Geology topics

Deborah T. Crouse

Publications and source records attributed to Deborah T. Crouse.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2022

Hurdles to developing quantitative decision support for Endangered Species Act resource allocation

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service oversees the recovery of many species protected by the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). Recent research suggests that a structured approach to allocating conservation resources could increase recovery outcomes for ESA listed species. Quantitative approaches to decision support can efficiently allocate limited financial resources and maximize desired outcomes. Yet, developing quantitative decision support under real-world constraints is challenging. Approaches that pair research teams and end-users are generally the most effective. However, co-development requires overcoming “hurdles” that can arise because of differences in the mental models of the co-development team. These include perceptions that: (1) scarce funds should be spent on action, not decision support; (2) quantitative approaches are only useful for simple decisions; (3) quantitative tools are inflexible and prescriptive black boxes; (4) available data are not good enough to support decisions; and (5) prioritization means admitting defeat. Here, we describe how we addressed these misperceptions during the development of a prototype resource allocation decision support tool for understanding trade-offs in U.S. endangered species recovery. We describe how acknowledging these hurdles and identifying solutions enabled us to progress with development. We believe that our experience can assist other applications of developing quantitative decision support for resource allocation.

Frontiers in Conservation Science↗

USGS2018

Endangered species recovery: A resource allocation problem

Many nations have laws to identify and protect imperiled species and their ecosystems. In the United States, actions taken under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) have prevented many extinctions, but few listed species have recovered to the point where they can have the ESA protections removed ( 1 , 2 ). One reason for this [among many ( 3 )] is a shortfall in funding, raising a conundrum for agencies responsible for species recovery: Should resources be allocated toward species facing imminent extinction or species whose long-term survival can most benefit from investment? Some argue that the latter strategy is ethically unsound because it may abandon species with little hope of long-term recovery [for example, ( 4 )], even when science suggests that the former strategy may miss opportunities to prevent species from ever experiencing the risk of imminent extinction ( 2 ). We suggest that framing recovery prioritization as a resource allocation problem provides a structure to facilitate constructive debate about such important questions. We discuss here the merits of an explicit resource allocation framework and introduce a prototype decision tool [( 5 ); see supplementary materials for details] that we developed with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to facilitate transparent and efficient recovery allocation decisions.

Science↗

USGS2011

A decision-analytic approach to the optimal allocation of resources for endangered species consultation

The resources available to support conservation work, whether time or money, are limited. Decision makers need methods to help them identify the optimal allocation of limited resources to meet conservation goals, and decision analysis is uniquely suited to assist with the development of such methods. In recent years, a number of case studies have been described that examine optimal conservation decisions under fiscal constraints; here we develop methods to look at other types of constraints, including limited staff and regulatory deadlines. In the US, Section Seven consultation, an important component of protection under the federal Endangered Species Act, requires that federal agencies overseeing projects consult with federal biologists to avoid jeopardizing species. A benefit of consultation is negotiation of project modifications that lessen impacts on species, so staff time allocated to consultation supports conservation. However, some offices have experienced declining staff, potentially reducing the efficacy of consultation. This is true of the US Fish and Wildlife Service's Washington Fish and Wildlife Office (WFWO) and its consultation work on federally-threatened bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus). To improve effectiveness, WFWO managers needed a tool to help allocate this work to maximize conservation benefits. We used a decision-analytic approach to score projects based on the value of staff time investment, and then identified an optimal decision rule for how scored projects would be allocated across bins, where projects in different bins received different time investments. We found that, given current staff, the optimal decision rule placed 80% of informal consultations (those where expected effects are beneficial, insignificant, or discountable) in a short bin where they would be completed without negotiating changes. The remaining 20% would be placed in a long bin, warranting an investment of seven days, including time for negotiation. For formal consultations (those where expected effects are significant), 82% of projects would be placed in a long bin, with an average time investment of 15. days. The WFWO is using this decision-support tool to help allocate staff time. Because workload allocation decisions are iterative, we describe a monitoring plan designed to increase the tool's efficacy over time. This work has general application beyond Section Seven consultation, in that it provides a framework for efficient investment of staff time in conservation when such time is limited and when regulatory deadlines prevent an unconstrained approach. ?? 2010.

Biological Conservation↗