Are we accurately estimating the potential role of pollution in the decline of species at risk in Canada?
Jenny L. McCune,
Sheila R. Colla,
Laura E. Coristine,
Christina M. Davy,
D.T. Tyler Flockhart,
Richard Schuster,
Diane M. Orihel
Affiliations
Jenny L. McCune
Geomatics and Landscape Ecology Laboratory, Department of Biology, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada.
Sheila R. Colla
Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada.
Laura E. Coristine
Department of Biology, The University of British Columbia—Okanagan Campus, 1177 Research Road, Kelowna, BC V1V 1V7, Canada.
Christina M. Davy
Wildlife Research & Monitoring Section, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources & Forestry, Trent University, 2140 East Bank Drive, Peterborough, ON K9J 7B8, Canada. Environmental and Life Sciences Graduate Program, Trent University, 1600 West Bank Drive, Peterborough, ON K9J 7B8, Canada.
D.T. Tyler Flockhart
Appalachian Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Frostburg, MD 21532, USA.
Richard Schuster
Department of Biology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6, Canada. Ecosystem Science and Management Program, University of Northern British Columbia, 3333 University Way, Prince George, BC V2N 4Z9, Canada.
Diane M. Orihel
School of Environmental Studies and Department of Biology, Queen’s University, 116 Barrie Street, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada.
Pollution is a pervasive, albeit often invisible, threat to biodiversity in Canada. Currently, the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) relies on expert opinion to assess the scope (i.e., the proportion of a species’ population that may be affected) of pollution to species at risk. Here, we describe a spatially explicit, quantitative method for assessing the scope of pollution as a threat to species at risk in Canada. Using this method, we quantified the geographic co-occurrence of 488 terrestrial and freshwater species and pollution sources and determined that, on average, 57% of the mapped occurrences of each species at risk co-occurred with at least one pollution source. Furthermore, we found a weak correlation between the scope of the threat of pollution as assessed by COSEWIC expert panels and the geographic overlap of species occurrences and pollution sources that we determined with our quantitative method. Experts frequently identified scope of pollution as absent or negligible even for species with extensive co-occurrence with pollution sources, especially vascular plants. Clearly, a quantitative approach is needed to make accurate estimates of the scope of pollution as a threat to species at risk in Canada.
