The culture of bird conservation: Australian stakeholder values regarding iconic, flagship and rare birds

Abstract

Iconic, flagship and rare threatened bird taxa attract disproportionate amounts of public attention, and are often used to enable broader conservation strategies. Yet, little is known about why certain taxa achieve iconic or flagship status. Also unclear is whether the perception of rarity among those acting to conserve threatened birds is sufficient to influence attitudes and behaviour that lead to effective conservation action and, if so, which characteristics of rare birds are important to their conservation. We interviewed 74 threatened bird conservation stakeholders to explore perceptions about iconic, flagship and rare threatened birds and classified their attitudes using a new typology of avifaunal attitudes. There was a relationship between societal interest and conservation effort for threatened species characterised as iconic, flagship and rare. Iconic species tended to arouse interest or emotion in people due to being appealing and readily encountered, thereby attracting conservation interest that can benefit other biodiversity. Flagships tended to have distinguishing physical or cultural characteristics and were used to convey conservation messages about associated biodiversity. Attitudes about rarity mostly related to a taxon’s threatened status and small population size. Rarity was important for threatened bird conservation but not always associated with attitudes and behaviour that lead to effective conservation action. We conclude that conservation action for individual threatened bird taxa is biased and directly influenced by the ways taxa are socially constructed by stakeholders, which is specific to prevailing culture and stakeholder knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Ainsworth GB (2014) Valuing birds: understanding the relationship between social values and the conservation of Australian threatened avifauna. PhD thesis, Charles Darwin University

  2. Ainsworth GB, Aslin HJ, Weston MA, Garnett ST (2016a) Do social values influence levels of conservation effort in threatened species? The case of two Australian chats. Oryx 50:636–645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ainsworth GB, Aslin HJ, Weston MA, Garnett ST (2016b) Social values and species conservation: the case of Baudin’s and Carnaby’s black-cockatoos. Environ Conserv 43:294–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Allchin R, Kirkpatrick J, Kriwoken L (2013) On not protecting the parrot: impact of conservation and planning legislation on an endangered species in Tasmania. J Int Wildl Law Policy 16:81–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Austin S, Douglas T (2008) Wielangta and the forest wars. Green Left. https://www.greenleft.org.au/content/wielangta-and-forest-wars. Accessed 14 Feb 2013

  6. Australian Government (2015) Threatened species strategy. Department of the Environment and Energy, Canberra

    Google Scholar 

  7. Barua M, Root-Bernstein M, Ladle R, Jepson P (2011) Defining flagship uses is critical for flagship selection: a critique of the IUCN climate change flagship fleet. AMBIO 40:431–435

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Birds Australia (2003) Carnaby's Black-cockatoo future directions symposium: proceedings from a conservation symposium. Carnaby's Black-cockatoo future directions symposium, Perth, Australia, Birds Australia

  9. BirdLife Australia (2016) South-west black-cockatoo recovery program. BirdLife Australia. http://birdlife.org.au/projects/southwest-black-cockatoo-recovery. Accessed 23 Aug 2016

  10. Bottrill MC, Joseph LN, Carwardine J, Bode M, Cook C, Game ET, Grantham H, Kark S, Linke S, McDonald-Madden E, Pressey RL, Walker S, Wilson KA, Possingham HP (2008) Is conservation triage just smart decision making? TREE 23:649–654

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Bowen-Jones E, Entwistle A (2002) Identifying appropriate flagship species: the importance of culture and local contexts. Oryx 36:189–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Breckheimer I, Haddad NM, Morris WF, Trainor AM, Fields WR, Jobe RT, Hudgens BR, Moody A, Walters JR (2014) Defining and evaluating the umbrella species concept for conserving and restoring landscape connectivity. Conserv Biol 28:1584–1593

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Caro T, Engilis A, Fitzherbert E, Gardner T (2004) Preliminary assessment of the flagship species concept at a small scale. Anim Conserv 7:63–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chapman T (2008) Forest black cockatoo (Baudin’s cockatoo Calyptorhynchus baudinii and forest red-tailed black cockatoo Calyptorhynchus banksii naso) recovery plan 2007–2016. Department of Environment and Conservation, Perth

    Google Scholar 

  15. Chiweshe N (2007) Black eagles and hyraxes—the two flagship species in the conservation of wildlife in the Matobo Hills, Zimbabwe. Ostrich 78:381–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dallimer M, Melo M, Collar NJ, Jones PJ (2010) The Príncipe thrush Turdus xanthorhynchus: a newly split, ‘Critically Endangered’, forest flagship species. Bird Conserv Int 20:375–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Damodaran A (2007) The project tiger crisis in India: moving away from the policy and economics of selectivity. Environ Values 16:61–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Department of Environment and Heritage Protection (2016) Back on Track species prioritisation framework criteria. Queensland Government. https://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/prioritisation-framework/back_on_track_species_prioritisation_framework_criteria.html. Accessed 15 June 2016

  19. Department of Environment and Resource Management [DERM] (2010) Building nature’s resilience. A draft biodiversity strategy for Queensland. Department of Environment and Resource Management, Brisbane

  20. Dietz T, Fitzgerald A, Shwom R (2005) Environmental values. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30(1):335–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Difficult Bird Research Group (2017) Difficult Bird Research Group. https://www.difficultbirds.com/. Accessed 19 Aug 2017

  22. DSEWPaC (2013a) Epthianura crocea tunneyi in Species Profile and Threats Database. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra, Australia. http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=67089. Accessed 1 Mar 2013

  23. DSEWPaC (2013b) Epthianura crocea macgregori in Species Profile and Threats Database. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra. http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=67090. Accessed 1 Mar 2013

  24. DSEWPaC (2013c) Neophema chrysogaster in Species Profile and Threats Database. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra, Australia. http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=747. Accessed 31 Jan 2013

  25. DSEWPaC (2013d) Lathamus discolor in Species Profile and Threats Database. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra, Australia. http://www.environment.gov.au/sprat. Accessed 30 Jan 2013

  26. Department of the Environment (2014a) Calyptorhynchus baudinii — Baudin's Black-Cockatoo, Long-billed Black-Cockatoo Australian Government, Canberra, Australia. http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=769. Accessed 26 Sept 2014

  27. Department of the Environment (2014b) Calyptorhynchus latirostris — Carnaby's Black-Cockatoo, Short-billed Black-Cockatoo. Australian Government, Canberra, Australia. http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicspecies.pl?taxon_id=59523. Accessed 26 Sept 2014

  28. Ehmke G, Tzaros C, Menkhorst P, Holdsworth M (2008) Trumped up corella indeed! The orange-bellied parrot should be a conservation ambassador not a political football. Wingspan 18(3):18–24

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ehmke G, Fitzsimons JA, Garnett ST (2017) Standardising English names for Australian bird subspecies as a conservation tool. Bird Conserv Int. doi:10.1017/S0959270916000538

    Google Scholar 

  30. Entwistle A (2000) Flagships for the future? Oryx 34:239–240

    Google Scholar 

  31. Garnett ST, Ainsworth GB, Zander KK (In revision) Are we choosing the right flagships? An assessment of the birds Australians find most attractive. Hum Dimen Wildl

  32. Garnett ST, Crowley GM, Balmford A (2003) The costs and effectiveness of funding the conservation of Australian threatened birds. Bioscience 53:658–665

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Garnett ST, Szabo J, Dutson G (2011) The action plan for Australian birds 2010. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  34. Garnett ST, Zander KK, Hagerman S, Satterfield TA, Meyerhoff J (2017a) Social preferences for adaptation measures to conserve Australian birds threatened by climate change. Oryx 1–11. doi:10.1017/S0030605316001058

    Google Scholar 

  35. Garnett ST, Woinarski J, Lindenmayer D, Latch P (eds) (2017b) Recovering Australian threatened species: a book of hope. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  36. Global Tiger Initiative (2016) Who we are. Global tiger initiative. http://globaltigerinitiative.org/who-we-are/. Accessed 01 Sept 2016

  37. Hausmann A, Slotow R, Fraser I, Di Minin E (2016) Ecotourism marketing alternative to charismatic megafauna can also support biodiversity conservation. Anim Conserv. doi:10.1111/acv.12292

    Google Scholar 

  38. Head BW (2007) Community engagement: participation on whose terms? Aust J Polit Sci 42:441–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Heneberg P (2012) Flagship bird species habitat management supports the presence of ground-nesting aculeate hymenopterans. J Insect Conserv 16:899–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Heywood VH (1995) Global biodiversity assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  41. Holmes TQ, Head BW, Possingham HP, Garnett ST (2017) Strengths and vulnerabilities of Australian networks for conservation of threatened birds. Oryx. doi:10.1017/S0030605316000454

    Google Scholar 

  42. Home R, Keller C, Nagel P, Bauer N, Hunziker M (2009) Selection criteria for flagship species by conservation organizations. Environ Conserv 36:139–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Houston W, Black RL, Elder RJ (2013) Distribution and habitat of the critically endangered Capricorn yellow chat Epthianura crocea macgregori. Pac Conserv Biol 19:39–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Hull V, Liu J (2016) A global icon for nature in the human-dominated world. In: Liu J, Hull V, Yang W, Viña A, Chen X, Ouyang Z, Zhang H (eds) Pandas and people. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 3–14

    Google Scholar 

  45. Johnstone RE, Kirkby T (2008) Distribution, status, social organisation, movements and conservation of Baudin's Cockatoo (Calyptorhynchus baudinii) in South-west Western Australia. Rec West Aust Mus 25(1):107

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Johnstone K, Miller KK, Antos MJ (2015) Grassland conservation and the plains-wanderer: a small brown bird makes an effective local flagship. Conserv Soc 13:407–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Joseph LN, Maloney RF, Possingham HP (2009) Optimal allocation of resources among threatened species: a project prioritization protocol. Conserv Biol 23:328–338

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Kyne PM, Jackson MV (2016) Status of the endangered yellow chat Epthianura crocea tunneyi on the western South Alligator River floodplain, Kakadu National Park. Aust Field Ornithol 33:169–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Lambeck RJ (1997) Focal species: a multi-species umbrella for nature conservation. Conserv Biol 11:849–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Landres PB, Verner J, Thomas JW (1988) Ecological uses of vertebrate indicator species: a critique. Conserv Biol 2:316–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Lawson J, Miller K, Weston M, Ehmke G (2010) Conservation of orange-bellied parrot habitat: a study of landholder views of wetlands and birds, and their management, on the Bellarine Peninsula, Victoria 2009 Melbourne. Birds Australia and Deakin University, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  52. Lorimer J (2006) Nonhuman charisma: which species trigger our emotions and why? Ecos 1(27):20–27

    Google Scholar 

  53. Marks K (2012) Australian developers see red as rare bird foils plans. Abu Dhabi Media. http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/asia-pacific/australian-developers-see-red-as-rare-bird-foils-plans. Accessed 01 Oct 2016

  54. Martin T, Nally S, Burbidge AA, Arnall S, Garnett ST, Hayward MW, Lumsden LF, Menkhorst P, McDonald-Madden E (2012) Acting fast helps avoid extinction. Conserv Lett 5:274–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Martín-López B, Montes C, Ramirez L, Benayas J (2009) What drives policy decision-making related to species conservation? Biol Conserv 142:1370–1380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Mynott J (2009) Birdscapes: birds in our imagination and experience. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  57. Niemi GJ, Hanowski JM, Lima AR, Nicholls T, Weiland N (1997) A critical analysis on the use of indicator species in management. J Wildl Manag 61:1240–1252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Noble I (2010) From iconic species to iconic case studies. The World Bank Group. http://blogs.worldbank.org/climatechange/node/681. Accessed 23 Aug 2016

  59. OBPRT (2006a) National recovery plan for the orange-bellied parrot (Neophema chrysogaster). Department of Primary Industries and Water, Hobart

    Google Scholar 

  60. OBPRT (2006b) Background and implementation information for the orange-bellied parrot recovery plan. Department of Primary Industries and Water (DPIW), Hobart

  61. Paine R (1969) A note on trophic complexity and community stability. Am Nat 103:91–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Patton MQ (1990) Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Sage, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  63. Possingham H (2001) The business of biodiversity: applying decision theory principles to nature conservation. Australian Conservation Foundation, Earthwatch Institute, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  64. Pritt JJ, Frimpong EA (2010) Quantitative determination of rarity of freshwater fishes and implications for imperilled-species designations. Conserv Biol 24:1249–1258

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Roberge J-M, Angelstam PER (2004) Usefulness of the umbrella species concept as a conservation tool. Conserv Biol 18:76–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Sandbrook C, Scales IR, Vira B, Adams WM (2011) Value plurality among conservation professionals. Conserv Biol 25:285–294

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Seddon PJ, Soorae PS, Launay F (2005) Taxonomic bias in reintroduction projects. Anim Conserv 8:51–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Small E (2012) The new Noah’s Ark: beautiful and useful species only. Part 2. The chosen species. Biodiversity 13:37–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Stake RE (2006) Multiple case study analysis. The Guildford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  70. Tisdell C, Wilson C, Swarna Nantha H (2006) Public choice of species for the ‘Ark’: phylogenetic similarity and preferred wildlife species for survival. J Nat Conserv 14:97–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Trimble MJ, Van Aarde RJ (2010) Species inequality in scientific study. Conserv Biol 24:886–890

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Tzaros C, Ingwersen D (2011) Update on swift parrot and regent honeyeater surveys in 2011. BirdLife Australia, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  73. Tzaros C, Ingwersen D (2012) Swift parrot and regent honeyeater survey update—July 2012. BirdLife Australia, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  74. Veríssimo D (2007) What makes a flagship species? A case study on the birds of Seychelles. MSc, University of Kent

  75. Veríssimo D, Fraser I, Groombridge J, Bristol R, MacMillan DC (2009) Birds as tourism flagship species: a case study of tropical islands. Anim Conserv 12:549–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Veríssimo D, Pongiluppi T, Santos MCM, Develey PF, Fraser I Smith RJ, Macmilan DC (2014) Using a systematic approach to select flagship species for bird conservation. Conserv Biol 28:269–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Walpole MJ, Leader-Williams N (2002) Tourism and flagship species in conservation. Biodiv Conserv 11:543–547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Watson JE, Dudley N, Segan DB, Hockings M (2014) The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature 515:67–73

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Weston MA (2006) Are we neglecting the non-migratory shorebirds of the East Asian-Australasian Flyway? Stilt 50:215–223

    Google Scholar 

  80. Weston M, Miller K, Lawson J, Ehmke GC (2012) Hope for resurrecting a functionally extinct parrot or squandered social capital? Landholder attitudes towards the orange-bellied parrot (Neophema chrysogaster) in Victoria, Australia. Conserv Soc 10:381–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Wilson C, Tisdell C (2005) Knowledge of birds and willingness to support their conservation: an Australian case study. Bird Conserv Int 15:225–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Wilson JRU, Procheş Ş, Braschler B, Dixon ES, Richardson DM (2007) The (bio)diversity of science reflects the interests of society. Front Ecol Environ 5:409–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. WWF-Australia (2008) Proceedings of the Carnaby’s black-cockatoo symposium. WWF-Australia, Birds Australia Western Australia Inc, Western Australia Department of Environment and Conservation, Kensington

  84. Yarwood MR, Weston MA, Garnett ST (2014) From little things, big things grow; trends and fads in 110 years of Australian ornithology. Scientometrics 98:2235–2254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Yin RK (2003) Case study research: design and methods. Sage, California

    Google Scholar 

  86. Zander KK, Ainsworth GB, Meyerhoff J, Garnett ST (2014) Threatened bird valuation in Australia. PLoS ONE 9:e100411

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all of the informants and other correspondents, as well as the anonymous reviewers for their improvements to this article, and G. Ehmke (BirdLife Australia) and Tim Schinkel for help with Fig. 1. G.B.A. was supported by a Commonwealth Government Australian Postgraduate Award scholarship and Charles Darwin University’s Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gillian B. Ainsworth.

Additional information

This article belongs to the Topical Collection: Biodiversity appreciation and engagement.

Communicated by Danna J Leaman.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 22 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 28 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ainsworth, G.B., Fitzsimons, J.A., Weston, M.A. et al. The culture of bird conservation: Australian stakeholder values regarding iconic, flagship and rare birds. Biodivers Conserv 27, 345–363 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-017-1438-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Knowledge
  • Preference
  • Prioritisation
  • Socio-ecological
  • Attitude