If the Tasmanian tiger were found, what should we do? An interdisciplinary guide to endangered species recovery. (cases).

Abstract

The Tasmanian tiger, or thylacine (Thylacinus cynocephalus), is a wolf-like carnivorous marsupial last reported in the 1930s in Tasmania, an island state of Australia. Although the species is likely extinct, sightings are reported annually. A fictional scenario is described in which a female thylacine with four pouched young is captured. This scenario is explored and an interdisciplinary approach to endangered species recovery is introduced. This approach is applicable to all endangered species recovery efforts and focuses on the principal dimensions of recovery: (1) orienting to the problem at hand and meeting it successfully; (2) understanding the recovery effort itself, its full context, and the required management (decision) process; (3) using a broad range of methods; and (4) integrating research results into a comprehensive recovery process (picture of the whole). By using this interdisciplinary approach, recovery can be systematically understood, best managed, and restoration prospects enhanced.

Introduction

Some people believe that the Tasmanian tiger, or thylacine (Thylacinus cynocephalus), still exists in the wilds of Tasmania (Figure 1). Finding surviving thylacines would focus international attention on this magnificent animal. It would be viewed as our last chance to restore a unique member of Australia's and the world's natural heritage. Resources likely would be unlimited. Unfortunately, evidence suggests that the species is extinct both on mainland Australia and in Tasmania. Conservation did not come to the aid of this fascinating animal when it was most needed, decades ago.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

If the thylacine did exist and was discovered, what should happen? Are we equipped to deal with such an important conservation challenge? What actions will we need to undertake to recover it? We know that endangered species recovery is always complex, risky, and a difficult task. The thylacine conservation scenario we present below clearly demonstrates this. The problem of recovering an endangered species can be guided using biological science, but more than biological science is required in species recovery. Information from other disciplines is necessary. People must be organized, knowledge and skill need to be mobilized and integrated, and an adequate decision process is required. The challenge becomes one of integrating diverse perspectives, knowledge, skills, and actions all focused on the species' recovery in a timely, reliable way. Clearly an interdisciplinary approach is needed (see Clark 1997, 2002). Exploring the thylacine scenario illustrates how an interdisciplinary approach could aid all recovery efforts.

This paper describes a fictional scenario wherein a live thylacine is captured. We explore an interdisciplinary approach to endangered species recovery applicable to this case and others. This approach is generalized and draws on systems thinking and the policy sciences. We provide a brief overview of the approach, identify relevant literature, and examine part of the approach (i.e. the "intelligence" function) in the limited space available.

Rediscovery of the thylacine

A scenario

Jack O'Halloran, a Tasmanian farmer from Black Creek, calls the local Department of Parks, Lands & Wildlife in Launceston. "Charlie I've got a problem 'ere, sumthins turned up youse might be interested in. She's in the back shed--chook feathers everywhere." Charlie asks Jack to describe the animal, as well as its condition and behavior. "Size of a large dog, sandy colour, but with them stripes down the back--that was what struck me" replied Jack. He also describes the animal resting quietly in the shed, under a table. The chickens were still excited. "Reckon it may have chased a chook in from the yard last night, was probably after some tucker, it's been pretty damn cold out here this summer. The shed door was closed, but I locked it after I peaked in. Pretty shook up I was--had a cuppa though, before I went to check again through the shed window and rang you," Jack said. "That certainly does sound worth investigating, hold tight I'll be there soon," Charlie tells Jack.

Charlie calls his assistant wildlife officer, Bob, down the hallway. He begins to relate the story, at the same time phoning his boss, the Director of Wildlife in Hobart, to alert him to the possibility of finding a live thylacine. Charlie says that they will call back, after a site visit to Jack's. Charlie and Bob then drive along the windy open forest road to Black Creek. Black Creek is 20 km west of Deloraine and 65 km west-southwest of Launceston. The area is known mainly for its wool production, and the landscape is dotted with flocks of sheep and lambs. Densely forested mountainous tracts surround Jack's property. A national park, Black Mountain, and an escarpment, the Great Western, lie south and southwest of the farming area. Jack meets the two officers at the gate and directs them toward the back of the house. They quietly approach the shed and observe the animal sleeping under the table. It is a thylacine!

They immediately call the Director, to inform him of events. He then calls the Minister as well as the Federal Endangered Species Unit and Federal Minister for Environment. A teleconference is arranged for that evening to decide what to do. Decisions must be made. Should the animal be turned loose immediately or should it be held in captivity? Many more questions need to be posed and answers rendered. All decisions must be based on reliable information and good judgment.

Thylacines

Before we consider recovery efforts, what do we know about the thylacine? The thylacine, also known as the Tasmanian wolf or tiger, is possibly one of the most widely known of the Australian mammals although it has not been captured for over 70 years (Dixon 1989). It is a large carnivorous marsupial and single member of the family Thylacinidae. It is sandy colored and has 15 to 20 distinct dark stripes that transverse its back, the number of bands varying between individuals. The color pattern may assist in camouflage. The thylacine has a large head that appears like that of a dog with long and powerful jaws. The tail of the thylacine is long and stiff, but unlike that of a dog it cannot be wagged laterally. The legs of the thylacine are relatively short. Because it is a marsupial, the female gives birth to small, undeveloped young that continue their development in her pouch.

The thylacine has a sad history, which is intimately linked with the way Australia was settled (Guiler 1985). This history reveals much about settlers' attitudes towards the land and its flora and fauna. The Dutch explorer Abel Tasman reported in 1642 that one of his crew had found footprints similar to the claws of a tiger on the shores of Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania). The first account of the animal from Tasmania was in the 1805 Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser and reported evidence of "an animal of a truly singular and novel description" and "certainly the only powerful and terrific of the carnivorous and voracious tribe yet discovered on any part of New Holland (Australia) or its adjacent islands." (see Dixon 1989).

The first scientific description of the thylacine was to the Linnean Society of London (Harris 1808). In 1803, sheep were introduced to the fertile midlands of Tasmania by settlers. The area also provided habitat for thylacines, and most sheep losses were attributed to the thylacine, although wild dogs may also have caused losses (Guiler 1985). In 1830 the Van Dieman's Land Company introduced a bounty on the thylacine. Government bounties in place between 1888 and 1909 resulted in 2,184 payments (Guiler 1985; Dixon 1989). The last thylacine killed in the wild was in 1930, and the last known animal died in the London Zoo in 1931 (Dixon 1989). By 1936, the species was added to the Tasmanian list of protected animals. Over 70 years later no further specimens have been collected, but scores of sightings have been reported.

Thylacine recovery

The thylacine recovery effort faces many challenges. A number of critical decisions need to be made, some quickly. Because so many things need to be considered and addressed, the challenge is truly an interdisciplinary one. Because of this, all parties involved need to ensure that the decision process they set up to address thylacine recovery is of the highest quality--timely, reliable, comprehensive, trustworthy, and effective, among other things. In all likelihood, the thylacine will only be restored through a decision process that brings many people together and integrates their knowledge and skills. How the decision process is organized and managed will mean the difference between saving the thylacine or its loss forever!

Interdisciplinary approach

What is an interdisciplinary approach and how does one set up an appropriate decision process directed at solving the problem posed by the thylacine discovery? Both the decision process and the problem itself are human constructs--that is, they are both a concern and product of people interacting. Thus, recovering the thylacine is really about people as much if not more than it is about thylacines. As a result, the human social process or context of the thylacine conservation problem must be understood and addressed simultaneously with addressing the core conservation biology problem and setting up an effective decision process.

Fortunately, for our thylacine conservationists all these concerns have been dealt with many times by other conservationists in many other endangered species cases (e.g., Clark 1996a, 1997; Reading and Miller 2000). In fact, we now have so much experience in trying to save species that practical interdisciplinary guidelines about how to set up and carry out a successful recovery program have been developed and are beginning to be used. The principal dimensions of this interdisciplinary approach with respect to species conservation have been described in articles published in the Endangered Species UPDATE (Figure 2). These articles cover introductions to (1) the benefits of an interdisciplinary approach (Clark et al. 1992); (2) setting up decision processes (Clark and Brunner 1996); (3) understanding the social process or context of a case (Clark and Wallace 1998); (4) methods of focusing on core problems (Wallace and Clark 1999); (5) multiple methods (Clark et al. 1999); (6) understanding people's standpoints (Clark and Wallace 1999); and (7) learning about how to learn to be more successful (Clark 1996b). Several of these papers offer checklists and sets of questions for the thylacine conservationists to use. These papers, all reprinted in this special issue of Endangered Species UPDATE, can be consulted to develop a more complete understanding of this approach and thus we will not repeat them here in detail.

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

The interdisciplinary approach draws on systems thinking and the policy sciences (Lasswell 1971). Interdisciplinary approaches differ fundamentally from multi-disciplinary approaches, although many people use the terms interchangeably. Interdisciplinary approaches systematically integrate information from different disciplines into a unified approach, ideally that integration occurs before and during data collection (Clark et al. 1999). Alternatively, multi-disciplinary approaches rely on information from several disciplines, but that information is usually collected, evaluated, and used independently to make recommendations. The lack of integration can lead to recommendations from different disciplines that are incompatible or contradictory. For example, when a biologist and a social scientist made independent recommendations for core area delineations within a newly created national park that included indigenous people in Mongolia, there was almost no overlap between their recommendations (R. Reading, unpubl. data).

An interdisciplinary approach sees recovery as a type of problem with systems-like features (i.e. problem orientation, social process, and decision process) that must be successfully addressed (Figure 2). First, at the heart of endangered species conservation is a perceived problem that must be solved--in our case, recovering thylacines. The problem can be best appreciated by carrying out five interrelated tasks that make up rational problem solving (Wallace and Clark 1999). Second, because the problem is a concern for people who interact in a social process, this process represents the context of the conservation problem to be solved (Clark and Wallace 1998). Third, the people focusing on the thylacine conservation problem must work through a decision process that hopefully will end with species recovery (Clark and Brunner 1996). These three dimensions of saving the thylacine correspond to problem orientation, social process, and decision process (Figure 2). These dimensions describe the basic features associated with the interdisciplinary approach we recommend. Proponents of this approach, who are often systems builders, have developed a comprehensive framework for inquiry that embraces a complex set of terms, concepts, maps, values, institutions, function, process, and intellectual skills that are part and parcel of the whole system (Chen 1989). This system is imminently practical, but rarely employed in species and ecosystem conservation to date.

The interdisciplinary approach we present here is a different way to think about species recovery for most practitioners. There are many ways to conceive of species recovery. The most common approach is a conventional one that draws on biology, and its paradigms, models, and methods (experimental, predictive science). This approach typically assumes that the conservation challenge is largely or solely a biological problem, thus biologists are brought in to address it. The biological disciplines obviously have much to contribute, but recovery faces far more than simply biological challenges. For example, biologists may not be skilled in setting up or participating in a decision process (e.g., organizational or leadership skills--see Clark and Wallace's paper on values, this volume). Nor will they necessarily be able to systematically map and comprehend the full context of the conservation challenge. They may be limited in the kinds of methods they know and have little experience with integrative, interdisciplinary methods. This situation typically exists among the government bureaucracies that dominate species recovery programs. As such, most recovery programs employ conventional approaches based on the biological sciences, despite their many limitations and difficulties. These conventional approaches often exacerbate the inadequacies of trying to solve complex, multi-faceted problems with narrow or limited knowledge and skills.

The thylacine scenario

An examination of the thylacine scenario using the interdisciplinary approach permits us to begin seeing species recovery as involving tasks such as problem orientation and social and decision processes (Figure 2). In species recovery, these dimensions are intertwined in complex ways and they must be understood and managed successfully. Because the intelligence function--the gathering, processing, and dissemination of information--is such a vital activity in the thylacine decision process, our discussion focuses on it.

Social process

Because thylacine recovery is a human undertaking, knowledge of the social process is vital. Initially, some people, groups, and institutions will be involved in a rapidly organizing decision process. Other participants will become involved later. Participants in and people and groups affected by the process are often referred to as stakeholders, or key stakeholders. Participants are involved for different reasons; some will be included because of their authority and control responsibilities (e.g., state and federal governments). The Tasmanian Government would have a major role in organizing the social and decision processes. Perhaps an analogy can best illustrate what is involved. The thylacine is like a critically ill patient in a hospital, the Tasmanian Government is the hospital administrator looking after the patient. The administrator will need to coordinate specialist doctors who can contribute to the patient's medical well-being and eventual recovery. As time goes on, other specialists and generalists would become involved because of their knowledge, skills, and other resources (e.g., national and international scientific and conservation communities). NGOs such as World Wide Fund For Nature, Australian Conservation Society, the International Union for Conservation of Nature may offer resources, financial, technical, and educational aid. These participants will have different perspectives, values, strategies, and seek different outcomes. This must be understood, "mapped" (i.e. information and interrelationships organized and outlined), and managed openly and fairly if the decision process is to work well.

The public would also play a part in the conservation effort. Assistance from the public would be needed to find more thylacines. Outreach and publicity in the local area and beyond would be important for the public to understand the thylacine, its habits, what the recovery effort is aiming to achieve and how, and the significance of the effort. As time goes on, the social and decision processes become more complex. A wider network of people and organizations come to play important roles in the recovery process.

Decision process

A key initial step in the overall decision process is a well-organized intelligence activity that helps clarify the problem and its context (Figure 2). Intelligence is the first phase in the decision process, but it should remain ongoing over the life of the recovery effort. Much information must be gathered and organized from existing sources and new intelligence must be obtained. All of this information must be integrated and disseminated as a basis for debate (promotion), decisions (prescriptions), and subsequent activities (invocation, application, appraisal, termination). These seven functions comprise a complete decision process. All decision functions will need to be carried out well if the thylacine is to be recovered.

The participants in thylacine recovery should make decisions based on available intelligence and a short but thorough debate about the problem and options for addressing it. They should make every effort to remain problem oriented.

In this case, let's assume they decide (prescription) to hold the thylacine temporarily in captivity at the Hobart Zoo. Plans are made to capture the animal that evening and house it in a quiet, off-exhibit accommodation. Keepers and vets from the zoo assist in the capture and transfer of the animal (invocation and application activities). The animal is examined (intelligence) and much to everyone's surprise is found to be female with four small pouch-young! It is likely that there are a few other thylacines in the wild, and a search plan must be developed. The possibility of setting up a captive breeding program is now a real option. Tasmanian biologists, familiar with the Black Creek area, based on knowledge of ecological systems in the region, predict that the wild population would consist of only a few animals, at best (intelligence). To ensure a well-functioning program, the rapidly forming recovery team also attends to social science considerations. For example, they evaluate likely attitudes of the local public toward thylacines and begin collecting additional data (intelligence). They also assess the ability of the growing number of participants to work well together (intelligence). Based on the available information, they decide to develop a public relations program and a special working group for thylacine recovery (prescription). The working group is formed that includes participants with diverse skills and the ability to work together in a team (invocation), and they rapidly begin working on the recovery problem (application). Participants take stock of how well they are orienting to the recovery problem and the rapidly emerging social and decision processes and conclude they are doing well (appraisal).

Many aspects of a growing and self-organizing decision process require attention, especially intelligence activities. As the social and decision processes become more active and complex, and as technical, social, and decision issues become more pressing, it is vital to attend to each of these diverse matters. There will be many biological, technical issues needing attention, but there will also be many social and decision process issues that are equally or even more important. The tendency of many officials and administrators is to simply rely upon their own bureaucracy to address these issues. Hard won experience in species recovery shows that this traditional bureaucratic approach can be disastrous (see Clark et al. 1994; Miller et al. 1996; Reading and Miller 2000).

Problem orientation

Orienting to the thylacine problem requires that conservationists focus on all of the tasks associated with problem solving (Wallace and Clark 1999). To carry out sound integrated research, management, and policy and to avoid a "solution oriented" approach (wherein practitioners rapidly jump to solutions before fully understanding a problem), Harold Lasswell (1971) proposed a strategy for problem solving that consists of five tasks: (1) clarifying goals; (2) describing trends; (3) analyzing conditions; (4) projecting developments; and (5) inventing, evaluating, and selecting alternatives (Figure 2). We recommend using this approach in endangered species conservation, although it is applicable to any kind of problem solving, conservation or otherwise.

Much information already exists about thylacines, but more is needed, and quickly. From a biological perspective, a number of questions need answering quickly. The following questions, although not comprehensive, help thylacine conservationists orient to the biological aspects of the problem. These questions are about trends, conditions, and projections, and also a tentative look at alternatives. First, what do we know of thylacines: their life span, age of reproduction, number of offspring, mating pattern, care of offspring? Second, how would one go about caring for these unique animals in captivity? Third, what do we know of their behavior? Fourth, even though life history information is essential to successfully managing a species, it provides only a partial understanding of changes in a population's numbers and density. Fifth, because there are so few thylacine individuals in our scenario, we would need to know the genetic relationship of individuals to guide genetic management of captive and wild populations. Sixth, how would one find other thylacines in the wild? Seventh, if more animals were detected, should they be captured or left in the wild? The objective of a captive breeding program would be to restore populations to self-sustaining viable levels in the wild. How would we go about reintroducing captive-bred animals into the wild?

To this point, we have emphasized biological intelligence activities; however, information in many other areas is also necessary. A number of non-biological factors also affect thylacine recovery efforts. Intelligence on the social and decision processes can help focus problem orientation, for example. Such intelligence consists of information on the values and attitudes of the various stakeholders, method of organizing for recovery, power and authority relationships, economic considerations, pertinent legislation, and more. In addition, recovery programs are subjected to uncertainty, because, as we have seen for the thylacine, often very little is known about the biology of endangered species, so researchers may make errors of estimation and judgment. Such programs are complex because of the many individuals and organizations involved, all with a sense of urgency to succeed before extinction of the species. These considerations argue for adaptive management approaches to recovery that are experimental and permit rapid changes in approaches based on new information and frequent evaluation (Holling 1995). To enhance chances for success, the recovery process should remain interdisciplinary, with all aspects of the challenge, including social and decision processes, investigated and incorporated in adaptive approaches to decision-making and action.

Most of the considerations and work we have outlined in each of these areas (i.e. social process, decision process, and problem orientation) fall well outside of the biological disciplines in which most practitioners are trained. To improve our chances for successful thylacine recovery we therefore should be enlisting the support of social scientists and others with practical expertise in these areas. We should also be training future practitioners in endangered species recovery in these areas.

Conclusions

Our scenario of discovering a living thylacine has illustrated the complexity that typifies endangered species recovery efforts. We have only just touched upon some of the aspects involved. The scenario has introduced us to the contributions that modern interdisciplinary approaches, well founded in the policy sciences, can make to solve endangered species problems. Other papers in this volume explore these theories and concepts we briefly introduce here in more detail. All conservation problems involve social and decision processes, as well as problem definition; even though most practitioners probably do not recognize them as such. A significantly improved understanding each of these aspects of a problem therefore offers the promise of increased success rates in the future.

We based our scenario on an extraordinary animal, the thylacine. Because of its unusual and unique status in the animal world, people can easily identify with its plight and would likely mobilize rapidly for its recovery. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that the thylacine will be found. One wonders what the outcome would have been if, in the 1930s, the conservation biology perspective we endorse here had pervaded, and modern techniques had been available. Similar situations, however, are likely to develop in the future. Will our response be adequate to meet the challenge? How would the situation differ for a less glamorous species, such as an insect or "weed," or for a species surrounded by greater conflict, such as a large, dangerous carnivore or an agricultural "pest?" Each of these scenarios exists today, but only the future will tell if recovery efforts will succeed.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Denver Zoological Society, Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Eckerd College, and grants to the Northern Rockies Conservation Cooperative.

Literature cited

Chen, L. 1989. An introduction to contemporary international law: A policy-oriented perspective. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

Clark, T.W. 1996a. Appraising threatened species recovery efforts: Practical recommendations. Pp. 1-22 in Back from the brink: Refining the threatened species recovery process. Australian Nature Conservation Agency in Transactions of the Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Australia.

Clark, T.W. 1996b. Learning as a strategy for improving endangered species conservation. Endangered Species UPDATE 13(1 & 2): 22-24.

Clark, T.W. 1997. Averting extinction: Reconstructing endangered species recovery. Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

Clark, T.W. 2002. The policy process A practical guide for natural resource professionals Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

Clark, T.W. and R.D. Brunner. 1996. Making partnerships work: Introduction to decision process. Endangered Species UPDATE 13(9): 1-5.

Clark, T.W. and R.L. Wallace. 1998. Understanding the human factor in endangered species recovery: An introduction to human social process. Endangered Species UPDATE 15(1): 2-9.

Clark, T.W. and R.L. Wallace. 1999. The professional in endangered species conservation: An introduction to standpoint clarification. Endangered Species UPDATE 16(1): 9-13.

Clark, T.W., R.P. Reading, and A.L. Clarke, eds. 1994. Endangered species recovery: Finding the lessons, improving the process. Island Press, Washington.

Clark, T.W., R.P. Reading, and R.L. Wallace. 1999. Research in endangered species conservation: An introduction to multi-methods. Endangered Species UPDATE 16(5):90-97

Dixon, J.M. 1989. Thylacinidae. Pp. 549-59 in D.W. Walton and B.J. Richardson, eds. Fauna of Australia: Mammalia. Australian Government Publ. Vol. 1b, Canberra.

Guiler, E.R. 1985. Thylacine: The tragedy of the Tasmanian Tiger. Oxford University Press, Melbourne.

Harris, G.P. 1808. Descriptions of two new species of Didelphis from Van Dieman's Land. Transactions of the Linnean Society of London 9:174.

Holling, C.S. 1995. What barriers? What bridges? Pages 3-36 in L.H. Gunderson, C.S. Holling, and S.S. Light, eds. Barriers and bridges to the renewal of ecosystems and institutions. Columbia University Press, New York.

Lasswell, H.D. 1971. A pre-view of policy sciences. American Elsevier Publishing Company, New York.

Lasswell, H.D. and M.S. McDougal. 1992. Jurisprudence for a free society. Kluwer Law International, The Hague, Netherlands.

Miller, B J., R.P. Reading, and S.C. Forrest. 1996. Prairie night: Black-footed ferrets and recovery of endangered species. Smithsonian Press, Washington, DC.

Reading, R.P. and B.J. Miller, eds. 2000. Endangered animals: A reference guide to conflicting issues. Greenwood Press, Westport, Connecticut.

Wallace, R.L. and T.W. Clark. 1999. Solving problems in endangered species conservation: An introduction to problem orientation. Endangered Species UPDATE 16:28-34.

Tim W. Clark
Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies,
301 Prospect Street, New Haven, CT 06511, Northern Rockies
Conservation Cooperative, Box 2705, Jackson, WY 83001
[e-mail]

Richard P. Reading
Denver Zoological Foundation, 2900 East 23rd Avenue, Denver, CO 80205
[e-mail]

Richard L. Wallace
Environmental Studies Program, Ursinus College, P.O. Box 1000,
Collegeville, PA 19426
[e-mail]

Barbara A. Wilson
Deakin University, Geelong, Australia, V1C 3217
[e-mail]