Context Operations to eradicate non-native invasive predators from islands frequently put native species at risk of consuming harmful substances, such as poison bait. The incorporation of certain colours in poison-bait pellets may reduce the risk of bait consumption and, therefore, non-target mortality. Previous work indicated that birds generally avoid blue or green colours; however, there is substantial inter-specific variation in this preference, and more experimental work on species of conservation concern is needed. Aims We tested whether a globally threatened island endemic, the Henderson crake (Zapornia atra), which suffered substantial mortality during a rat-eradication attempt on Henderson Island in 2011, would consume fewer blue than green pellets, which were used during the previous eradication attempt. Methods We held 22 Henderson crakes in captivity and provided them with either blue or green non-toxic pellets for 5 days in June and July 2015. We measured consumption and used linear mixed models to evaluate whether bait colour influenced consumption. Key results Henderson crakes did not consume any dry pellets, and all trials were conducted with wet bait pellets. We found slightly lower consumption of blue pellets than green pellets, and substantial variation among individuals. Females (n = 17) consumed 24% less blue than green bait, whereas males (n = 5) consumed 77% less blue than green bait. Conclusion Henderson crakes are unlikely to consume dry pellets, and will likely consume fewer blue than green bait pellets. Implications We recommend that any future rat eradication on Henderson Island considers using blue rather than green baits and targets dry weather to reduce the risk of Henderson crakes consuming toxic rodenticide bait pellets.
Context House mice (Mus musculus) on temperate Gough Island (6500 ha) are known for their large size, boldness, and tendency to kill large prey such as albatross chicks and even adults. To remove this threat, a mouse eradication operation was implemented in June–August 2021. How mice react to bait during eradications is not well understood, so we capitalised on this operation and conducted the first study with wild house mice during an actual eradication. Aim To document how rapidly mouse activity declined after application of rodent bait, to improve eradication guidelines. Methods We set up a monthly monitoring regime using 10 trail cameras without lures, active for three nights in various habitats around a research station, because this area supported the highest abundance of mice and was logistically feasible. Monitoring commenced before the mouse eradication operation (January–May 2021), and continued when rodent bait was spread (from June 2021), when mouse activity was monitored for 17 consecutive nights, starting the day before baiting. In addition, an increasing number of cameras (up to 15) associated with lures were set further afield in July–August to detect survivors. Key results In the months before bait application, mean daily mouse activity was 3.2 detections/camera (range: 0–56 detections/camera). Immediately after the first bait application, detection rates declined dramatically, from 9.6 to zero detections/camera per day on Day 4 post-baiting. From 1 week post-baiting, mouse detections were extremely rare on both cameras with and without lures. Our last mouse record, 27 days after the first bait application, may be related to initial rapid bait disappearance. Opportunistic camera traps first detected surviving mice 6 months after the first bait drop. Conclusions The rapid decline in detections suggests that most mice consumed bait as soon as it became available, which is faster than what laboratory trials suggest. Future similar operations can expect that mouse activity will decline sharply within 1 week, although some mice may survive longer. Implications Documenting similar declines in mouse activity using cameras could inform operational decisions such as timing of a second bait application or non-target monitoring on future eradication projects. Cameras, particularly with attractive lures, are an effective addition to the mouse detection toolkit, and facilitated a timely confirmation of eradication outcome.
Population size assessments for nocturnal burrow-nesting seabirds are logistically challenging because these species are active in colonies only during darkness and often nest on remote islands where manual inspections of breeding burrows are not feasible. Many seabird species are highly vocal, and recent technological innovations now make it possible to record and quantify vocal activity in seabird colonies. Here we test the hypothesis that remotely recorded vocal activity in Cory's shearwater (Calonectris borealis) breeding colonies in the North Atlantic increases with nest density, and combined this relationship with cliff habitat mapping to estimate the population size of Cory's shearwaters on the island of Corvo (Azores). We deployed acoustic recording devices in 9 Cory's shearwater colonies of known size to establish a relationship between vocal activity and local nest density (slope = 1.07, R2 = 0.86, p < 0.001). We used this relationship to predict the nest density in various cliff habitat types and produced a habitat map of breeding cliffs to extrapolate nest density around the island of Corvo. The mean predicted nest density on Corvo ranged from 6.6 (2.1–16.2) to 27.8 (19.5–36.4) nests/ha. Extrapolation of habitat-specific nest densities across the cliff area of Corvo resulted in an estimate of 6326 Cory's shearwater nests (95% confidence interval: 3735–10, 524). This population size estimate is similar to previous assessments, but is too imprecise to detect moderate changes in population size over time. While estimating absolute population size from acoustic recordings may not be sufficiently precise, the strong positive relationship that we found between local nest density and recorded calling rate indicates that passive acoustic monitoring may be useful to document relative changes in seabird populations over time. ; This work was co-financed by the European Union (LIFE07 NAT/P/000649). ; Peer Reviewed
Migratory marine species cross political borders and enter the high seas, where the lack of an effective global management framework for biodiversity leaves them vulnerable to threats. Here, we combine 10,108 tracks from 5775 individual birds at 87 sites with data on breeding population sizes to estimate the relative year-round importance of national jurisdictions and high seas areas for 39 species of albatrosses and large petrels. Populations from every country made extensive use of the high seas, indicating the stake each country has in the management of biodiversity in international waters. We quantified the links among national populations of these threatened seabirds and the regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) which regulate fishing in the high seas. This work makes explicit the relative responsibilities that each country and RFMO has for the management of shared biodiversity, providing invaluable information for the conservation and management of migratory species in the marine realm.
Disentangling individual- and population-level variation in migratory movements is necessary for understanding migration at the species level. However, very few studies have analyzed these patterns across large portions of species' distributions. We compiled a large telemetry dataset on the globally endangered Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus (94 individuals, 188 completed migratory journeys), tracked across ~70% of the species' global range, to analyze spatial and temporal variability of migratory movements within and among individuals and populations. We found high migratory connectivity at large spatial scales (i.e., different subpopulations showed little overlap in wintering areas), but very diffuse migratory connectivity within subpopulations, with wintering ranges up to 4,000 km apart for birds breeding in the same region and each subpopulation visiting up to 28 countries (44 in total). Additionally, Egyptian Vultures exhibited a high level of variability at the subpopulation level and flexibility at the individual level in basic migration parameters. Subpopulations differed significantly in travel distance and straightness of migratory movements, while differences in migration speed and duration differed as much between seasons and among individuals within subpopulations as between subpopulations. The total distances of the migrations completed by individuals from the Balkans and Caucasus were up to twice as long and less direct than those in Western Europe, and consequently were longer in duration, despite faster migration speeds. These differences appear to be largely attributable to more numerous and wider geographic barriers (water bodies) along the eastern flyway. We also found that adult spring migrations to Western Europe and the Balkans were longer and slower than fall migrations. We encourage further research to assess the underlying mechanisms for these differences and the extent to which environmental change could affect Egyptian Vulture movement ecology and population trends. ; Balkans and Caucasus data: This work was financially supported by the LIFE+ projects LIFE10 NAT/BG/000152 and LIFE 16 NAT/BG/000874 funded by the European Union and co-funded by the AG Leventis Foundation and MAVA, the US National Science Foundation, the Christensen Fund, National Geographic Society, the Whitley Fund for Nature, Faruk Yalçin Zoo and Kuzey Doga's donors (in particular Bilge Bahar, Devrim Celal, Seha Işmen, Lin Lougheed, Burak Över, and Batubay Özkan). We are grateful to Turkey's Ministry of Forestry and Water Affairs General Directorate of Nature Conservation and National Parks and NorthStar Science and Technology for donating three transmitters each. State Nature Reserve Dagestanskiy and Russian Raptor Research and Conservation Network supported work in Dagestan. Western Europe data: deployments of transmitters in Portugal were funded by the EU-funded LIFE Rupis project (LIFE14 NAT/PT/00855); SALORO S.L.U. funded the deployment of transmitters in the Duero region of Spain; DREAL Nouvelle-Aquitaine—Fondation d'entreprises Barjane funded deployments in France; JE was supported by Basque government predoctoral grant (grant number: 569382696); GREFA (Grupo para la Rehabilitación de la Fauna Autóctona y su habitat)-Endangered Species Monitoring Project together with Poison Sentinels Project of WWF/Spain. The Migra Program of SEO/BirdLife (www.migraciondeaves.org/en/) deployed transmitters in collaboration with Fundación Iberdrola España, and were funded by La Rioja Regional Government in La Rioja, and Fundación Hazi and Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa within the Interreg POCTEFA-ECOGYP project in Gipuzkoa.
International audience ; Migratory marine species cross political borders and enter the high seas, where the lack of an effective global management framework for biodiversity leaves them vulnerable to threats. Here, we combine 10,108 tracks from 5775 individual birds at 87 sites with data on breeding population sizes to estimate the relative year-round importance of national jurisdictions and high seas areas for 39 species of albatrosses and large petrels. Populations from every country made extensive use of the high seas, indicating the stake each country has in the management of biodiversity in international waters. We quantified the links among national populations of these threatened seabirds and the regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) which regulate fishing in the high seas. This work makes explicit the relative responsibilities that each country and RFMO has for the management of shared biodiversity, providing invaluable information for the conservation and management of migratory species in the marine realm.
International audience ; Migratory marine species cross political borders and enter the high seas, where the lack of an effective global management framework for biodiversity leaves them vulnerable to threats. Here, we combine 10,108 tracks from 5775 individual birds at 87 sites with data on breeding population sizes to estimate the relative year-round importance of national jurisdictions and high seas areas for 39 species of albatrosses and large petrels. Populations from every country made extensive use of the high seas, indicating the stake each country has in the management of biodiversity in international waters. We quantified the links among national populations of these threatened seabirds and the regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) which regulate fishing in the high seas. This work makes explicit the relative responsibilities that each country and RFMO has for the management of shared biodiversity, providing invaluable information for the conservation and management of migratory species in the marine realm.
International audience ; Migratory marine species cross political borders and enter the high seas, where the lack of an effective global management framework for biodiversity leaves them vulnerable to threats. Here, we combine 10,108 tracks from 5775 individual birds at 87 sites with data on breeding population sizes to estimate the relative year-round importance of national jurisdictions and high seas areas for 39 species of albatrosses and large petrels. Populations from every country made extensive use of the high seas, indicating the stake each country has in the management of biodiversity in international waters. We quantified the links among national populations of these threatened seabirds and the regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) which regulate fishing in the high seas. This work makes explicit the relative responsibilities that each country and RFMO has for the management of shared biodiversity, providing invaluable information for the conservation and management of migratory species in the marine realm.
Migratory marine species cross political borders and enter the high seas, where the lack of an effective global management framework for biodiversity leaves them vulnerable to threats. Here, we combine 10,108 tracks from 5775 individual birds at 87 sites with data on breeding population sizes to estimate the relative year-round importance of national jurisdictions and high seas areas for 39 species of albatrosses and large petrels. Populations from every country made extensive use of the high seas, indicating the stake each country has in the management of biodiversity in international waters. We quantified the links among national populations of these threatened seabirds and the regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) which regulate fishing in the high seas. This work makes explicit the relative responsibilities that each country and RFMO has for the management of shared biodiversity, providing invaluable information for the conservation and management of migratory species in the marine realm. ; Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia - FCT ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Migratory marine species cross political borders and enter the high seas, where the lack of an effective global management framework for biodiversity leaves them vulnerable to threats. Here, we combine 10,108 tracks from 5775 individual birds at 87 sites with data on breeding population sizes to estimate the relative year-round importance of national jurisdictions and high seas areas for 39 species of albatrosses and large petrels. Populations from every country made extensive use of the high seas, indicating the stake each country has in the management of biodiversity in international waters. We quantified the links among national populations of these threatened seabirds and the regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) which regulate fishing in the high seas. This work makes explicit the relative responsibilities that each country and RFMO has for the management of shared biodiversity, providing invaluable information for the conservation and management of migratory species in the marine realm. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement no. 766417. Research made possible with the support, permissions, and funding granted by the following organizations, institutions, and grant agreements: Marine Conservation Program of DPIPWE Tasmania; American Bird Conservancy; Bureau of Ocean Energy Management; communities of Isla Mocha and Islas Juan Fernández; Corporación Nacional Forestal and Servicio Agrícola y Ganadería (Chile); Environment Canada; the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; the National Geographic Society; ProDelphinus; and the Wallis Foundation; NSF grants DEB 9304579, DEB 9629539, DEB9806606, DEB0235818, and DEB 0842199 to D.J.A.; the National Geographic Society; the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystems Mission Area, Wake Forest University; Max-Planck Society and State of Baden-Wuerttemberg Innovation funding; Colorado State University International Programs; Swiss Friends of Galapagos; the International Center for Tropical Ecology at University of Missouri-St. Louis; the Instituto Antartico Chileno (INACH) and the Australian Antarctic Division (AAD); LIFE "Marine IBAs IN Spain" (LIFE04NAT/ES/000049, 2004-2009) and LIFE+ INDEMARES (2009-2014); Sea World Research and Rescue Foundation Inc.; Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment; and Winifred Violet Scott Trust; FCT-Portugal through projects (UIDB/04292/2020 and UIDP/04292/2020 and UIDP/50017/2020 and UIDB/50017/2020, granted to MARE and CESAM, respectively); the Falklands Islands Government; Natural Environmental Research Council (NERC) core funding to British Antarctic Survey Ecosystems Programme and Official Development Assistance Atlantic Islands project (NE/ R000 107/1); the New Zealand Department of Conservation; Ministry for Primary Industries; Ngāti Rehua Ngāti Wai ki Aotea; Falklands Island Conservation; University of Barcelona (APIF/2015, to M.C.-F.); the French Polar Institute (program IPEV n°109 to H.W.); Réserve Naturelle Nationale des Terres Australes Françaises; and the Zones Atelier Antarctique (LTSER France, CNRS-INEE); European funds through the European Commission Training and Mobility of Researchers Programme (ERBFMBICT983030); Spanish funds through the Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología (REN2002-01164/GLO), Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia (CGL2006-01315/BOS), Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (CGL2009-11278/BOS), and Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (CGL2013-42585-P); Catalan funds through the Generalitat de Catalunya (2001SGR00091); and additional funding from SEO/BirdLife (programa Migra & proyecto LIFE+ Indemares), Fundación Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria (BIOCON04/099) and Fundación Biodiversidad (18PCA4328, 2012-2013); NSERC Discovery Grant and Government of Canada's Program for International Polar Year to W.A.M.; and an ACAP AC Grant in 2013-14, predoctoral contract BES-2017-079874 of the Spanish Ministerio de Industria, Economía y Competitividad (to L.N.-H.); Spanish Foundation for Biodiversity and Spanish Ministry of Science grant ref. CGL2013-42203-R; the Pew Environment Group via the Pew Fellowship Award in Marine Conservation (to M.L.C.); National Research Foundation; South Africa and Oceans and Coasts; Department of Environment, Agriculture and Fisheries; Malta Seabird Project (LIFE10NAT/MT/090) co-funded by the LIFE program of the European Commission and the Maltese Ministry for the Environment, Sustainable Development and Climate Change, in partnership with the Royal Society for the Protection of Bird and the Portuguese Society for the Study of Birds; predoctoral contract BES-2014-068025 of the Spanish Ministerio de Industria, Economía y Competitividad (to V.M.-P.); Scientific Expert PIM initiative (Petites Iles de Méditerranée); the PIM initiative (Petites Iles de Méditerranée); the Tunisian Coastal Protection and Planning Agency (APAL); Ministry of the Environment, Japan; Funding by Fundación Ecocentro, Argentina; Wildlife Conservation Society, USA; and Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, Argentina; Centro Nacional Patagónico (CONICET), postdoctoral contracts by Beatriu de Pinós (2010-BP_A-00173), Juan de la Cierva (JCI-2009-05426), PLEAMAR (2017/2349), and Ramón y Cajal (RYC-2017-22055) programme (to R.R.); Seventh Framework Programme (Research Executive Agency of the European Commission, 618841, FP7-PEOPLE-2013-CIG); Fondation Total pour la Biodiversité (project: Trophic ecology and impacts of bycatch on the avifauna communities of Zembra archipelago); Agence de Protection et d'Aménagement du Littoral (APAL-Tunisia); Killam Postdoctoral fellowship from Dalhousie University; South African National Antarctic Programme; ACAP; Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument; NOAA; Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Kakenhi grant 19651100 and 15H02857; National Parks and Conservation Service (Mauritius) (to M.L.C.); IPEV Prog 109; and NASA. The use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. government. The scientific results and conclusions, as well as any views or opinions expressed herein, are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NOAA or the Department of Commerce. This communication reflects only the authors' view, and the Research Executive Agency of the European Union is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. Z.Z. acknowledges funding from a predoctoral grant (APIF/2012) from the University of Barcelona. J.Ad. acknowledges funding from the U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystems Mission Area, U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Pacific OCS Region.
Aim: Animal movement is an important determinant of individual survival, population dynamics and ecosystem structure and function. Nonetheless, it is still unclear how local movements are related to resource availability and the spatial arrangement of resources. Using resident bird species and migratory bird species outside the migratory period, we examined how the distribution of resources affects the movement patterns of both large terrestrial birds (e.g., raptors, bustards and hornbills) and waterbirds (e.g., cranes, storks, ducks, geese and flamingos). Location: Global. Time period: 2003–2015. Major taxa studied: Birds. Methods: We compiled GPS tracking data for 386 individuals across 36 bird species. We calculated the straight‐line distance between GPS locations of each individual at the 1‐hr and 10‐day time‐scales. For each individual and time‐scale, we calculated the median and 0.95 quantile of displacement. We used linear mixed‐effects models to examine the effect of the spatial arrangement of resources, measured as enhanced vegetation index homogeneity, on avian movements, while accounting for mean resource availability, body mass, diet, flight type, migratory status and taxonomy and spatial autocorrelation. Results: We found a significant effect of resource spatial arrangement at the 1‐hr and 10‐day time‐scales. On average, individual movements were seven times longer in environments with homogeneously distributed resources compared with areas of low resource homogeneity. Contrary to previous work, we found no significant effect of resource availability, diet, flight type, migratory status or body mass on the non‐migratory movements of birds. Main conclusions: We suggest that longer movements in homogeneous environments might reflect the need for different habitat types associated with foraging and reproduction. This highlights the importance of landscape complementarity, where habitat patches within a landscape include a range of different, yet complementary resources. As habitat homogenization increases, it might force birds to travel increasingly longer distances to meet their diverse needs. ; National Trust for Scotland; Penguin Foundation; The U.S. Department of Energy, Grant/Award Number: DE-EE0005362; Australian Research Council; NASA's Arctic Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE), Grant/Award Number: NNX15AV92A; Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research, Grant/Award Number: VIDI 864.10.006; BCC; NSF Award, Grant/Award Number: ABI-1458748; U.K. Department for Energy and Climate Change; 'Juan de la Cierva ‐ Incorporación' postdoctoral grant; Irish Research Council, Grant/Award Number: GOIPD/2015/81 ; DECC; Goethe International Postdoctoral Programme, People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007‐2013/ under REA grant agreement no [291776]; German Aerospace Center Award, Grant/Award Number: 50JR1601; Scottish Natural Heritage; Solway Coast AONB Sustainable Development Fund; COWRIE Ltd.; Heritage Lottery Fund; Robert Bosch Stiftung; NSF Division of Biological Infrastructure Award, Grant/Award Number: 1564380; Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, Grant/Award Number: IJCI-2014-19190; Energinet.dk; NASA Award, Grant/Award Number: NNX15AV92A; MAVA Foundation; Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Grant/Award Number: SFRH/BPD/118635/2016; National Key R&D Program of China, Grant/Award Number: 2016YFC0500406; Green Fund of the Greek Ministry of Environment
Migratory marine species cross political borders and enter the high seas, where the lack of an effective global management framework for biodiversity leaves them vulnerable to threats. Here, we combine 10,108 tracks from 5775 individual birds at 87 sites with data on breeding population sizes to estimate the relative year-round importance of national jurisdictions and high seas areas for 39 species of albatrosses and large petrels. Populations from every country made extensive use of the high seas, indicating the stake each country has in the management of biodiversity in international waters. We quantified the links among national populations of these threatened seabirds and the regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) which regulate fishing in the high seas. This work makes explicit the relative responsibilities that each country and RFMO has for the management of shared biodiversity, providing invaluable information for the conservation and management of migratory species in the marine realm.
The global lockdown to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic health risks has altered human interactions with nature. Here, we report immediate impacts of changes in human activities on wildlife and environmental threats during the early lockdown months of 2020, based on 877 qualitative reports and 332 quantitative assessments from 89 different studies. Hundreds of reports of unusual species observations from around the world suggest that animals quickly responded to the reductions in human presence. However, negative effects of lockdown on conservation also emerged, as confinement resulted in some park officials being unable to perform conservation, restoration and enforcement tasks, resulting in local increases in illegal activities such as hunting. Overall, there is a complex mixture of positive and negative effects of the pandemic lockdown on nature, all of which have the potential to lead to cascading responses which in turn impact wildlife and nature conservation. While the net effect of the lockdown will need to be assessed over years as data becomes available and persistent effects emerge, immediate responses were detected across the world. Thus, initial qualitative and quantitative data arising from this serendipitous global quasi-experimental perturbation highlights the dual role that humans play in threatening and protecting species and ecosystems. Pathways to favorably tilt this delicate balance include reducing impacts and increasing conservation effectiveness. ; The Canada Research Chairs program provided funding for the core writing team. Field research funding was provided by A.G. Leventis Foundation; Agence Nationale de la Recherche, [grant number ANR-18-32–0010CE-01 (JCJC PEPPER)]; Agencia Estatal de Investigaci; Agência Regional para o Desenvolvimento da Investigação Tecnologia e Inovação (ARDITI), [grant number M1420-09-5369-FSE-000002]; Alan Peterson; ArcticNet; Arkadaşlar; Army Corp of Engineers; Artificial Reef Program; Australia's Integrated Marine Observing System (IMOS), National Collaborative; Research Infrastructure Strategy (NCRIS), University of Tasmania; Australian Institute of Marine Science; Australian Research Council, [grant number LP140100222]; Bai Xian Asia Institute; Batubay Özkan; BC Hydro Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program; Ben-Gurion University of the Negev; Bertarelli Foundation; Bertarelli Programme in Marine Science; Bilge Bahar; Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Biology Society of South Australia; Boston University; Burak Över; California State Assembly member Patrick O'Donnell; California State University Council on Ocean Affairs, Science & Technology; California State University Long Beach; Canada Foundation for Innovation (Major Science Initiative Fund and funding to Oceans Network Canada), [grant number MSI 30199 for ONC]; Cape Eleuthera Foundation; Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales; Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique; Charles Darwin Foundation, [grant number 2398]; Colombian Institute for the Development of Science and Technology (COLCIENCIAS), [grant number 811–2018]; Colombian Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, [grant number 0041–2020]; Columbia Basin Trust; Commission for Environmental Cooperation; Cornell Lab of Ornithology; Cultural practices and environmental certification of beaches, Universidad de la Costa, Colombia, [grant number INV.1106–01–002-15, 2020–21]; Department of Conservation New Zealand; Direction de l'Environnement de Polynésie Française; Disney Conservation Fund; DSI-NRF Centre of; Excellence at the FitzPatrick Institute of African Ornithology; Ecology Project International; Emin Özgür; Environment and Climate Change Canada; European Community: RTD programme - Species Support to Policies; European Community's Seventh Framework Programme; European Union; European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, Marie Skłodowska-Curie, [grant number 798091, 794938]; Faruk Eczacıbaşı; Faruk Yalçın Zoo; Field research funding was provided by King Abdullah University of Science and Technology; Fish and Wildlife Compensation Program; Fisheries and Oceans Canada; Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, [grant numbers FWC-12164, FWC-14026, FWC-19050]; Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional; Fonds québécois de la recherche nature et technologies; Foundation Segré; Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT Portugal); Galapagos National Park Directorate research, [grant number PC-41-20]; Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, [grant number GBMF9881 and GBMF 8072]; Government of Tristan da Cunha; Habitat; Conservation Trust Foundation; Holsworth Wildlife Research Endowment; Institute of Biology of the Southern Seas, Sevastopol, Russia; Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt; Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais (INPE), Brazil; Israeli Academy of Science's Adams Fellowship; King Family Trust; Labex, CORAIL, France; Liber Ero Fellowship; LIFE (European Union), [grant number LIFE16 NAT/BG/000874]; Mar'a de Maeztu Program for Units of Excellence in R&D; Ministry of Science and Innovation, FEDER, SPASIMM,; Spain, [grant number FIS2016–80067-P (AEI/FEDER, UE)]; MOE-Korea, [grant number 2020002990006]; Mohamed bin Zayed Species Conservation Fund; Montreal Space for Life; National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Earth and Space Science Fellowship Program; National Geographic Society, [grant numbers NGS-82515R-20]; National Natural Science Fund of China; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; National Parks Board, Singapore; National Science and Technology Major Project of China; National Science Foundation, [grant number DEB-1832016]; Natural Environment Research Council of the UK; Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), Alliance COVID-19 grant program, [grant numbers ALLRP 550721–20, RGPIN-2014-06229 (year: 2014), RGPIN-2016-05772 (year: 2016)]; Neiser Foundation; Nekton Foundation; Network of Centre of Excellence of Canada: ArcticNet; North Family Foundation; Ocean Tracking Network; Ömer Külahçıoğlu; Oregon State University; Parks Canada Agency (Lake Louise, Yoho, and Kootenay Field Unit); Pew Charitable Trusts; Porsim Kanaf partnership; President's International Fellowship Initiative for postdoctoral researchers Chinese Academy of Sciences, [grant number 2019 PB0143]; Red Sea Research Center; Regional Government of the Azores, [grant number M3.1a/F/025/2015]; Regione Toscana; Rotary Club of Rhinebeck; Save our Seas Foundation; Science & Technology (CSU COAST); Science City Davos, Naturforschende Gesellschaft Davos; Seha İşmen; Sentinelle Nord program from the Canada First Research Excellence Fund; Servizio Foreste e Fauna (Provincia Autonoma di Trento); Sigrid Rausing Trust; Simon Fraser University; Sitka Foundation; Sivil Toplum Geliştirme Merkezi Derneği; South African National Parks (SANParks); South Australian Department for Environment and Water; Southern California Tuna Club (SCTC); Spanish Ministry for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge; Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness; Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation; State of California; Sternlicht Family Foundation; Suna Reyent; Sunshine Coast Regional Council; Tarea Vida, CEMZOC, Universidad de Oriente, Cuba, [grant number 10523, 2020]; Teck Coal; The Hamilton Waterfront Trust; The Ian Potter Foundation, Coastwest, Western Australian State NRM; The Red Sea Development Company; The Wanderlust Fund; The Whitley Fund; Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline; Tula Foundation (Hakai Institute); University of Arizona; University of Pisa; US Fish and Wildlife Service; US Geological Survey; Valencian Regional Government; Vermont Center for Ecostudies; Victorian Fisheries Authority; VMRC Fishing License Fund; and Wildlife Warriors Worldwide.