Our newest paper Listening to Save Wildlife: Lessons Learnt from Use of Acoustic Technology by a Species Recovery Team, demonstrates how technology design research can reveal new opportunities, barriers, and future needs for conservation technology. Having been presented at the Designing Interactive Systems Conference in June, we would like to share it with you, as well as bonus pictures, sweet serenades of bristlebirds, and more about my work with the team!

The endangered Eastern Bristlebird (Dasyornis brachypterus)

There is little doubt that plants, animals, and ecosystems are declining at an alarming rate, and conservationists are looking for technology to support their tireless work to reverse these trends. In the early days of using technologies for conservation, the tools used were often created for other purposes (e.g. military or biomedical). Recently, conservationists have taken to developing their own technical solutions, exchanging experiences, opportunities, and barriers, such as through the conservation technology network WildLabs.Net or through social media channels (also see #Tech4Wildlife and newer #Tech4Wild).

A WildLabs.Net website screenshot

With the wonderfully burgeoning development of innovative conservation technologies has come new challenges. There is now an abundance of conservation technologies on the market that people can purchase, such as acoustic sensors and camera traps. These devices allow for massive amounts of data to be collected at a low cost, with minimal disturbance to the animals. This is certainly great, but before running off to purchase these devices we need to have a solid plan for what the data should look like, and what happens to it once we have it. In advance of purchasing devices, questions such as following should be considered:

• Are people going to use any particular data and metadata standards to ensure that the data can be easily shared for broadscale use?
• What biological and technical expertise is required to analyse the data? Do the volumes of data collected require a particular technological infrastructure to manage?
• How is the data going to be used, analysed, and managed?
• How can technologies be used to support conservation beyond locating and quantifying sneaky species? Are the data useful for conservation activities beyond simply finding the target critters?
• If so, what data analysis adaptations are needed? It’s worth thinking of these types of questions well in advance.

Check out the paper to learn about the Eastern Bristlebird Recovery Team’s goals, conservation activities, invaluable knowledge, and interest in acoustics, but even beyond that the team taught me a huge amount about efforts to save bristlebirds. Visiting Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary several times, I learned for myself just how tricky these feathered beauties are to see and photograph, even when captive! Can you spot them?

While visiting the aviaries I learned about nesting behaviours of bristlebirds, and worked with the team to deploy sensors where keepers thought best to capture a variety of bristlebird calls. The keeper herself shared so much invaluable information about the calls with me while we worked together, and even challenged me to identify which individuals birds were making calls! I don’t have her skills! I also had the pleasure of meeting Penny, a former New South Wales Office of Environment and Heritage dog who assisted in the surveys to find Eastern bristlebirds in their wild habitats. She is now retired, but it was absolutely amazing watching how hard and efficiently she worked, bounding through tall grass, rapidly picking up the bristlebird scent during a training!

Once we brought the recorders back to the lab, I explored the audio data with team members playing audio of bristlebirds calling, while looking at associated visualisations of sound (i.e. spectrograms), and then discussing calls.

Call type 1

Call type 2

Call type 3

The team takes on a wide variety of tasks to combat the decline of Eastern bristlebirds, regularly evolving new techniques, and eagerly trying new technologies to improve bristlebird conservation outcomes.

From studying this team through a technology design lens, we identified 5 key aspects that warrant detailed consideration by both designers and conservationists to create innovative, impactful conservation technologies into the future.

1. Discern Goals & Motives: Understanding what is driving members of the group both individually and collectively can help share the technological infrastructure so that a variety of interests can be investigated with new
   data.

2. Improve Skills and Knowledge: Interested parties may lack the biological and/or technical skills required to collect and/or analyse data. It’s important to consider how technology can be designed to improve skills.

3. Facilitate Information Exchange: Technology has an important role to play in allowing people to share knowledge and exchange findings in new ways.

4. Extend Beyond the Team: Conservationists are often overburdened, and so it’s worthwhile considering what is needed for broader groups, such as citizen scientists, to participate in use of new technologies in
   conservation.

5. Design for Engagement, Usability, and Conservation Impact: When needing to review large quantities of data, it’s essential to design technology that is fun, usable, and produces accurate analysis to inform conservation efforts.

Technology designers have skills necessary to investigate such complex, wicked problems, and including technology design research in the conservation technology pipeline will reveal novel ways that technology could support conservation more effectively.

You can read Jessie’s complete post on the Queensland University of Technology’s Ecosounds site. You can also give us your feedback by comment below, start a chat with us via Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn, or email directly via alex.chapman@gaiaresources.com.au.

The post Bristlebird Adventures: Designing Technology to Support Saving Wildlife appeared first on Gaia Resources.

The vision of the CRCHBP is ‘To make Australian honey renowned as unique and pure, and priced for its rarity.‘  It is their contention that low prices for Australian honey bee products don’t reflect their uniqueness and purity, and the endemic Western Australian foraging flora and regulated isolation provides opportunities to produce rare honey bee products from healthy bees, and develop this niche market. This federally funded Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) aims to resolve industry problems limiting both the value and expansion of the Australian honey bee products industry. It also plans to contribute to disease insurance policies to address a major global threat to our Australian honey bees.

The research focus for the CRCHBP is trans-disciplinary across four Programs:

1. 1. Hive Sites – will help protect existing sites, inform bee hive movement and rehabilitate land into new high-value hive sites. Australian Manuka honey will be a new product.
   2. Bee Health – to contribute to honey bee health, the CRC will work towards future-proofing the bee industry and developing a catalogue of disease markers.
   3. Honey Products – will add value to the industry through developing honeys from known floral sources for the export market.
   4. Chain of Custody – will use all the information from the CRC to develop a Chain of Custody. This will be linked to developing and testing product quality labels in the export market.

Of course, I’m particularly interested in the floristics side of things – for example, see my annual publication of FloraBase flora statistics in my role as Research Associate at the WA Herbarium.

Within Program 1, I am working with project leader Dr Bryan Boruff and spatial specialist Dr Manita Narongsirikul to design and develop a spatiotemporal information system to produce an enhanced bee-related floristic vegetation map of the south-west of the State. This project also aims to house and integrate spatial information and research data gathered across the CRCHBP projects and related sites. The current DBCA Beekeepers app (shown below) is the current system for accessing apiary site data in WA and provides a case study for developing a more complete spatial modelling environment to answer CRCHBP and industry research questions. Some of the work already underway, both within the CRC and in other oganisations such as the Department of Biodiversity and Conservation Attractions (DBCA), who manage beekeepers on Crown land in Western Australia.

The DBCA’s WA Beekeeper App, an interactive map running in ArcGIS online (click here to launch)

Further information on the full range of research projects is available here: http://www.crchoneybeeproducts.com/research-programs/

If you’d like to know more about how we can help you with research programs, data management or spatial information systems, then please leave a comment below, start a chat with us via Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn, or email me directly via alex.chapman@gaiaresources.com.au.

Alex

The post Researching honey bees, floristics and data management appeared first on Gaia Resources.