34 – Organisational perspectives on threatened species monitoring^425similar overarching objectives and constraints. However, particular strengths (and,
inversely, weaknesses) are connected to secondary reasons for monitoring. By
understanding how particular organisational positions diverge from best practice,
practitioners can anticipate which aspects of their monitoring programs may need
fine-tuning to achieve the most effective threatened species monitoring.
Partnerships and collaborations between different types of organisations can
augment the effectiveness of monitoring by sharing skills, knowledge and
inf luence, thereby achieving better conservation outcomes with similar effort and
resources. Understanding the different reasons organisations have for monitoring
will be important for enabling these partnerships to work. Enhanced
communication about the benefits of monitoring can help overcome potential
disconnections between external decision makers and those implementing
monitoring programs, thereby inf luencing future funding and management
decisions. Greater awareness of the types of issues and constraints that
practitioners face, as well as celebrating their strengths, can lead to improvements
in threatened species monitoring.
References
Burbidge AH, Maron M, Clarke MF, Baker J, Oliver DL, Ford G (2011) Linking science
and practice in ecological research and management: how can we do it better?
Ecological Management & Restoration 12 , 54–60. doi:10.1111/j.14 42-89 03.2011.0 0569.x
Fazey I, Fazey JA, Salisbury JG, Lindenmayer DB, Dovers S (2006) The nature and role
of experiential knowledge for environmental conservation. Environmental Conser-
vation 33 , 1–10. doi:10.1017/S037689290600275X
MacMillan DC, Marshall K (2006) The Delphi process – an expert-based approach to
ecological modelling in data-poor environments. Animal Conservation 9 , 11–19.
doi:10.1111/j.1469-1795.2005.00001.x
Martin TG, Burgman MA, Fidler F, Kuhnert PM, Low-Choy S, McBride M, et al.
(2012) Eliciting expert knowledge in conservation science. Conservation Biology 26 ,
29–38. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01806.x