Applied Filters
- Conservation and Sustainability
- Favaro, BrettRemove filter
Journal Title
Publication Date
Author
- Jacob, Aerin L2
- Nowlan, Linda2
- Baron, Nancy E1
- Bennett, Nathan J1
- Bergshoeff, Jonathan A1
- Bittick, Sarah Joy1
- Carlsson, Anja M1
- Colla, Sheila1
- Collins, Lynda1
- Coristine, Laura E1
- Davy, Christina1
- Dey, Cody1
- Ford, Adam1
- Ford, Adam T1
- Fraser, Kevin C1
- Legge, George1
- Martins, Eduardo G1
- McCune, J L1
- Moore, Jonathan W1
- Olszynski, Martin1
- Orihel, Diane1
- Otto, Sarah P1
- Palen, Wendy J1
- Polfus, Jean L1
Access Type
1 - 4of4
Save this search
Please login to be able to save your searches and receive alerts for new content matching your search criteria.
Filters
Search Name | Searched On |
---|---|
[Subject Areas: Conservation and Sustainability] AND [Author: Favaro, Brett] (4) | 1 Apr 2025 |
You do not have any saved searches
- OPEN ACCESS
- Laura E. Coristine,
- Aerin L. Jacob,
- Richard Schuster,
- Sarah P. Otto,
- Nancy E. Baron,
- Nathan J. Bennett,
- Sarah Joy Bittick,
- Cody Dey,
- Brett Favaro,
- Adam Ford,
- Linda Nowlan,
- Diane Orihel,
- Wendy J. Palen,
- Jean L. Polfus,
- David S. Shiffman,
- Oscar Venter, and
- Stephen Woodley
Biodiversity is intrinsically linked to the health of our planet—and its people. Yet, increasingly, human activities are causing the extinction of species, degrading ecosystems, and reducing nature’s resilience to climate change and other threats. As a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Canada has a legal responsibility to protect 17% of land and freshwater by 2020. Currently, Canada has protected ∼10% of its terrestrial lands, requiring a marked increase in the pace and focus of protection over the next three years.Given the distribution, extent, and geography of Canada’s current protected areas, systematic conservation planning would provide decision-makers with a ranking of the potential for new protected area sites to stem biodiversity loss and preserve functioning ecosystems. Here, we identify five key principles for identifying lands that are likely to make the greatest contribution to reversing biodiversity declines and ensuring biodiversity persistence into the future. We identify current gaps and integrate principles of protecting (i) species at risk, (ii) representative ecosystems, (iii) intact wilderness, (iv) connectivity, and (v) climate refugia. This spatially explicit assessment is intended as an ecological foundation that, when integrated with social, economic and governance considerations, would support evidence-based protected area decision-making in Canada. - OPEN ACCESS
- Jonathan W. Moore,
- Linda Nowlan,
- Martin Olszynski,
- Aerin L. Jacob,
- Brett Favaro,
- Lynda Collins,
- G.L. Terri-Lynn Williams-Davidson, and
- Jill Weitz
Gaps between environmental science and environmental law may undermine sound environmental decision-making. We link perspectives and insights from science and law to highlight opportunities and challenges at the environmental science–law interface. The objectives of this paper are to assist scientists who wish to conduct and communicate science that informs environmental statutes, regulations, and associated operational policies (OPs), and to ensure the environmental lawyers (and others) working to ensure that these statutes, regulations, and OPs are appropriately informed by scientific evidence. We provide a conceptual model of how different kinds of science-based activities can feed into legislative and policy cycles, ranging from actionable science that can inform decision-making windows to retrospective analyses that can inform future regulations. We identify a series of major gaps and barriers that challenge the successful linking of environmental science and law. These include (1) the different time frames for science and law, (2) the different standards of proof for scientific and legal (un)certainty, (3) the need for effective scientific communication, (4) the multijurisdictional (federal, provincial, and Indigenous) nature of environmental law, and (5) the different ethical obligations of law and science. Addressing these challenges calls for bidirectional learning among scientists and lawyers and more intentional collaborations at the law–science interface. - OPEN ACCESSRemote cameras are an increasingly important tool in field-based biological research. Terrestrial researchers can purchase inexpensive off-the-shelf cameras, but aquatic researchers face challenges in adopting similar systems for underwater science. Although technology allows researchers to deploy cameras in any aquatic environment, high procurement costs are often a barrier, particularly for studies that require the collection of lengthy videos. In this note, we provide a detailed guide explaining how to assemble an underwater camera system for less than $425 USD. We focus especially on the construction of the underwater housing, which is typically the most expensive component of an underwater camera system. As described, this system can record 13 h full high-definition videos in depths up to 100 m. It can be constructed and assembled with limited technical background using tools available in most workshops. The guide includes a general overview of the system, a full list of components, detailed instructions on constructing the camera housing, and suggestions on how to mount and use the camera in fieldwork. Our goal for this note is to promote the wider use of remote underwater cameras in aquatic research by making them accessible to those with limited financial means.
- OPEN ACCESS
- J.L. McCune,
- Anja M. Carlsson,
- Sheila Colla,
- Christina Davy,
- Brett Favaro,
- Adam T. Ford,
- Kevin C. Fraser, and
- Eduardo G. Martins
Preventing the extinction of species will require limiting human activities in key areas, but it is unclear to what extent the public is committed to these limits and the associated costs. We commissioned an online survey of 1000 Canadians and asked them if it is important to prevent the extinction of wild species in Canada. We used specific scenarios illustrating the need for limits to personal activities, private property rights, and industrial development to further test their support. The respondents were strongly committed to species conservation in principle (89% agree), including the need to limit industrial development (80% agree). There was less support for limiting private property rights (63% agree), and more uncertainty when scenarios suggested potential loss of property rights and industry-based jobs. This highlights the high level of public concern regarding the economic impacts of preventing extinctions, and the need for more programs to encourage voluntary stewardship of endangered species on private land. Opinion polls that measure public support for conservation without acknowledging the concessions required may result in overly optimistic estimates of the level of support. Most Canadians in our sample supported endangered species conservation even when the necessity of limiting human activities was explicitly stated.