In the lecture today in Environmental Monitoring and Audit, I mentioned the model examining how much search effort is required to be sufficiently sure of the absence of a species at a site. This was based on a paper by Brendan Wintle et al. (2012).
You can read more about this topic here, with an attempt at an intuitive interpretation of the model, and some links to other examples where the prior probability (base rate) matters.
If you are particularly keen, you can read a copy of the manuscript here.
As additional reading to support tomorrow’s lecture on detectability, you might want to look at this blog post I wrote about our recent paper on determining the required survey effort to claim absence of something from a site.
This is an interesting case associated with environmental auditing. A few months ago, the Victoria government lodged a court case against VicForests for alleged illegal logging of rainforest and forest buffers. One interesting aspect is that VicForests is a stated-owned commerical agency; this is almost a case of the government prosecuting itself.
Well, the case has been resolved, for now with an out-of-court settlement. The Victorian government has adjourned the case for year. VicForests has agreed to improve its procedures, work with the Victorian government to better define what constitutes rainforest, and initiate revegetation of 22 ha of rainforest.
I’d be interested to know how the definitions of rainforest are changing.