Nest protection for threatened birds 93
TABLE 1 Summary of the ideas discussed in the brainstorming session for protecting the regent honeyeater Anthochaera phrygia from avian predation, mammalian predation and extreme weather events, with additional ideas/interventions that did not fall within the scope of the three categories.
Avian predation Mammalian predation
Cages around nests. Human warden. Trapping predators (lethal control). Playing alarm calls to deter predators.
Olfactory camouflage/condition taste aversion. Acoustic deterrent (ultrasonic), predator calls & acoustic camouflage. Double-sided sticky tape around trees. Translocate/cull gliders such as the squirrel glider Petaurus norfolcensis and sugar glider Petaurus breviceps. Motion sensor technology, sup- ported by artificial intelligence tools, to project monochromatic images of predators as a deterrent, coupled with sounds as a deterrent. Use artificial light sources to encourage gliders away from nesting regent honeyeaters (likely to lead to an increase in insects). Improve tree collar design (there could be alternative designs that are more effective, & could be tested on captive gliders).
Extreme weather events
Provision & supplement resources in various scenarios (e.g. food/water/ shelter/nesting material) to limit stealing behaviour & aid nest building. Long-term habitat conditioning, with good proactive fire management to reduce high-intensity fires. Official recognition of nesting sites as high value, for further protection of sites. Strategic proactive landscape-scale management with targeted breeding regions that improve habitat condi- tion & food availability/resources (e.g. landscape water irrigation to improve environment/breeding area). Better use of short- & long-term weather data & improved modelling in release decision-making regarding both timings & locations.
Others
Head-starting. Nest disturbance by other com- peting species such as the noisy miner Manorina melanocephala needs to be considered. More information on predator behaviour, diet (& how important regent honeyeaters are as part of predator diet), home ranges, motivation & sensory systems.
physical barriers around nests to deter predators and the use of acoustic deterrents for nuisance animals. A brief description of the case studies is given in Supplementary Table 1b. In the second half of the session, breakout groups dis-
cussed and developed ideas central to one of the three categories, which were then presented to the whole group for discussion. The group discussed the concept of a set of possible conservation solutions that could be applied de- pending on the circumstances. For example, in some loca- tions there may be more avian predators, so interventions should be focused on that threat, whereas in other loca- tions a combination of solutions may be required.
Pre-expert elicitation
We held a pre-expert elicitation meeting on 14 July 2022, with nine participants involved (Supplementary Table 2). The list of ideas proposed for nest protection fromthe brain- storming session (Table 1) was reviewed and the feasibility of success of each intervention was discussed, with the aim of synthesizing the list to help guide the expert elicitation discussions. This meeting generated a target list of inter- ventions (Table 2). Additionally, there was group consensus that a nest warden should be used to monitor nests and implement the appropriate nest protection interventions, and should form part of the nest protection process
and would therefore not need to be included in the expert elicitation process.
Expert elicitation
Weconducted the expert elicitation process on 29 July 2022, with 15 participants (Supplementary Table 3). Table 3 lists the set of candidate ideas for the protection of regent honey- eater nests, which were synthesized from the list of interven- tions developed during the pre-expert elicitation (Table 2). This elicitation of expert judgement aimed to follow best practice. Specifically: (1) assessors included a range of pro- fessional backgrounds and organizational perspectives, in- cluding field ecologists, behavioural ecologists, captive breeding experts and managers (Burgman et al., 2011); (2) judgements were made anonymously, to insulate against groupthink and deference to authority (Burgman, 2016); (3) assessment sought to reduce language-based ambiguity through discussion of candidate ideas and factors that could condition prospects of success or failure (Carey & Burgman, 2008); and (4) a second round of assessment was conducted following the presentation of all first round judgements, to insulate against overconfidence (Hemming et al., 2018). The elicitation of judgements followed the formal struc-
tured IDEA protocol (Hemming et al., 2018). In general, for- mal structured techniques provide answers that are more accurate than unstructured approaches (Burgman, 2016).
Oryx, 2025, 59(1), 91–100 © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605324000942
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140
