
carnivores because we were interested in a community-
weighted mean trait value of the carnivores composing
a specific assembly, following, for example, D´
ıaz et al.
(2007). To obtain an overall index of human–carnivore
conflict, we averaged the above 3 maps, weighted by the
natural log of the body mass of each livestock class (Sup-
porting Information). By weighting the maps by the log
of the body mass of each livestock class, we aimed at as-
signing a higher weight to the interaction between larger
stock and selected carnivores. This is associated with
higher economic losses (a cow has a much higher eco-
nomic value than a goat (details given in Supporting Infor-
mation), implying a stronger trigger for poisoning and el-
evated threat intensity because larger poisoned carcasses
are more likely consumed by vultures. Finally, we visually
validated the resulting priority areas for vulture conser-
vation (based on the 15 vulture species and poisoning
layers) with independent data on known poisoning loca-
tions (details given in Supporting Information).
Across Sub-Saharan Africa, a recently uncovered threat
to vultures is represented by poachers intentionally poi-
soning vultures to eliminate their sentinel function (i.e.,
indicating to authorities where poaching has occurred by
circling over carcasses) (Ogada et al. 2016a; Botha et al.
2017). To map this threat, we identified the herbivore
and carnivore species targeted by poachers based on in-
formation on the occurrence and frequency of ungulates
and carnivores found poisoned from 2007 onward (En-
dangered Wildlife Trust and the Peregrine Fund 2017).
This search suggested that the carcasses of medium- to
large-sized herbivores (e.g., body mass of 53 kg for im-
pala [Aepyceros melampus] and above) and 2 carnivores
(lion [Panthera leo] and leopard [Panthera pardus]) are
poisoned to intentionally kill vultures; some species were
targeted more often than others. Because not all poison-
ing incidences have been detected and reported in the
database, we conservatively selected all Cetartiodactyla
and Perissodactyla species of Africa with body mass
20 kg and the African elephant (Loxodonta africana),
lion, and leopard (Ogada et al. 2016a). This resulted in
72 species, to each of which we assigned a conservative
weight based on the log of the frequency of its occur-
rence in the African wildlife poisoning database (Support-
ing Information). Thus, species that are more often re-
ported in the database had a comparatively higher weight
in driving the intentional poisoning map compared with
species reported once or never (the latter 2 equally re-
ceived the lowest weight) (Supporting Information). We
then used the International Union for Conservation of
Nature (IUCN 2017) range maps of the 72 target species
of intentional poisoning and the species-specific weight
to derive a single map of sentinel poisoning risk. In do-
ing so, we calculated the average of the species-specific
weight of intentional poisoning across all species present
in each 10 ×10 km pixel within the range of the study
area in Africa (Supporting Information).
Wind Collision Risk
We used Pogson et al.’s (2013) map of wind-power po-
tential as a proxy for exposure to collision with wind
turbines, a major threat to vultures (Pearce-Higgins &
Green 2014; Ogada et al. 2016b; Botha et al. 2017). This
map approximates installed and planned national wind
energy capacity (REN21 2017; Santangeli et al. 2018) and
has been used to evaluate impacts of wind energy ex-
pansion on biodiversity (Santangeli et al. 2016b, 2016c,
2018).
Human Influence Index
Collision with and electrocution on energy infrastructure,
human disturbance, habitat degradation, and decline in
food availability are further important threats to vultures
(Botha et al. 2017). These 5 threats are all linked to
human influence and were captured by a single proxy
layer: the Global Human Influence Index (GHII) (Wildlife
Conservation Society and Center for International Earth
Science Information Network 2005). The GHII combines
information on human population pressure, land use, in-
frastructure, and accessibility (details given in Supporting
Information).
Treatment of Expert Knowledge
The priority of each of the above threats to vultures varies
regionally and has been recently quantified as part of the
MSAP by experts using standardized classes of critical,
high, and medium or low priority (Botha et al. 2017). We
incorporated this information by assigning a weight of 2
to critical threats, 1.5 to high threats, and 1 to medium
to low threats by region (Botha et al. 2017) (Supporting
Information). We then refined the spatial threat layers
by multiplying their original values with the assigned
threat-specific regional weight (Supporting Information).
Because GHII represents a proxy for 5 threats, the sum
of weights of the 5 threats per region was used. The
resulting 4 spatial layers would ultimately represent the
spatial distribution of threats, weighted by priority, as
assessed by experts (Supporting Information).
Conservation Biology
Volume 33, No. 5, 2019
1060 Old World Vultures
Spatial Prioritization Analyses
We used the software Zonation version 4.0 (Moilanen
et al. 2014) to identify priority areas for vulture conserva-
tion across Africa and Eurasia. Heuristically expressed, we
sought to identify areas where many vultures occur and
threats are most intense. It is important that the threats
incorporated here can be reduced with specific actions
(e.g., Woodroffe et al. 2005; Northrup & Wittemyer 2013;
Botha et al. 2017; Murn & Botha 2018). Zonation devel-
ops spatial priority rankings based on the distributions
of biodiversity features (e.g., vultures) and, optionally,
on threats or costs. It is an important characteristic of
Zonation that complementarity is accounted for (i.e., a
balanced representation across all features is maintained
through the priority ranking) (Moilanen et al. 2014).
We used the core area method (CAZ; Moilanen et al.
2005) as the ranking method, with the interpretation
that high-priority areas should include locally high-
quality areas for all species individually (Moilanen et al.
2005). All feature layers (vulture distributions and their
threats) were rasterized to the resolution of 10 ×10
km, and each threat layer was rescaled to between 0
and 1 prior to analyses. The adopted resolution was
deemed most appropriate given the available distribu-
tion data on vultures and their threats. Commission
errors (i.e., predicting presence incorrectly) are mini-
mized for the vulture distributions because these species’
ranges are well known and because they have been re-
fined here with a robust SDM approach (details given in
Supporting Information). Similarly, the underlying data
used to derive the threat layers had a resolution of 10
×10 km or higher or an appropriate original resolution
given that used here (Montesino Pouzols et al. 2014). In
all analyses, each vulture species was given a specific
weight based on its IUCN Red List status following Di
Minin et al. (2016) (weights: 1, least concern; 2, near
threatened; 3, vulnerable, 4, endangered, 5, critically en-
dangered; none, data deficient).
We first ran 4 separate prioritization analyses, each
including the distributions of the 15 vultures and with
each of the 3 threats included in turn: unintentional and
intentional poisoning together, wind energy, and GHII.
Next, we ran a holistic scenario in which all 3 threats and
the 15 vultures were included. For all scenarios, threat
layers were weighted so that their aggregate weight
equaled the aggregate weight of all vulture species, fol-
lowing Montesino Pouzols et al. (2014). This ensured
a balanced representation between areas important for
vulture conservation and areas where threats are most in-
tense. These prioritization analyses deliver maps showing
the priority areas for vulture conservation where threats
are most intense. We further extracted the 30% of priority
areas most important (i.e., all pixels with ranked value
>0.7 [Fig. 1]) (rationale below) for vulture conservation
(hereafter, vulture priority areas) (rationale discussed be-
low), converted them into vector files, and calculated
the area of overlap with the global network of pro-
tected areas (PAs) (i.e., IUCN protected-area categories
I–VI obtained from UNEP-WCMC and IUCN [2017]) and
important bird and biodiversity areas (IBAs) (BirdLife In-
ternational 2014). We also identified the number of IBAs
in danger (i.e., under high pressure in 2018) (BirdLife
International 2014) that at least partly overlapped with
the above vulture priority areas. Robustness to the un-
certainty associated with the species distributions and
selected threat layers, as well as to changes in the rel-
ative weight assigned to each feature, was assessed by
means of sensitivity analyses (details given in Supporting
Information).
National-Level Analyses
We calculated the national share of the vulture priority
areas (pixels with rank >0.7) (Fig. 1) following Butchart
et al. (2015), Santangeli et al. (2018), and Santangeli et al.
(2016b). Although the top 30% threshold used here is
somewhat arbitrary, it represents a balanced trade-off
between allowing enough protection for vulture ranges
and the reality of resource limitations and societal con-
straints on implementation. We used this value as the
response in a beta regression model (because the re-
sponse is a percentage) aiming to quantify its relationship
with national socioeconomic, governance, and environ-
mental indicators (Di Minin et al. 2016; Amano et al.
2017; Baynham-Herd et al. 2018), as well as national
incidence of and costs related to rabies (Hampson et al.
2015) (Supporting Information). Prior to analyses, we
log transformed and rescaled all predictor variables. A
variance inflation analysis (VIF) run on the set of predic-
tors indicated that country size and human development
index had high VIF values (i.e., >3) and were therefore
excluded. The remaining predictors (governance, per-
cent terrestrial PAs, rabies costs, and incidences) were
largely uncorrelated (VIF <2). We applied multimodel
selection and averaging based on the best models (with
AIC <4) (Burnham & Anderson 2002) to quantify the
relative importance and relationship of each predictor
with the response variable with the package MuMIn in
R version 3.0.3 (Barto´
n 2014). Model validation was per-
formed by inspecting the residuals. There was no sign of
violation of model assumptions. We repeated the above
analyses with national share of vulture priority areas as
the response variable, calculated by considering in turn
the top 20% and 40% of priority areas.
Results
The prioritization analysis indicated the highest priority
areas for vulture conservation across the Old World were
concentrated in southern and eastern Africa, southern
Conservation Biology
Volume 33, No. 5, 2019
Santangeli et al. 1061
Europe, Central and East Asia
West Asia
East Africa
West and Central Africa
North Africa
South Asia
Southern A
Conservation priority:
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
frica
South East Asia
Figure 1. Priority areas for vulture conservation identified through spatial conservation prioritization across
Africa and Eurasia (gray, outside breeding and resident range of any of the 15 vultures considered). Priorities are
ranked from highest (red) to lowest (green). The abrupt shift in priorities across some country borders is due to
the different weights assigned to threats within 8 subregions (black lines) based on expert knowledge (Supporting
Information).
Figure 2. Continental (black) and
regional (gray) share of the 30% of
priority areas most important for
vulture conservation (red areas in
Fig. 1). Geographic regions
considered are those defined in the
Multi-Species Action Plan to
Conserve African-Eurasian Vultures
(Botha et al. 2017) (Supporting
Information).
Conservation Biology
Volume 33, No. 5, 2019
1062 Old World Vultures
Figure 3. Zonation performance
curves showing the relation between
conservation coverage of the range
of each vulture species (y-axis: 1, all
species’ ranges protected) and
hypothetical proportions of the
landscape protected for vultures
(x-axis: 1, entire study area
protected) (gray, 30% of priority
areas most important for vulture
conservation). Species-specific
conservation coverage can be
determined from the y-axis, where
the rightmost edge of the gray area
(x =0.3) intersects the
species-specific performance curve.
Europe, the Arabian Peninsula, and the Indian subcon-
tinent (Fig. 1). About 95% of the top-ranked 30% pri-
ority areas for vulture conservation in the region fell
within Africa (51.6%) and Asia (43.5%), and within these
southern Africa, East Africa, and South Asia each sup-
ported over 20% of the top 30% ranked areas for vulture
conservation (Fig. 2). The high-priority areas for vulture
conservation as shown in Figure 1 are typically affected
by multiple threats, particularly poisoning and other
threats associated with human influence (Supporting In-
formation). The above results were robust (i.e., had low
sensitivity to the uncertainty associated with the vulture
distributions and selected threats or to changes in the
weight assigned to each feature) (Supporting Informa-
tion). About one-fifth of the top 30% vulture priority areas
shown in Figure 1 were covered by the global PA network
(19%), whereas 12% of them were covered by IBAs. More-
over, 38 of the IBAs overlapping vulture priority areas had
been classified by BirdLife International as being in dan-
ger, largely owing to high pressures to develop these ar-
eas. Species-specific performance curves showed the in-
crease in (conservation) coverage of each vulture species’
distribution as a function of area selected (Fig. 3). These
curves clearly indicated that protection efforts will not
be similarly effective for all species. Some species, such
as Gyps tenuirostris and Gyps coprotheres,wouldreach
almost full range coverage if just 30% of the landscape
were protected. Others, such as Aegypius monachus and
Gypaetus barbatus, would require a much larger fraction
of land to be protected for their ranges to be adequately
covered (Fig. 3). These differences between species were
explained by different distribution sizes and overlaps of
species distribution: small overlapping ranges can be pro-
tected much easier than large nonoverlapping ranges.
We found that countries harboring the highest share
of vulture priority areas were those that incurred the
Figure 4. Relationship between proportion of
national share of vulture priority areas (i.e., the 30%
of priority areas most important for vulture
conservation; red areas in Fig. 1) and the total
national costs related to the burden of rabies ($US in
2010 per year on a log scale; dots, separate countries;
black line, relationship as predicted by the beta
regression model [see Table 1 and Methods]).
highest economic costs, but not human mortality inci-
dences, associated with the burden of rabies (Fig. 4), and
those with good governance (Table 1). Analyses based on
the top 20% and 40% priority areas confirmed the above
results.
Discussion
By combining vulture distributions with their threats
and using regional expert knowledge on threat inten-
sity, we produced the first holistic map of priority areas
Conservation Biology
Volume 33, No. 5, 2019
Santangeli et al. 1063
Table 1. Fit of a beta regression model quantifying the relationship
between national share of the 30% of priority areas most important for
vulture conservation (red areas in Fig. 1) and 5 national-level variables
(predictors described in Supporting Information).
Variable βSE Z p
Intercept 4.69 0.14 32.46 <0.001
Governance 0.24 0.11 2.13 0.033
Terrestrial protected
areas (%)
0.12 0.11 1.10 0.273
Rabies costs 0.72 0.10 7.16 <0.001
Rabies incidence 0.03 0.11 0.28 0.782
for vulture conservation across Africa and Eurasia. We
found that high-priority areas were mostly concentrated
in southern and eastern Africa, South Asia, and the Iberian
Peninsula. These areas were largely unprotected. We
found major differences in the species-specific perfor-
mance curves, highlighting that some species would re-
quire larger areas for protection than others. Finally, we
showed that countries holding the largest share of pri-
ority areas for vulture conservation were those that also
paid the highest costs from rabies burden (such as India,
China, and Myanmar).
Priority areas for vulture conservation identified here
represented large areas that were clustered within spe-
cific regions and countries. Although this aggregation
of priorities may represent a challenge due to the dis-
proportionate responsibility of some countries toward
vulture conservation, it may also present an opportunity,
due to the limited number of countries and stakeholders
involved. Actions to revert the major threats to vultures
are broadly known (Buechley & S¸ekercio˘
glu 2016; Botha
et al. 2017). Although some of these actions, such as
rapid response interventions on poisoning events and
supplementary feeding stations, may reduce adverse im-
pacts from threats such as poisoning (Cortes-Avizanda
et al. 2016; Murn & Botha 2018), these are short-term
solutions only. Fundamentally, actions of wide temporal
and spatial scope and impact are needed. Among these,
design and strong enforcement of targeted legislation
would help restrict the distribution and use of drugs
and poisons that threaten vultures (Ogada 2014). Sim-
ilarly, strict regulations to ensure proper environmental
impact assessments and planning would help reduce risks
from wind energy and other infrastructure development
in areas important for vulture conservation. For region-
ally localized threats, locally targeted measures could
play a key role. For example, the Protection Areas for
the Feeding of Necrophagous Species of European In-
terest (EC 142/2011) program in the Iberian Peninsula
allows farmers to leave livestock carcasses in the field,
providing food for vultures (Morales-Reyes et al. 2017).
This practice was banned following bovine spongiform
encephalopathy in Europe. Ultimately, it will be impor-
tant to identify the relevant local stakeholders, such as
communities, nongovernmental organizations, govern-
ment institutions, private, and state-owned companies,
and address the threats with a participatory, community-
engaged approach.
Our results also highlight that restricting conservation
efforts toward vulture priority areas as identified here
(Fig. 1) may be effective for some species but inadequate
for others (Fig. 3). Species with a restricted distribution,
such as G. tenuirostris and G. coprotheres, would benefit
from actions that target threats inside the vulture priority
areas. Conversely, widespread species, such as G. bar-
batus and A. monachus, will require action across very
large areas.
We found a positive relationship between national gov-
ernance and the share of vulture priority areas. This indi-
cates that vulture priority areas are more concentrated
in countries with good governance. National govern-
ments can play a key role for vulture conservation, as
the Asian case indicates (e.g., Prakash et al. 2012). Over-
all, governance levels may drive the cost-effectiveness
of conservation (Amano et al. 2017), and the potential
implications of this should be considered when defin-
ing actions targeting vulture priority areas. To this end,
local and national stakeholder participation will be key
to designing national- and regional-level actions that will
be feasible to implement and cost-effective under each
specific context, governance level included.
We found correlative evidence that countries investing
large financial resources to counter rabies also held the
largest shares of vulture priority areas. In many of these
areas, vulture populations have declined markedly over
the past decades, leading to a loss of their waste removal
and potential disease regulating services (Pain et al. 2008;
Ogada et al. 2012; Buechley & S¸ekercio˘
glu 2016). By
rapidly consuming carrion, vultures reduce access to car-
rion and direct contact between mammalian scavengers
(Ogada et al. 2012) and thus have been theorized to help
mitigate the spread of diseases such as rabies (Markandya
et al. 2008). Spread of rabies leads to increased livestock
and human mortality and increased public health expen-
diture, causing high rabies-related economic costs in Asia
and Africa (Hampson et al. 2015). The positive correlation
between national economic spending for rabies and vul-
ture priority areas that we found may highlight a potential
opportunity for restoring vulture populations that could
simultaneously result in national savings from reduced
rabies burden. However, the extent and value of potential
disease control provided by vultures needs to be better
demonstrated with empirical evidence (O’Bryan et al.
2018). At present, this evidence is largely correlative and
localized, thereby preventing firm conclusions about the
link (or lack thereof) between vultures and disease, in-
cluding rabies. Localized evidence is available, for exam-
ple, from a study in India, which reported that when the
national vulture populations dropped by 99% from 1992
to 2003, feral dog numbers increased and so did cases
Conservation Biology
Volume 33, No. 5, 2019
1064 Old World Vultures
of human dog bites and rabies (Markandya et al. 2008).
This occurred despite widespread and very expensive
dog sterilization programs over the period (Markandya
et al. 2008).
Although there has been recent progress to bring vul-
ture conservation to the top of the international conserva-
tion science and policy agenda (Botha et al. 2017), there
is now an urgent need to mobilize funds and implement
action. Our findings can help guide direct action where
it is needed most. Saving vultures is not only a matter of
conservation ethics and principle, but also about saving
a unique functional guild that provides key ecosystem
services (Markandya et al. 2008; Buechley & S¸ekercio˘
glu
2016). No other functional guild is dominated by a group
of so few and yet so endangered species.
Acknowledgments
A.S. and E.D.M. are funded by the Academy of Finland
(grants 307909 and 296524) and E.R.B is funded by Hawk-
Watch International and National Geographic Society.
We thank C. Mclure and 3 other anonymous referees for
valuable comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript.
For providing African vulture observation data included
in the ARDB (African Raptor DataBank), we particularly
thank C.R. Barlow, Birds of The Gambia, E. Brouhaugh,
Sabi, N. and L. Baker, and U. Lieden, T. Wacher, and J.
Brouwer, who manage the West African Bird DataBase,
and T. Wacher (Sahara Conservation Fund and Zoological
Society London), who collected most of the WABDaB
vulture data for Chad, and A. Harouna, T. Rabeil,
T. Wacher, and No´
e Conservation, who collected data
for Niger.
Supporting Information
Additional methods (Appendix S1); count of vulture oc-
currence data (Appendix S2); list of land-cover categories
(Appendix S3); SDM model performance (Appendix S4);
list of carnivore species and attributes (Appendix S5);
interactions of large stock, small stock, and poultry
with carnivores (Appendix S6–8); livestock–carnivore in-
teractions (Appendix S9); validation of poisoning layer
(Appendix S10); list of species used for intentional poi-
soning layer (Appendix S11); intentional poisoning layer
(Appendix S12); threat intensity by region (Appendix
S13); threat weights by region (Appendix S14); descrip-
tion of national predictors (Appendix S15); priority ar-
eas from intermediate scenarios (Appendix S16); vali-
dation priority areas (Appendix S17); and sensitivity of
priorities to weight changes (Appendix S18) are avail-
able online. The authors are solely responsible for the
content and functionality of these materials. Queries
(other than absence of the material) should be di-
rected to the corresponding author. Priority maps of
the holistic scenario and alternative intermediate sce-
narios are available from https://vultureconservation.
shinyapps.io/vulturepriorities/.
Literature Cited
Aiello-Lammens ME, Boria RA, Radosavljevic A, Vilela B, Anderson RP.
2015. spThin: an R package for spatial thinning of species oc-
currence records for use in ecological niche models. Ecography
38:541–545.
Amano T, Sz´
ekely T, Sandel B, Nagy S, Mundkur T, Langendoen T,
Blanco D, Soykan CU, Sutherland WJ. 2017. Successful conservation
of global waterbird populations depends on effective governance.
Nature 553:199.
Barto´
n K. 2014. Package “MuMIn” multi-model interence. Avail-
able from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=MuMIn (accessed
November 2017).
Baynham-Herd Z, Amano T, Sutherland WJ, Donald PF. 2018. Gover-
nance explains variation in national responses to the biodiversity
crisis. Environmental Conservation 45:407–418.
Bennett EM, et al. 2015. Linking biodiversity, ecosystem services, and
human well-being: three challenges for designing research for sus-
tainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14:
76–85.
BirdLife International. 2014. Important bird and biodiversity areas:
a global network for conserving nature and benefiting people.
BirdLife International, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Available from
http://datazone.birdlife.org/userfiles/file/IBAs (accessed November
2017).
BirdLife International and NatureServe. 2015. Bird species distribution
maps of the world. Version 4.0. BirdLife International, Cambridge,
United Kingdom, and NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia.
Botha A, Andevski J, Bowden CGR, Gudka M, Safford RJ, Tavares J,
Williams NP. 2017. Multi-species Action Plan to Conserve African-
Eurasian Vultures. Coordinating Unit of the CMS Raptors MOU. CMS
raptors MOU technical publication 5. United Nations Environment
Programme, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Buechley ER, S¸ekercio˘
glu C¸H. 2016. The avian scavenger crisis: looming
extinctions, trophic cascades, and loss of critical ecosystem func-
tions. Biological Conservation 198:220–228.
Burnham KP, Anderson DR. 2002. Model selection and multimodel in-
ference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New
York.
Butchart SHM, et al. 2015. Shortfalls and solutions for meeting national
and global conservation area targets. Conservation Letters 8:329–
337.
Butchart SHM, Stattersfield AJ, Bennun LA, Shutes SM, Akcakaya HR,
Baillie JEM, Stuart SN, Hilton-Taylor C, Mace GM. 2004. Measuring
global trends in the status of biodiversity: red list indices for birds.
PLOS Biology https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020383.
Cardinale BJ, et al. 2012. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity.
Nature 486:59.
Chaudhry MJI, Ogada DL, Malik RN, Virani MZ, Giovanni MD. 2012.
First evidence that populations of the critically endangered Long-
billed Vulture Gyps indicus in Pakistan have increased following
the ban of the toxic veterinary drug diclofenac in south Asia. Bird
Conservation International 22:389–397.
Cortes-Avizanda A, Blanco G, DeVault TL, Markandya A, Virani MZ,
Brandt J, Donazar JA. 2016. Supplementary feeding and endangered
avian scavengers: benefits, caveats, and controversies. Frontiers in
Ecology and the Environment 14:191–199.
Di Minin E, Slotow R, Hunter LTB, Montesino Pouzols F, Toivo-
nen T, Verburg PH, Leader-Williams N, Petracca L, Moilanen A.
2016. Global priorities for national carnivore conservation under
Conservation Biology
Volume 33, No. 5, 2019
Santangeli et al. 1065
land use change. Scientific Reports https://doi.org/10.1038/
srep23814.
D´
ıaz S, Fargione J, Chapin FS, III, Tilman D. 2006. Biodiversity
loss threatens human well-being. PLOS Biology https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pbio.0040277.
D´
ıazS,LavorelS,deBelloF,Qu
´
etier F, Grigulis K, Robson TM. 2007.
Incorporating plant functional diversity effects in ecosystem service
assessments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of
the United States of America 104:20684–20689.
Endangered Wildlife Trust and the Peregrine Fund. 2017. African
wildlife poisoning database. Available from www.africanwildlif-
epoisoning.org (accessed November 2017).
Gangoso L, Agudo R, Anad´
on JD, Riva Mdela, Suleyman AS, Porter R,
Don´
azar JA. 2013. Reinventing mutualism between humans and
wild fauna: insights from vultures as ecosystem services providers.
Conservation Letters 6:172–179.
Hampson K, et al. 2015. Estimating the global burden of endemic
canine rabies. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pntd.0003709.
IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). 2017. The IUCN
Red List of threatened species. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Available
from: www.iucnredlist.org (accessed April 2017).
Joppa LN, et al. 2016. Filling in biodiversity threat gaps. Science
352:416–418.
Margalida A, Mole´
on M. 2016. Toward carrion-free ecosystems? Fron-
tiers in Ecology and the Environment 14:183–184.
Markandya A, Taylor T, Longo A, Murty MN, Murty S, Dhavala K. 2008.
Counting the cost of vulture decline an appraisal of the human
health and other benefits of vultures in India. Ecological Economics
67:194–204.
Mateo-Tomas P, Olea PP, Sanchez-Barbudo IS, Mateo R. 2012. Alleviating
human–wildlife conflicts: identifying the causes and mapping the
risk of illegal poisoning of wild fauna. Journal of Applied Ecology
49:376–385.
Moilanen A, Franco AMA, Early RI, Fox R, Wintle B, Thomas CD. 2005.
Prioritizing multiple-use landscapes for conservation: methods for
large multi-species planning problems. Proceedings of the Royal
Society B: Biological Sciences 272:1885–1891.
Moilanen A, Pouzols FM, Meller L, Veach V, Arponen A, Lepp¨
anen J,
Kujala H. 2014. Zonation version 4 user manual. C-BIG Conservation
Biology Informatics Group, Department of Biosciences, University
of Helsinki, Helsinki.
Mole´
on M, S´
anchez-Zapata JA, Margalida A, Carrete M, Owen-Smith N,
Don´
azar JA. 2014. Humans and scavengers: the evolution of inter-
actions and ecosystem services. BioScience 64:394–403.
Montesino Pouzols F, et al. 2014. Global protected area expansion
is compromised by projected land-use and parochialism. Nature
516:383–386.
Morales-Reyes Z, et al. 2017. Evaluation of the network of protection
areas for the feeding of scavengers in Spain: from biodiversity con-
servation to greenhouse gas emission savings. Journal of Applied
Ecology 54:1120–1129.
Moreno-Opo R, Margalida A. 2013. Conservation of the Cinereous Vul-
ture Aegypius monachus in Spain (1966–2011): a bibliometric re-
view of threats, research and adaptive management. Bird Conserva-
tion International 24:178–191.
Murn C, Botha A. 2018. A clear and present danger: impacts of poisoning
on a vulture population and the effect of poison response activities.
Oryx 52:552–558.
Northrup JM, Wittemyer G. 2013. Characterising the impacts of emerg-
ing energy development on wildlife, with an eye towards mitigation.
Ecology Letters 16:112–125.
O’Bryan CJ, Braczkowski AR, Beyer HL, Carter NH, Watson JEM,
McDonald-Madden E. 2018. The contribution of predators and
scavengers to human well-being. Nature Ecology & Evolution 2:
229–236.
Ogada D, Botha A, Shaw P. 2016a. Ivory poachers and poison: drivers
of Africa’s declining vulture populations. Oryx 50:593–596.
Ogada D, et al. 2016b. Another continental vulture crisis: Africa’s vul-
tures collapsing toward extinction. Conservation Letters 9:89–97.
Ogada DL. 2014. The power of poison: pesticide poisoning of Africa’s
wildlife. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1322:
1–20.
Ogada DL, Torchin ME, Kinnaird MF, Ezenwa VO. 2012. Effects of
vulture declines on facultative scavengers and potential implications
for mammalian disease transmission. Conservation Biology 26:453–
460.
Olea PP, Mateo-Tom´
as P. 2009. The role of traditional farming practices
in ecosystem conservation: the case of transhumance and vultures.
Biological Conservation 142:1844–1853.
Pain DJ, et al. 2008. The race to prevent the extinction of South Asian
vultures. Bird Conservation International 18:S30–S48.
Pearce-Higgins JW, Green RE. 2014. Birds and climate change im-
pacts and conservation responses. Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge, United Kingdom.
Pogson M, Hastings A, Smith P. 2013. How does bioenergy compare
with other land-based renewable energy sources globally? Global
Change Biology Bioenergy 5:513–524.
Prakash V, et al. 2012. The population decline of Gyps vultures in
India and Nepal has slowed since veterinary use of diclofenac
was banned. PLOS ONE (e49118) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0049118.
REN21. 2017. Renewables 2017 global status report in R. REN21 Secre-
tariat, Paris.
Robinson TP, Wint GRW, Conchedda G, Van Boeckel TP, Ercoli V, Pala-
mara E, Cinardi G, D’Aietti L, Hay SI, Gilbert M. 2014. Mapping the
global distribution of livestock. PLOS ONE (e96084) https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0096084.
Santangeli A, Arkumarev V, Rust N, Girardello M. 2016a. Understanding,
quantifying and mapping the use of poison by commercial farmers in
Namibia implications for scavengers’ conservation and ecosystem
health. Biological Conservation 204:205–211.
Santangeli A, Butchart SHM, Pogson M, Hastings A, Smith P, Girardello
M, Moilanen A. 2018. Mapping the global potential exposure of
soaring birds to terrestrial wind energy expansion. Ornis Fennica
95:1–14.
Santangeli A, Di Minin E, Toivonen T, Pogson M, Hastings A, Smith
P, Moilanen A. 2016b. Synergies and trade-offs between renewable
energy expansion and biodiversity conservation a cross-national
multifactor analysis. Global Change Biology Bioenergy 8:1191–1200.
Santangeli A, Toivonen T, Pouzols FM, Pogson M, Hastings A, Smith
P, Moilanen A. 2016c. Global change synergies and trade-offs be-
tween renewable energy and biodiversity. Global Change Biology
Bioenergy 8:941–951.
UNEP (UN Environment Programme)-WCMC (World Conservation
Monitoring Centre) and International Union for Conservation of
Nature (IUCN). 2017. Protected planet: the world database on pro-
tected areas. UNEP, Nairobi. Available from www.protectedplanet.
net (accessed August 2017).
United Nations (UN). 2015. Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda
for sustainable development. UN General Assembly, New York.
Urban MC, et al. 2016. Improving the forecast for biodiversity un-
der climate change. Science 353. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.
aad8466.
Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and Center for International Earth
Science Information Network. 2005. Last of the wild project, version
2, global human footprint dataset (geographic). WCS, New York.
Available from https://doi.org/10.7927/H4M61H5F (accessed April
2017).
Woodroffe R, Thirgood SJ, Rabinowitz A. 2005. People and wildlife:
Conflict or co-existence? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
United Kingdom.
Conservation Biology
Volume 33, No. 5, 2019
... Southern Africa, while representing a global priority region for vulture conservation, also faces significant challenges for conserving these species due to the concomitant presence of two types of poisoning, among other threats such as electrocution and collisions caused by power infrastructure, decline of food availability and habitat loss (Botha et al., 2017;Santangeli et al., 2019). The highly mobile nature of vultures further magnifies the scale of these challenges, as these animals move across extensive landscapes (see e.g. ...
... We derived the intentional poisoning layer directly from Santangeli et al. (2019). The study produced this layer by identifying the herbivore and carnivore species targeted by poachers for sentinel poisoning, with the use of an integrated poisoning database (The Endangered Wildlife Trust and the Peregrine Fund, 2023). ...
... At this step, the relative occurrence values were conservatively log (plus two) transformed, so that relative differences among species are reduced, to minimize the bias associated with the frequency of species occurrence in the poisoning database. This conservative species-specific value of poisoning intensity was then combined with the range map of each species, and for each pixel (10 km x 10 km size) of the study region, the mean of the species-specific poisoning intensity values across all species (among the above 72 species) present within that pixel was calculated (for more details, including validation, see Santangeli et al., 2019). ...
Article
Full-text available
Given the current biodiversity crisis, understanding how animals move across a landscape dotted with different anthropogenic threats and the consequences of those threats for animals is paramount to devising evidence‐based conservation interventions. Vultures roam across large areas and are highly exposed to poisoning, which represents a particularly damaging form of wildlife crime. In this study, we introduce a framework for quantifying the exposure to threats and illustrate an example of poisoning risk as a threat in an endangered African vulture species, the Lappet‐faced Vulture (Torgos tracheliotos). We combined GPS tracking data of 19 individuals collected between 2012 and 2022 with food availability and spatial threat maps of both intentional (poachers directly targeting vultures) and unintentional (farmers aiming to kill carnivores, with vultures being secondarily affected) poisoning across most of Southern Africa. We identified poisoning hotspots in northern Botswana and south‐eastern Namibia. These areas were also associated with a high number of vulture mortalities, providing additional support for poisoning risk. Northern Botswana and areas at the border between Botswana and South Africa were characterized by high food availability, potentially amplifying the mortality rate by attracting vultures from surrounding areas. Our results offer valuable insights for regional vulture conservation, together with a methodological framework for quantifying and mapping the spatial exposure to threats for mobile species of conservation concern, enabling improved targeting of conservation actions.
... The African Vulture Crisis (AVC) is a growing concern arising from rapidly declining vulture populations in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) [1]. The SSA is considered a major vulture conservation but poison use hotspot [2,3], requiring urgent interventions to save vultures from extinction [4]. Vulture population decline is associated with composite environmental stressors, such as human and ecological factors, undercutting conservation efforts. ...
... There are several co-benefits regarding humans and vultures [24]. While contemporary conservation efforts are critical to the vultures [2], African vultures, renowned for clean ups of the carcasses (i.e., an important sanitary ecosystem service for public and animal health) by feeding on the carrions of livestock, wildlife and other organisms [17,25], play an important role in disease transmission control to humans and among carnivorous scavengers [26,27]. Vultures also contribute to ecotourism-based incomes that are important to increasing community appreciation of vulture [28,29]. ...
... In the recent years, though, there are estimates, especially in some countries, such as South Africa, Botswana and Zambia reporting poisoning incidences fairly well on cloud platform (https://awpd.cloud/) and African Wildlife Poisoning Database (AWPD) Website (https://www.africanwildlifepoisoning.org). Though vulture species are rapidly driven toward extinction in the SSA [2,16,42], despite the existence of biodiversity laws in many African vulture range countries [9], the AWPD is an attempt to understand the magnitude of poisoning. ...
Article
Full-text available
The Old World Vultures (OWV), constituting 16 species primarily in Africa, Europe and Asia, are currently being driven to extinction mostly by anthropogenic activities, especially poisoning. The vulture losses from poisoning caused by human-related activities are en masse at a single mortality event-level and occur in complex social-ecological systems. There has been a growing body of knowledge on wildlife poisoning over the years. However, no review has been done to consolidate vulture poisoning studies in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), with a social lens of conservation planning. Here we present a review of the vulture poisoning research by re-contextualizing the problem of vulture poisoning across SSA. We employed stepwise Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) method to search for literature on vulture poisoning. The search yielded 211 studies which were trimmed to 55 after applying sets of eligibility criteria. Literature shows that efforts aimed at successful vulture conservation planning will require an understanding of the relational aspects of stakeholder social capital (assets) that are critical to the implementation of species recovery strategies. Strengthening relational social capital through multi-scale stakeholder evidence-based awareness creation and participation is necessary for addressing the African Vulture Crisis (AVC). Applying stakeholder social capital approaches to different vulture conservation scenarios at local, regional and international scales can enhance successful implementation of conservation strategies for the persistence of vultures in complex socio-ecological systems in African landscapes. Existing literature also showed the importance of stakeholder social capital as a countermeasure against vulture losses.
... In the southern Indian region, a small population of G. indicus in the Ramanagaram Hills of Karnataka and Nilgiri Forest Division in Tamil Nadu is known to remain in inland southern India, and it is rare elsewhere within its former range (Prakash et al., 2007;Venkitachalam & Senthilnathan, 2015, 2016. Regular monitoring breeding populations of threatened vultures is widely recognised as a priority to enable the effective implementation of targeted conservation actions in key areas across their ranges Santangeli et al., 2019). ...
Article
Full-text available
The species extinction rate has recently accelerated worldwide and is a thousand times higher than through natural processes alone. Small, isolated populations are especially vulnerable to extinction due to deterministic and stochastic threats. Hence, the conservation of such populations is challenging. The present study from 2015 to 2021 aimed to understand the population, nesting characteristics, and breeding ecology of the country's southernmost population of Gyps indicus in Mudumalai Tiger Reserve, South India. The population estimation was performed on the roosting and nesting sites of Gyps indicus in the Mudumalai Tiger Reserve. To study the nesting characteristics and breeding ecology, each nesting colony was systematically visited four times per month during the breeding season (October to May). Assessments of threats were estimated during the field visits. In 2015-2021, four breeding sites were identified. Two nesting sites were identified in 2016 and two more in 2017 and 2020. The mean altitude of the nesting sites was 1122.25 ± 170.06 m a.s.l., ranging from 821 m a.s.l. to 1600 m a.s.l. In the Protected Area, two nests were located on east-facing exposure, one nest on southeast-facing exposure, and one nest on south-facing exposure. In terms of population composition, the mean number of adult individuals steadily increased from 9.5 ± 0.46 in 2016 to 14.08 ± 0.67 in 2021. Consequently, the mean total number of individuals per colony increased from 13.66 ± 0.56 in 2016 to 27.83 ± 0.62 in 2021. A total of 40 (in average, 6.66 ± 0.49 pairs/year) territorial pairs with occupied nests were observed in 2015-2021. Of them, 31 (in average, 5.16 ± 0.30 pairs/year) breeding pairs had laid eggs. Successful incubation was recorded, and the mean incubation period was 63.64 ± 1.74 days. Out of 31 incubated nests, 23 fledglings (3.83 ± 0.47 individuals/ year) successfully came out with 74% breeding success. The entire nesting period was 128.43 ± 1.16 days. In total, out of 17 failed breeding attempts nine (53%) were detected before egg laying, and eight (47%) were found during incubation. There were no significant differences between nests abandoned before and after egg laying (t = 0.4152, p > 0.05). During the breeding seasons of 2015-2017, a human-made forest fire posed a serious threat to nesting colonies of Gyps indicus, resulting in no observed nesting. A species-specific conservation-oriented action programme is necessary to secure this last southernmost wild viable Gyps indicus population in the Mudumalai Tiger Reserve. At this juncture, we highly recommend declaring the buffer zone of the Mudumalai Tiger Reserve as a «Vulture Sanctuary» to provide a legal protection of the Gyps indicus population living in the studied area.
... Human socio-economic features, as well as ecological and biological factors, may influence the magnitude of different causes of mortality to bird populations (Buchan et al., 2022) and these can vary geographically throughout their ranges Santangeli et al., 2019). Studies at large spatial and temporal scales are particularly important to analyse this variability and assess how particular causes of mortality impact species (Kirby et al., 2008;Vickery et al., 2014). ...
Article
Full-text available
Human-induced direct mortality affects huge numbers of birds each year, threatening hundreds of species worldwide. Tracking technologies can be an important tool to investigate temporal and spatial patterns of bird mortality as well as their drivers. We compiled 1704 mortality records from tracking studies across the African-Eurasian flyway for 45 species, including raptors, storks, and cranes, covering the period from 2003 to 2021. Our results show a higher frequency of human-induced causes of mortality than natural causes across taxonomic groups, geographical areas, and age classes. Moreover, we found that the frequency of human-induced mortality remained stable over the study period. From the human-induced mortality events with a known cause (n = 637), three main causes were identified: electrocution (40.5 %), illegal killing (21.7 %), and poisoning (16.3 %). Additionally, combined energy infrastructure-related mortality (i.e., electrocution, power line collision, and wind-farm collision) represented 49 % of all human-induced mortality events. Using a random forest model, the main predictors of human-induced mortality were found to be taxonomic group, geographic location (latitude and longitude), and human footprint index value at the location of mortality. Despite conservation efforts, human drivers of bird mortality in the African-Eurasian flyway do not appear to have declined over the last 15 years for the studied group of species. Results suggest that stronger conservation actions to address these threats across the flyway can reduce their impacts on species. In particular, projected future development of energy infrastructure is a representative example where application of planning, operation, and mitigation measures can enhance bird conservation.
... Human socio-economic features, as well as ecological and biological factors, may influence the magnitude of different causes of mortality to bird populations (Buchan et al., 2022) and these can vary geographically throughout their ranges Santangeli et al., 2019). Studies at large spatial and temporal scales are particularly important to analyse this variability and assess how particular causes of mortality impact species (Kirby et al., 2008;Vickery et al., 2014). ...
Article
Full-text available
Human-induced direct mortality affects huge numbers of birds each year, threatening hundreds of species worldwide. Tracking technologies can be an important tool to investigate temporal and spatial patterns of bird mortality as well as their drivers. We compiled 1704 mortality records from tracking studies across the African-Eurasian flyway for 45 species, including raptors, storks, and cranes, covering the period from 2003 to 2021. Our results show a higher frequency of human-induced causes of mortality than natural causes across taxonomic groups, geographical areas, and age classes. Moreover, we found that the frequency of human-induced mortality remained stable over the study period. From the human-induced mortality events with a known cause (n = 637), three main causes were identified: electrocution (40.5 %), illegal killing (21.7 %), and poisoning (16.3 %). Additionally, combined energy infrastructure-related mortality (i.e., electrocution, power line collision, and wind-farm collision) represented 49 % of all human-induced mortality events. Using a random forest model, the main predictors of human-induced mortality were found to be taxonomic group, geographic location (latitude and longitude), and human footprint index value at the location of mortality. Despite conservation efforts, human drivers of bird mortality in the African-Eurasian flyway do not appear to have declined over the last 15 years for the studied group of species. Results suggest that stronger conservation actions to address these threats across the flyway can reduce their impacts on species. In particular, projected future development of energy infrastructure is a representative example where application of planning, operation, and mitigation measures can enhance bird conservation.
Article
Full-text available
The ecosystem services framework is essential for biodiversity conservation, emphasizing the role of nature in achieving sustainable development goals (SDGs). This study offers a global view on vulture-associated ecosystem services and their SDG contributions, based on insights from 206 experts. The findings reveal global consensus on the importance of vultures in regulation and maintenance services, such as waste recycling and disease control. Cultural services attributed to vultures are moderate and vary regionally. Provisioning services are consistently rated low across all regions. Experts’ views on vultures' key ecosystem roles are often biased toward well-known services and may not align with all scientific evidence. The study emphasizes vultures’ role in achieving SDGs, particularly impacting life on land and health, and calls for reevaluating their contribution to sustainable practices. It stresses the need to customize conservation to regional values and perceptions, recognizing vultures’ critical role in ecological balance, public health, and sustainable development.
Article
Full-text available
Increasing urbanization coupled with spatial expansion and numerical increase of New World vulture populations has engendered a rise in human-vulture conflict, creating a need for effective tools to mitigate vulture-related damage. Visual frightening devices that mimic the presence of human or other predators can be employed in human-vulture conflict scenarios to increase perceived risk by the pest species, thereby eliciting an antipredator behavioral response, such as fleeing. One visual frightening device, inflatable scarecrows, recently proved effective at reducing passerine attendance at feral swine feeders, but their effectiveness when directed at other species and conflict scenarios has varied. Our primary objective was to evaluate an inflatable deterrent for reducing the number of black (Coragyps atratus) and turkey vultures (Cathartes aura) present (hereafter abundance) at 13 human-vulture conflict sites throughout the southeastern United States. We predicted that vulture abundance would be substantially reduced when inflatable deterrents were deployed. Because we suspected other factors might also influence vulture site abundance, we also examined the exploratory variables of weather, site size (area), and vulture tolerance to human approach in relation to vulture site abundance using a model selection approach. Black vulture site abundance was more pervasive than turkey vultures, occurring at all sites and accounting for 85% of daily vulture counts (10.78 ± 0.52 vultures/site/day) whereas turkey vultures were only present at 62% of sites (2.12 ± 0.21). Across all sites, inflatable scarecrows were effective at reducing vulture abundance by 82% during the seventeen-day treatment period when deterrents were deployed (3.50 ± 0.20), but only a 48% reduction during the twenty-one-day post-treatment phase (15.34 ± 1.39) was observed. Site size and weather did not influence tool effectiveness. Human tolerance at sites, as determined by vulture flight initiation distance, was influential, with tool effectiveness being reduced at sites where local human tolerance was high. We recommend inflatable scarecrows as a tool to reduce vulture-wildlife conflict to private property and recreation at sites where the conflict is spatially restricted (e.g., parking lot or recreation area), conducive to scarecrow deployment (e.g., flat stable surfaces), and where vulture site human tolerance is low to moderate. Globally, many vulture species (Accipitridae and Cathartidae) have recently experienced population and/or distribution declines 1-3. Contrarily, over the past several decades, North American populations of black (Coragyps atratus) and turkey vultures (Cathartes aura) have increased in abundance and expanded their distribution 4-6. Concomitantly, there has been an increase in human-vulture conflicts involving these species, particularly in the eastern and southern United States 7-9. Large congregations of both black and turkey vultures at roosting, loafing, or foraging sites can be associated with human-vulture conflict 4,7. Conflicts associated with black vultures include damage to residential and commercial property 8 , such as the destruction of rubber and vinyl type (hereafter termed synthetic) products (e.g., roof coverings, vinyl seat covers, windshield wipers), depredation of livestock 10,11 , and potential risks to human health and safety through exposure to fecal matter and aircraft collisions 6. Conflicts with turkey vultures are similar to those experienced with black vultures with the exception that the species is less predatory and does not represent a livestock depredation threat 10. Due to considerable economic losses incurred as a result of vulture-related conflicts 4,9 a variety of mitigation techniques have been employed in an attempt to minimize damage 10. These methods have primarily focused on dispersal of roost sites 12,13 , reducing aircraft collision risks 14 , and the creation of allowable take models 6 that can allow for and justify lethal removal. In addition, wildlife managers and others experiencing vulture damage have OPEN
Article
Full-text available
The wind energy sector is steadily growing, and the number of wind turbines is expected to expand across large areas of the globe in the near future. While the development of wind energy can contribute tomitigating climate change, it also poses challenges towildlife, particularly birds, due to increased collision risk with wind turbines. Here we quantify and map potential conflicts between the potential for wind energy development and the distribution of terrestrial soaring birds. We explore the relationship between species traits (including body mass, migration ecology and extinction risk) and exposure to potential wind energy development, and identified areas of potential conflict between wind power production and soaring bird conservation. We considered the full range of each species, as well as separately analyzing the breeding, non-breeding and passage ranges for migratory species. We show that exposure to potential wind energy development is similar for soaring and non-soaring bird species. Within different parts of the range of soaring bird species, passage distributions have significantly higher potential for wind energy development than the full, breeding or non-breeding ranges.Moreover, exposure to potential wind energy development was higher within the ranges of heavier soaring bird species and those that are migratory.We show that areas of conflict between soaring bird conservation and potential wind energy development could be very large, particularly when the passage ranges of soaring bird species are considered. Such areas of potential conflict are largely unprotected. This highlights a risk for soaring birds from potential wind energy development wherever it is not carefully sited in order to minimise environmental impacts.
Article
Full-text available
Growing concern about the biodiversity crisis has led to a proliferation of conservation responses, but with wide variation between countries in the levels of engagement and investment. Much of this variation is inevitably attributed to differences between nations in wealth. However, the relationship between environmentalism and wealth is complex and it is increasingly apparent that other factors are also involved. We review hypotheses that have been developed to explain variation in broad environmentalism and show that many of the factors that explain such variation in individuals, such as wealth, age and experience, also explain differences between nation states. We then assess the extent to which these factors explain variation between nation states in responses to and investment in the more specific area of biodiversity conservation. Unexpectedly, quality of governance explained substantially more variation in public and state investment in biodiversity conservation than did direct measures of wealth. The results inform assessments of where conservation investments might most profitably be directed in the future and suggest that metrics relating to governance might be of considerable use in conservation planning.
Article
Full-text available
Understanding global patterns of biodiversity change is crucial for conservation research, policies and practices. However, for most ecosystems, the lack of systematically collected data at a global level limits our understanding of biodiversity changes and their local-scale drivers. Here we address this challenge by focusing on wetlands, which are among the most biodiverse and productive of any environments and which provide essential ecosystem services, but are also amongst the most seriously threatened ecosystems. Using birds as an indicator taxon of wetland biodiversity, we model time-series abundance data for 461 waterbird species at 25,769 survey sites across the globe. We show that the strongest predictor of changes in waterbird abundance, and of conservation efforts having beneficial effects, is the effective governance of a country. In areas in which governance is on average less effective, such as western and central Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and South America, waterbird declines are particularly pronounced; a higher protected area coverage of wetland environments facilitates waterbird increases, but only in countries with more effective governance. Our findings highlight that sociopolitical instability can lead to biodiversity loss and undermine the benefit of existing conservation efforts, such as the expansion of protected area coverage. Furthermore, data deficiencies in areas with less effective governance could lead to underestimations of the extent of the current biodiversity crisis.
Article
Full-text available
Vultures in Africa are being poisoned deliberately by poachers to prevent the birds alerting authorities to the poachers’ illegal activities, or for harvesting and sale of body parts for use in witchcraft. Hundreds of vultures can be killed at a single poisoned elephant Loxodonta africana carcass, and although field staff trained in poison response activities can limit the damage, mortalities remain numerous. We used the population viability analysis programme VORTEX to simulate seven 100-year-long scenarios investigating various rates of poisoning mortalities and the remedial effects of poison response activities on a population of Critically Endangered white-backed vultures Gyps africanus breeding in Kruger National Park, South Africa. In six scenarios the population declined (λ < 1); in three scenarios the population remained extant over the 100-year simulations but declined by 60–90% from a starting size of 2,400 individuals. In two scenarios one poisoned elephant carcass left untreated and causing the greatest number of vulture deaths was modelled as a catastrophic event with a 50% probability of annual occurrence, which resulted in a 100% probability of population extinction, with a mean time to extinction of 55–62 years. Effective poison response activities were modelled as a 70% reduction of mortality at each poisoned elephant carcass and resulted in population persistence after 100 years but with a c. 90% reduction in size (final n = 205). We highlight that although poison response activities will not prevent poisoning from occurring, they form an essential part of wider conservation actions designed to prevent local extinctions of vultures or other vulnerable species.
Article
Full-text available
Protected areas are one of the most common strategies for wildlife conservation world‐wide. However, their effectiveness is rarely evaluated. In Europe, after the outbreak of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, a restrictive sanitary regulation ( EC 1774/2002) prohibited the abandonment of dead livestock in extensive farming (extensive livestock) in the field, which led to negative consequences for scavengers. As an attempt to mitigate this negative impact, a new regulation was approved ( EC 142/2011) to allow farmers to leave extensive livestock carcasses in the so‐called ‘Protection areas for the feeding of necrophagous species of European interest’ ( PAF s). Our general aims were to quantify (i) the proportion of breeding distribution of targeted scavenger species overlapping PAF s; (ii) the extensive livestock carrion biomass available inside PAF s; (iii) the proportion of breeding distribution of non‐targeted scavenger species falling within PAF s; (iv) the overlap between the home range of vultures and PAF s, as well as the extent to which vultures move through different administrative units; and (v) the savings in greenhouse gas ( GHG ) emissions in relation to the pre‐ PAF scenario. After assessing the status of PAF implementation in every region of peninsular Spain, we analysed the large‐scale spatial information of extensive livestock carrion availability and scavenger breeding distribution, movement data of GPS ‐tracked vultures, and the annual GHG emissions associated with the transport of livestock carcasses. Most regions established PAF s in their territories, although design criteria were variable. The breeding distribution of targeted species was better represented within PAF s than that of non‐targeted species. The extensive livestock carrion biomass potentially available for scavengers within PAF s represented 34·9% of the annual extensive livestock biomass generated in peninsular Spain. The overlap between the home range of GPS ‐marked vulture populations and PAF s ranged between 63·4% and 100%. The minimum convex polygon of these and other GPS ‐tracked vulture populations in peninsular Spain encompassed 3–14 Spanish regions and 1–4 countries. Post‐ PAF there was a potential reduction of c. 55·7% of GHG emissions compared to pre‐ PAF . Synthesis and applications . The implementation of the new sanitary regulation by means of areas for the feeding of scavengers could mean an important improvement in scavenger conservation and a noteworthy reduction in greenhouse gas emissions: in Spain, extensive livestock carrion availability might increase to 33 474 t yr ⁻¹ , and 43 344 t of CO 2 eq. might be saved annually. However, we identified some gaps related to the distribution of endangered facultative scavengers. Moreover, given that vultures are highly mobile organisms, the design and management of these feeding areas should be coordinated at both the supra‐regional and supra‐national scales.
Article
Full-text available
Effective nature conservation in human-dominated landscapes requires a deep understanding of human behaviors, perceptions and values. Human-wildlife conflicts represent relatively well-studied, global-scale conservation challenges. In Africa, vulture populations are collapsing as they fall victim to poison used by livestock farmers to kill predators, but our understanding of the prevalence of this practice is still very poor. We gathered data on the prevalence of poison use in Namibia by means of questionnaires completed by commercial farmers. The data were collected and analyzed with ad-hoc quantitative methods.We quantified prevalence of poison use, determined factors associated with this practice and derived a map of its prevalence. We found that 20% of commercial farmers in Namibia used poison; farmers that owned high numbers of small stock and on large farms, and those who had suffered high livestock losses to predators, were most likely to admit to using poison. We pinpoint areas of high prevalence of reported poison use, which are largely concentrated in the south of the country. Furthermore, we report a generally positive perception of commercial farmers towards vultures, which may indicate future potential to implement bottom-up approaches for vulture conservation. Overall, the findings have important implications for prioritizing efforts to effectively tackle the African vulture crisis and preserve healthy ecosystems for the wellbeing of humans and wildlife.
Article
Predators and scavengers are frequently persecuted for their negative effects on property, livestock and human life. Research has shown that these species play important regulatory roles in intact ecosystems including regulating herbivore and mesopredator populations that in turn affect floral, soil and hydrological systems. Yet predators and scavengers receive surprisingly little recognition for their benefits to humans in the landscapes they share. We review these benefits, highlighting the most recent studies that have documented their positive effects across a range of environments. Indeed, the benefits of predators and scavengers can be far reaching, affecting human health and well-being through disease mitigation, agricultural production and waste-disposal services. As many predators and scavengers are in a state of rapid decline, we argue that researchers must work in concert with the media, managers and policymakers to highlight benefits of these species and the need to ensure their long-term conservation. Furthermore, instead of assessing the costs of predators and scavengers only in economic terms, it is critical to recognize their beneficial contributions to human health and well-being. Given the ever-expanding human footprint, it is essential that we construct conservation solutions that allow a wide variety of species to persist in shared landscapes. Identifying, evaluating and communicating the benefits provided by species that are often considered problem animals is an important step for establishing tolerance in these shared spaces.
Article
The rapid destruction of the planet's biodiversity has prompted the nations of the world to set a target of achieving a significant reduction in the rate of loss of biodiversity by 2010. However, we do not yet have an adequate way of monitoring progress towards achieving this target. Here we present a method for producing indices based on the IUCN Red List to chart the overall threat status (projected relative extinction risk) of all the world's bird species from 1988 to 2004. Red List Indices (RLIs) are based on the number of species in each Red List category, and on the number changing categories between assessments as a result of genuine improvement or deterioration in status. The RLI for all bird species shows that their overall threat status has continued to deteriorate since 1988. Disaggregated indices show that deteriorations have occurred worldwide and in all major ecosystems, but with particularly steep declines in the indices for Indo-Malayan birds (driven by intensifying deforestation of the Sundaic lowlands) and for albatrosses and petrels (driven by incidental mortality in commercial longline fisheries). RLIs complement indicators based on species population trends and habitat extent for quantifying global trends in the status of biodiversity. Their main weaknesses are that the resolution of status changes is fairly coarse and that delays may occur before some status changes are detected. Their greatest strength is that they are based on information from nearly all species in a taxonomic group worldwide, rather than a potentially biased subset. At present, suitable data are only available for birds, but indices for other taxonomic groups are in development, as is a sampled index based on a stratified sample from all major taxonomic groups.
Article
BACKGROUND As global climate change accelerates, one of the most urgent tasks for the coming decades is to develop accurate predictions about biological responses to guide the effective protection of biodiversity. Predictive models in biology provide a means for scientists to project changes to species and ecosystems in response to disturbances such as climate change. Most current predictive models, however, exclude important biological mechanisms such as demography, dispersal, evolution, and species interactions. These biological mechanisms have been shown to be important in mediating past and present responses to climate change. Thus, current modeling efforts do not provide sufficiently accurate predictions. Despite the many complexities involved, biologists are rapidly developing tools that include the key biological processes needed to improve predictive accuracy. The biggest obstacle to applying these more realistic models is that the data needed to inform them are almost always missing. We suggest ways to fill this growing gap between model sophistication and information to predict and prevent the most damaging aspects of climate change for life on Earth. ADVANCES On the basis of empirical and theoretical evidence, we identify six biological mechanisms that commonly shape responses to climate change yet are too often missing from current predictive models: physiology; demography, life history, and phenology; species interactions; evolutionary potential and population differentiation; dispersal, colonization, and range dynamics; and responses to environmental variation. We prioritize the types of information needed to inform each of these mechanisms and suggest proxies for data that are missing or difficult to collect. We show that even for well-studied species, we often lack critical information that would be necessary to apply more realistic, mechanistic models. Consequently, data limitations likely override the potential gains in accuracy of more realistic models. Given the enormous challenge of collecting this detailed information on millions of species around the world, we highlight practical methods that promote the greatest gains in predictive accuracy. Trait-based approaches leverage sparse data to make more general inferences about unstudied species. Targeting species with high climate sensitivity and disproportionate ecological impact can yield important insights about future ecosystem change. Adaptive modeling schemes provide a means to target the most important data while simultaneously improving predictive accuracy. OUTLOOK Strategic collections of essential biological information will allow us to build generalizable insights that inform our broader ability to anticipate species’ responses to climate change and other human-caused disturbances. By increasing accuracy and making uncertainties explicit, scientists can deliver improved projections for biodiversity under climate change together with characterizations of uncertainty to support more informed decisions by policymakers and land managers. Toward this end, a globally coordinated effort to fill data gaps in advance of the growing climate-fueled biodiversity crisis offers substantial advantages in efficiency, coverage, and accuracy. Biologists can take advantage of the lessons learned from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s development, coordination, and integration of climate change projections. Climate and weather projections were greatly improved by incorporating important mechanisms and testing predictions against global weather station data. Biology can do the same. We need to adopt this meteorological approach to predicting biological responses to climate change to enhance our ability to mitigate future changes to global biodiversity and the services it provides to humans. Emerging models are beginning to incorporate six key biological mechanisms that can improve predictions of biological responses to climate change Models that include biological mechanisms have been used to project (clockwise from top) the evolution of disease-harboring mosquitoes, future environments and land use, physiological responses of invasive species such as cane toads, demographic responses of penguins to future climates, climate-dependent dispersal behavior in butterflies, and mismatched interactions between butterflies and their host plants. Despite these modeling advances, we seldom have the detailed data needed to build these models, necessitating new efforts to collect the relevant data to parameterize more biologically realistic predictive models.