Fig. 1.

A decision-making heuristic for managed relocation (MR). This heuristic is illustrated for 2 stereotyped stakeholders in each of 3 hypothetical cases (see Methods). Each case is evaluated along 4 axes: 1. Focal impact, 2. Collateral impact, 3. Feasibility, and 4. Acceptability (Table 1). These axes are scaled from 0–5, with low to high scores, respectively, except for the collateral impacts axis, which is scaled inversely (such that 5 is the lowest collateral impact). These axes create a 4-dimensional space but are illustrated in 2 dimensions. Consequently, polygons connecting the axes do not represent the actual volume of this space, but their shapes do convey a perspective about MR (see Text). Polygons with medium shading show mean scores; darker and lighter polygons show the lower and upper bounds, respectively, of uncertainty in these estimates. Case 1 illustrates how differing conservation groups could differentially evaluate MR for the Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis); this species is threatened by climate change and habitat destruction. Case 2 illustrates evaluations of MR for Torreya taxifolia, an endangered tree with a small endemic range in northern Florida that is threatened by disease and potentially by climate change. Case 3 is for MR of trees used in production forestry in Canada. All 3 cases show how different stakeholder groups could come to very different conclusions about MR, even with the same information.