G Model

PECON-330; No. of Pages 9 ARTICLE IN PRESS

Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Supported by the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development - CNPq

www.perspectecolconserv.com

Research Letters

Identifying priority conservation areas for the Andean Condor in

Colombia
María Alejandra Parrado-Vargas a,b,e,∗∗ , José Fernando González-Maya d,e , Björn Reu a ,
Antoni Margalida f,g , Fausto Sáenz-Jiménez c , Félix Hernán Vargas b,∗
a
Escuela de Biología, Universidad Industrial de Santander, Carrera 27 Calle 9, P.C. 2768002, Bucaramanga, Santander, Colombia
b
The Peregrine Fund, Isla Santa Cruz, C.P. 200102, Galápagos, Ecuador
c
Escuela de Biología, Universidad Pedagógica y Tecnológica de Colombia-UPTC, Sede Central Tunja–Boyacá–Colombia; Avenida Central del Norte 39-115, PC-150003
d
Departamento de Ciencias Ambientales, CBS, Universidad, Autónoma Metropolitana Unidad Lerma, Av. de las Garzas 10, Col. El Panteón, C.P. 52005, Lerma de Villada, Estado, de
México, México
e
Proyecto de Conservación de Aguas y Tierras, ProCAT Colombia, Cra 8 # 127c-36, Of. 101, C.P. 110121, Bogotá, Colombia
f
Pyrenean Institute of Ecology (CSIC). Avda. Nuestra Señora de la Victoria 12, C.P. 22700, Jaca, Spain
g
Institute for Game and Wildlife Research IREC (CSIC-UCLM-JCCM), Ronda de Toledo, 12, C.P. 13071, Ciudad Real, Spain

h i g h l i g h t s g r a p h i c a l a b s t r a c t

• Priority conservation areas (PCA)

were determined for Andean condors
in Colombia.
• Less than 30% of the PCA for condors
are in protected areas.
• Areas with Low, Medium, and High
Human Footprint Index require dif-
ferent strategies for prioritization
conservation Areas.
• We propose an area-based roadmap
to optimize Andean condor conserva-
tion in the northern Andes of South
America.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The Andean Condor (Vultur gryphus) is a globally threatened species. Its highly mobile capability presents
Received 22 May 2023 important challenges for conservation planning, especially in extremely geographically complex regions
Accepted 5 May 2024 such as Colombia, where little is known about its ecology. Over the past three decades, financial and tech-
Available online xxx
nical conservation efforts have primarily focussed on reintroduction and local management strategies.
However, these initiatives did not properly prioritize the various conservation measures undertaken.
Keywords: We utilized roosting locations across Colombia to identify suitable roosting distribution with high risk
Vultur gryphus
because of the anthropogenic impact on a Systematic Planning Tool for decision-making based on robust
Decision making tools
Roosting selections
spatial habitat modelling to define where and how should focus the Andean condor conservation actions
Habitat suitability in the country. Specifically, we aimed to develop a conservation planning tool to facilitate spatially explicit
New world vultures decision-making. Our results showed that Colombia has at least 19,571.33 km2 of suitable roosting habi-
tat for this species, but over 30% of this area is currently considered to be under conservation risk due to
severe anthropogenic impacts. Considering this, we suggested different actions for each proposed area
according to potential threats generated by human communities.
© 2024 Associação Brasileira de Ciência Ecológica e Conservação. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an
open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
).

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (M.A. Parrado-Vargas), [email protected] (J.F. González-Maya), [email protected] (B. Reu),
[email protected] (A. Margalida), [email protected] (F. Sáenz-Jiménez), [email protected] (F.H. Vargas).
∗∗
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Maria-Parrado-Vargas

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2024.05.002
2530-0644/© 2024 Associação Brasileira de Ciência Ecológica e Conservação. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Please cite this article as: M.A. Parrado-Vargas, J.F. González-Maya, B. Reu et al. Identifying priority conservation areas for the Andean
Condor in Colombia, Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2024.05.002
G Model
PECON-330; No. of Pages 9 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.A. Parrado-Vargas, J.F. González-Maya, B. Reu et al. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Introduction Material and methods

One of the greatest challenges facing conservation planning Study Area

(Knight et al., 2006) is deciding how and where to invest limited
financial and technical resources to conserve biodiversity (Wilson The study was carried out within the historical distribution of
et al., 2007). This situation becomes even more complex for mobile the Andean Condor in the Colombian Andes (Rodríguez et al., 2006)
threatened species that are highly mobile with large home ranges, in an area located between 1800 and 5500 m asl. The study area was
which are usually susceptible to large-scale threats throughout defined according to the most up-to-date data on the presence and
their distribution range (Nandintsetseg et al., 2019). For this reason, distribution of Andean Condors in Colombia (Sáenz-Jiménez, 2020),
single actions at specific local scales are often insufficient to secure and comprises an area of 83,808 km2 .
species persistence, and large-scale approaches, including trans- We gathered roost site data from three sources: (i) satellite data
boundary management and conservation strategies, are required from two tagged wild condors, a non-breeding adult female and
(Lambertucci et al., 2014; Runge et al., 2014). an immature male, tracked in north-eastern Colombia between
The Andean Condor (Vultur gryphus) is one of the largest and 2019 and 2021 using Geotrack 65 G Solar PTT trackers (eight GPS
most mobile species in the Neotropical region, with its distribu- fixes/day); (ii) data collected from three condors tagged between
tion spanning most of the Andes. Classified as Vulnerable (VU), its 2014–2019 in Ecuador, comprising one juvenile male and two
populations are in decline (BirdLife International, 2020) and the subadult females, using microwave telemetry satellite trackers
situation is particularly critical in the northern part of its range (PTT-100 50 gram solar patagial tags) programmed to provide one
(Naveda-Rodríguez et al., 2016; Padró et al., 2023). In Colombia, the fix per hour from 05:00 to 19:00 local Ecuador time (GMT-5); and
Andean Condor is considered Critically Endangered (CR) (Renjifo iii) direct observations at communal and occasional roosts, and one
et al., 2016): This critical situation was identified in Colombia in nesting site, between 2014 and 2021 across different parts of the
the 1980s, a decade during which it was believed to be extinct in Colombian Andes (Fig. 1).
several localities (Rodríguez et al., 2006). Consequently, a reintro- Roosting condor locations were identified using the satellite
duction program was implemented between 1989 and 2013 and tracking data collected between sunset and sunrise (18:00 to
71 individuals were released at eight repopulation sites (Sáenz- 05:00 h), when condors are less active and birds with movement
Jiménez, 2020). However, to date only one successful reproduction speeds of zero knots could be assumed to be resting (Perrig et al.,
of the released condors was reported in Los Nevados Natural Park 2020). Roost sites in areas without satellite tracking data were con-
(Restrepo-Cardona et al., 2018). At present, little is known about firmed by observation between 18:00 and 05:00 h (Lambertucci
the ecological requirements and survival of reintroduced individ- and Ruggiero, 2013). GPS errors potentially resulting from multiple
uals and the threats they may face, hindering the development closely spaced roosting locations were eliminated by aggregating
of effective technical and financial strategies for their long-term all observations within a 100 m radius and assuming that they
conservation in the country. corresponded to the same roost sites. We identified the roost-
Andean Condors can travel more than 300 km/day (Lambertucci ing sites using Package tidyr in R (Wickham and Girlich, 2022)
et al., 2014; Padró et al., 2023) and prefer to roost on cliffs and and assumed that all the identified roosting sites had the same
steep mountain slopes, which offer refuge from threats and adverse importance.
weather conditions (Lambertucci and Ruggiero, 2013). Condors
regularly frequent the same roosting sites (Padró et al., 2018), with Selection of predictive variables
conditions that offer safety and facilitate easy take-off and land-
ing (H.J. Williams et al., 2020). The roosting sites are preserved We explored climatic and geomorphological variables to iden-
within Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs) to guarantee safe habi- tify those that could explain roosting site selection (data for all
tats that facilitate efficient take-off and landing, nesting, and the records are shown at doi: 10.17632/trgd5tnwxp.1). The climatic
overall survival of Andean Condors (Plaza and Lambertucci, 2020). variables selected were expressed at a spatial resolution of 50 m and
Additionally, these sites serve as vital conservation and gather- included wind speed, air density (air mass per unit volume) (Badger
ing spots for other bird species, supporting their populations and et al., 2015), and solar radiation on inclined surfaces (Solargis, World
the ecosystem services provided (Lambertucci and Ruggiero, 2016). Bank Group, 2019) all of which are known to influence the flight and
These areas also create stepping-stone corridors between regions, soaring capabilities of condors (H.J. Williams et al., 2020), or to pro-
promoting gene flow among populations (Padró et al., 2023), Thus, vide protection against extreme weather conditions (Lambertucci
the protection of roosting sites should help to reduce discrete loss and Ruggiero, 2013).
of genetic variability (Padró et al., 2018), and reduce the effects of In addition, six geomorphological variables were included at a
inbreeding (Padró et al., 2020). spatial resolution of 90 m, including roughness (topographic com-
Here, we highlight the significance of modelling suitable roost- plexity), convergence (dissected terrain with valleys and ridges),
ing sites as an effective systematic planning tool to inform condor elevation, degree of northerly orientation, degree of easterly orienta-
conservation strategies in Colombia, a region characterized by sub- tion (measures of orientation combined with slope to the north or
stantial research gaps on habitat use and movement ecology of the to the east), and slope (rate of change of elevation) (Amatulli et al.,
Andean Condor. This study aims to identify PCA’s for the Andean 2020). These variables are associated with cliff structures (Amatulli
Condor in Colombia based on the available information on con- et al., 2020), which provide condors with refuge from predators and
firmed roosting areas used by the species and the potential risks adverse weather conditions (Lambertucci and Ruggiero, 2013) (SI
defined by the Human Footprint Index (HFI, Correa Ayram et al., 1). All variables with a spatial resolution less than 90 m were resam-
2020). The delineation of these areas will serve as a valuable pled to 90 m using the resample function with bilinear interpolation
decision-making tool, providing guidelines for better prioritization method in the Package raster of R (Hijmans et al., 2023). Data were
of Andean Condor conservation efforts and effective mitigation of collected in areas within the extent of the potential distribution of
population threats at the landscape scale. condors in Colombia.

2
G Model
PECON-330; No. of Pages 9 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.A. Parrado-Vargas, J.F. González-Maya, B. Reu et al. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Fig. 1. Study Area. Roosting sites identified, dots in colours represent the origin of the data; polygons correspond to Minimal convex polygons for tagged wild condors. The
Gray area represents potential Andean condor distribution (Sáenz-Jiménez, 2020).

Distribution patterns of potential roosting sites asl within the potential condor distribution in Colombia and ran-
domized the data using the resample function with Package caret
We analysed roosting sites used by condors (denoted 1) and in R (Wickham, 2017). We tested for correlations among all vari-
500 random points (denoted 0) located between 2000 and 5500 m ables and excluded those that were highly correlated (>0.7) (SI 2)

3
G Model
PECON-330; No. of Pages 9 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.A. Parrado-Vargas, J.F. González-Maya, B. Reu et al. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Table 1
Summary of the Generalized Linear Model (GLM). The table shows the first ten models obtained, along with their Akaike delta value (AICc), Akaike value (AIC), degrees of
freedom (df), weight, log-likelihood (LogLike), and prediction error for K-fold Cross-validation (K-fold err). The combined value of the variables corresponding to each model
are shown in the variables row. *Indicates the best competitive models.

Models AICc df AICw AIC K-fold Err LogLike Intercept Air Density Wind Speed Slope Convergence Radiation Northeness

Mod81* 0 6 0.5 740.87 0.12 −364.43 −0.25 −0.78 0.42 1.9 −0.01 0.55 –
Mod63 1.56 5 0.2 742.45 0.12 −366.22 −0.22 −0.80 0.44 1.9 – 0.56 –
Mod90 2 7 0.2 742.83 0.12 −364.43 −0.22 −0.79 0.42 1.9 −0.01 0.55 −0.02
Mod.all 3.07 8 0.1 743.87 0.12 −363.93 – – – – – – –
Mod64 16.71 5 <0.01 757.6 0.12 −373.8 – – – – – – –
Mod83 18.56 6 <0.01 759.42 0.13 −373.71 – – – – – – –
Mod82 18.64 6 <0.01 759.5 0.12 −373.75 – – – – – – –
Mod39 20.49 4 <0.01 761.4 0.13 −376.7 – – – – – – –
Mod66 22.43 5 <0.01 763.33 0.13 −376.66 – – – – – – –
Mod65 22.46 5 <0.01 763.36 0.13 −376.67 – – – – – – –
Avg Model −0.22 −0.73 0.39 1.75 −0.01 0.51 −0.02

(Hosmer and Lemeshow, 2000). All variables were standardized to II Socio-ecological Actions and Restoration Priority Areas (SERPAs),
mean zero and unit variance. We analysed the potential influence defined as areas with medium anthropogenic pressure and suit-
of variables using the Generalized Linear Model (GLM) approach able roosting sites; and (iii) Type III Socio-ecological Actions and
based on the Binomial Logistic family and logit link to relate the Priority Diagnostic Areas (SEDPAs) (Fig.2), defined as areas with high
species presence-absence, using the ‘glm’ function using Package anthropogenic pressure and suitable roosting sites, probably very
stats in R (Venables and Ripley, 2002) and generated 93 models, close to urban centres or major cities. This final mapping was done
including all the potential variable combinations without interac- using QGis 3.16.16 (Fig. 3). Using the defined PCAs, we proposed
tions. a roadmap for the best conservation actions in each PCA type (SI
We used the Akaike information criterion (AIC) corrected for 4), considering the particular threats affecting condors in Colom-
small samples, Delta AIC, and AIC weight (AICw) values using the bia (Restrepo-Cardona et al., 2022) and South America (Plaza and
bbml R package (Bolker et al., 2009) to choose the most parsi- Lambertucci, 2020), and more generally for other vulture species
monious models based on delta AIC values (AICc < 2) as the elsewhere in the world (Botha et al., 2017).
best-performing models for downstream analyses (Table 1). Where
a predictive model was identified as competitive, we averaged the Results
selected models using AICw and estimated the weighted regression
coefficient values of each variable (Table 1) (Imam and Kushwaha, The satellite data recorded 4640 GPS locations, leading to the
2013). To validate the most competitive models, we used K-fold identification of 461 roost sites in Colombia. Ten of these sites
cross-validation with a training set and data test set (80%–20%), were verified through direct observations and the detailed data for
repeated in 10 cross-validation runs (Yates et al., 2023), and cal- all records are available at doi: 10.17632/trgd5tnwxp.1. Our best
culated the prediction error for GLMs using R Package boot (Canty model indicated that roost sites were predominantly selected on
and Ripley, 2022). After identifying and averaging a group of mod- cliffs with low air density, high wind speed, high radiation, and
els, we extrapolated the model values, considering the coefficient high slope, in areas such as ridges or cliff ledges, and south-facing
of predictor variables, the AICw, and the Intercept (Table 1), using (Table 1 and SI 3). The probability distribution of roosting site selec-
the raster calculator in QGIS 3.16.16 to generate a predictive map of tion in the three categories was: Low, <40%; Medium, 40%–60%;
suitable roosting areas for Andean Condors within their potential High, 61%–80%; and Very High, >80%. The resulting map of poten-
distribution in Colombia. tial roosts within the potential distribution of the Andean Condor
in Colombia is shown in SI 5. The third quartile data (>43%) repre-
Identifying priority roosting sites for conservation sents suitable roosting areas for the Andean Condor and, therefore,
we only considered areas above this threshold as PCAs.
To define priority conservation roosting sites, we first selected
areas with values equal or high to 43% of suitability as areas of Priority conservation areas for the Andean Condor in Colombia
medium and high suitability for roosting (third quartile of the data)
(Allen et al., 2023; De Kerckhove, 2008). Then, we overlapped these The PCAs for Andean Condor conservation in Colombia covered
areas with the HFI identified by Correa Ayram et al. (2020) using an area of 19,571.34 km2 , which represents 23.35% of the study
QGis 3.16.16, with a resolution of 300 m, as a proxy of landscape area. Of this area, 5628.25 km2 (29%) are currently included in
anthropization, such as human population density, land use inten- National Natural Parks, and of this: 13,715.58 km2 (70%) corre-
sity, and other anthropogenic ecosystem impacts (Correa Ayram spond to Type I MPAs; 4757.59 km2 (24.3%) are Type II SERPAs;
et al., 2020). and 1098.16 km2 (5.6%) are Type III SEDPAs (Figs. 2 and 3).
Given the lack of spatially explicit information regarding direct Most of the Type I PCAs were in northern Andean region and the
threats to condors in Colombia, the HFI can be estimated either National Natural Park Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta (NNP-SNSM).
directly or indirectly from known anthropogenic impacts (Plaza In contrast, Type II and III areas were primarily located outside
and Lambertucci, 2020). While the HFI is a continuous index that the NNP-SNSM and the north-eastern Andean region of Colom-
responds to underlying spatial processes, Correa Ayram et al. (2020) bia (Fig. 3). However, the paramo corridor in the eastern Andes
defined areas with high anthropogenic impacts as those with an Mountain range, spanning the departments of Cundinamarca, Boy-
index >40%. We adopted a discrete division of the HFI into three acá, Santander, and Norte de Santander, serves as a critical region
categories: low (<40%), medium (40%–60%) and high (>60%). with the highest concentration of all PCA types. Our spatial model
Considering the decision tree proposed (Fig. 2), We suggested highlighted the fact that the central and southern regions of the
three types of PCA: (i) Type I Maintenance Priority Areas (MPAs), Colombian Andes offer fewer suitable resting and refuge habitats
defined as suitable areas with only natural threats or minimal and are characterized by a high HFI. Consequently, these areas have
threats according to their HFI (Correa Ayram et al., 2020); (ii) Type fewer Type I PCAs and a higher prevalence of Type II and III PCAs

4
G Model
PECON-330; No. of Pages 9 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.A. Parrado-Vargas, J.F. González-Maya, B. Reu et al. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Fig. 2. Proposed Decision Tree for Identifying Actions in Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs) for Andean Condor Conservation. The figure shows a decision tree outlining
strategies for Andean Condor conservation within various PCA types. The primary focus is on addressing the intersection of suitable roosting habitats and their Human
Footprint Indexes (HFIs), which pose conservation risks to the species. Green areas signify proposed actions designed for Type I PCAs, Yellow areas indicate strategies
tailored for Type II PCAs, and Red areas represent approaches for Type III PCAs. The priority decisions highlighted in this figure serve as guidelines for potential actions to be
undertaken for the conservation of Andean Condors across various PCAs in Colombia.

due to elevated levels of human impact (Fig. 3). Our prioritization do not coincide with the most suitable areas and many threats,
exercise enabled us to propose a roadmap with recommendations such as poisoning, shooting, and power lines, that have caused
for conservation actions within each PCA type, addressing potential population declines and impacted wild and reintroduced individ-
threats across the territory (SI 4). uals (Restrepo-Cardona et al., 2022). These factors and the limited
information regarding threats and their distribution, have resulted
in ineffective conservation strategies (Carwardine et al., 2008;
Discussion Buechley et al., 2019; Santangeli et al., 2022).
Understanding the conservation and magnitude of the threats
Our study provides baseline ecological and spatial information faced by condors at different scales in the PCAs, and the magnitude
and a systematic planning tool for designing and implementing of the pressures they face (Wallace et al., 2021, 2022), will enable to
conservation strategies for the Andean Condor in Colombia. These focus conservation action at the landscape scale in both the medium
are key for decision-making and action to reduce the extinction risk and long term (Guerrero et al., 2013), and will assist in generating
for this species and represent one of the first systematic approaches Systematic Conservation Planning Tool (Gordon et al., 2011).
to the selection of critical areas for this Critically Endangered
species in Colombia.
We found that south-facing cliffs on high slopes located on Identifying Priority Conservation Areas for the Andean Condor in
ridges and cliff faces with high solar radiation, low air densities, Colombia
and high wind speeds are more likely to be selected for condor
roosting sites (Table 1). Condors seem to choose these condi- Our results indicate that the 19,570 km2 which could be con-
tions to seek refuge from threats and adverse weather conditions sidered for PCA status (PCAs), represents only 23% of the potential
(Lambertucci and Ruggiero, 2013), in accordance with previous distribution of this species in Colombia (Sáenz-Jiménez, 2020). This
findings in Colombia (Sáenz-Jiménez, 2020). Other birds of prey, limitation may stem from our focusing solely on roosting areas,
including vultures such as the Griffon Vulture Gyps fulvus (Aresu neglecting suitable feeding and flight areas (Perrig et al., 2020). Of
et al., 2022) and the Bearded Vulture Gypaetus barbatus (Margalida the potential PCAs, only 29% are situated within the national pro-
et al., 2008), and other raptors such as Bonelli’s Eagle (Hieraae- tected areas system (Fig. 3), constituting only a small fraction of
tus fasciatus) (López-López et al., 2006), also select resting sites the overall PCAs for the species in Colombia. This is consistent with
based on these criteria. Similarly, Peregrine Falcons Falco pere- previous studies and emphasises the necessity for concerted con-
grinus (Wightman and Fuller, 2005) exhibit a preference for high servation strategies on private lands owned by ranchers, farmers,
cliffs or steep slopes, which provide favourable conditions for ther- and local communities (Sáenz-Jiménez, 2020). A similarly low rep-
moregulation, energy conservation during flight, and refuge from resentation of PCAs in protected areas has been reported in Ecuador
terrestrial predators (Aresu et al., 2022). (Naveda-Rodríguez et al., 2016) and the southern distribution of
Systematic conservation planning tools require ecological condors in Argentina (Perrig et al., 2020; Plaza and Lambertucci,
and biological knowledge at various scales to design informed, 2020). This situation represents a significant challenge for condor
species-specific strategies, resulting in more cost-efficient species conservation, especially considering the importance of well-chosen
conservation over time (Nandintsetseg et al., 2019; Nori et al., protected areas critical for biodiversity conservation (Tittensor
2020). In Colombia, technical and financial efforts have been et al., 2014).
invested in Andean Condor conservation for over 30 years, includ- Previous studies have found that anthropogenic pressures
ing public policies, localized conservation programs, (Rodríguez clearly influence the presence of condors (Lambertucci et al., 2009;
et al., 2006), and reintroductions of captive-bred individuals Lambertucci and Ruggiero, 2013; Perrig et al., 2020). The HFI in
(Sáenz-Jiménez, 2020). However, the repopulation nuclei defined Colombia has increased from 1979 to 2015 and caused consider-
for the species between 1989 and 2013 (Sáenz-Jiménez, 2020) able loss of natural areas, resulting in many ecosystems becoming

5
G Model
PECON-330; No. of Pages 9 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.A. Parrado-Vargas, J.F. González-Maya, B. Reu et al. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Fig. 3. Priority Conservation Areas (PCAs) for Andean Condor Conservation in Colombia. Colours represent priority areas at the landscape scale. Green: low-risk areas with a
high probability of roost selection >43% (Type I PCAs); Yellow: areas with medium-risks for conservation and a high-probability of roost selection (>43%) and areas between
40–60% of anthropogenic pressure overlap (Type II PCAs); Red: high-risk areas for Andean Condor conservation where there is a high probability of roost selection (>43%)
and high anthropogenic pressure (>60%) (Type III PCAs).

6
G Model
PECON-330; No. of Pages 9 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.A. Parrado-Vargas, J.F. González-Maya, B. Reu et al. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

vulnerable (Correa Ayram et al., 2020). These conditions are more ing trips, selecting high quality food patches and predictable food
pronounced in the geographically and climatically diverse Colom- resources such as feeding sites (Perrig et al., 2020). In this context,
bian Caribbean and Andean regions because of human population it is essential to reiterate that while very little is known regard-
growth and urban expansion and the resulting increase in land ing the movement ecology of the Andean Condor in Colombia, this
devoted to providing food security for human communities (Etter study was based on the most complete dataset available. The data
and Wyngaarden, 2016). This increasing human footprint may in this set clustered within isolated patches in the northern part of
have caused the Andean Condor decline in the Colombian Andes Colombia, potentially introducing bias into our model. This cluster-
(Rodríguez et al., 2006). Because of the local population extinctions ing phenomenon has also been observed in studies of species with
of condors in Colombia, a reintroduction program was developed, low population densities confined to specific habitat patches, and
with 71 individuals bring released between 1989 and 2013 (Sáenz- any bias may intensify in habitats which decline in quality due to
Jiménez, 2020). However, only 55% of the condors released survived human intervention (Greene and Stamps, 2001).
to 2010 (Sáenz-Jiménez, 2020) and many died from anthropogenic Future research endeavours should investigate additional facets
causes (Restrepo-Cardona et al., 2022). This high mortality rate of the species’ habitat and behaviour, including foraging and nest-
could be due to poor planning and a lack of proper identifica- ing sites, to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of its
tion of suitable areas for condor reintroduction. Better spatially conservation requirements (Frans et al., 2018; Perrig et al., 2020).
explicit models guiding reintroductions could reduce the risks due Consequently, we urge international collaboration to consolidate
to human persecution and ensure that birds are released into more data gathered throughout South America pertaining to all areas
suitable habitats and have better survival chances (Coz and Young, suitable for Andean Condors. Such a collaborative effort is essential
2020). to predict Andean Condor PCAs across the whole of South America
Our strategy for identifying PCAs for Andean Condors in Colom- and to develop a continent-wide spatial decision-making roadmap
bia centres on pinpointing suitable roosting sites in areas where the for the implementation of conservation actions throughout the geo-
species is more vulnerable. Roosting sites in PCAs in Colombia serve graphical distribution of the species (Jahn et al., 2017; H.J. Williams
as vital refuges (Lambertucci and Ruggiero, 2013), safeguarding et al., 2020).
against low genetic variability (Padró et al., 2020) and facilitat- While our model effectively identified a combination of geo-
ing connectivity and gene flow between robust populations within morphological and climatic variables related to roost selection,
Colombia and across the continent (Padró et al., 2023). the exploration of ecological and biological factors remains largely
Our findings show that Type II and III PCAs in the central uncharted. For instance, information on food availability, micro-
and southern Colombian Andes lie outside the national protected climatic variables, and other biological factors could significantly
areas scheme and have medium and high HFIs (Fig. 3), which enrich the model’s predictive power, because these variables influ-
could explain the species’ decline in these localities (Renjifo et al., ence population distribution and dynamics (Perrig et al., 2020).
2016). Conserving roosts in southern Colombia could facilitate Despite the large information gaps, we identified condor PCAs in
gene flow between populations north and south of the equator, Colombia for the first time, and proposed conservation actions
potentially reducing the genetic impoverishment observed in the appropriate to the conditions in each PCA type, which will serve
country’s condors (Padró et al., 2023, 2020). The Type I PCAs in as both regional and national decision-making tools.
the north-eastern Andes are located in the NNP-SNSM, which is
home to the largest wild Andean Condor population in Colombia
(Rodríguez et al., 2006) and is under the protection of the Kogui, Conflict of interest
Wiwa, Arhuaco, and Kankuamo indigenous people. Multicultural
and community actions to reduce the threats inside these terri- The authors declare no conflict of interests.
tories should be considered (Prieto, 2014). Furthermore, satellite
tracking data has shown that condors move between the NNP-
Funding sources
SNSM and the NNP El Cocuy, using a dispersal corridor of paramo
complexes throughout Boyacá, Santander, Norte de Santander, and
This work corresponds to the results of the first author’s master’s
Cesar, where over 70% of the human persecution events for Andean
research, and was supported by The Peregrine Fund, [Grant num-
Condor have been reported (Restrepo-Cardona et al., 2022).
ber TPF-COL-1- FY21-FY22); Alejandro Ángel Escobar Fund [Grant
To avoid misguided conservation actions, the definition of PCAs
Colombia Biodiversa number 2020-I) and Neotropical Ornitholog-
should vary based on the measures to be implemented in them
ical Society [Grant Francoise Vieullimer number, FFV 2020).
(Carwardine et al., 2008). For this reason, we developed a roadmap
with strategies for maintaining or improving the conditions in the
various PCA types (SI 4). Suitable roosting areas with low HFIs were Acknowledgments
termed Type I MPAs, where action should prioritize to maintain
viable natural low-risk conditions. Type II SERPAs, where socio- We acknowledge The Peregrine Fund and GeoTrak Inc (Keith
ecological and community programs are essential, especially on LeSage) for the donation of satellite trackers and technical advice
private land, and Type III SEDPAs (Fig. 2), should focus efforts on in obtaining the data on the movement ecology for the south
assessing population and habitat status to determine the viability and north of the Colombian Andes. We also thank Juan Sebastián
of direct technical and financial condor conservation (refer to Fig. 3, Restrepo for providing the Condor roosting sites monitored in the
SI 4). Central Andes region and Francisco Ciri for taking this research into
While our study has provided valuable insights into the con- account in the initial design of the update of the Andean Condor
servation of the Andean Condor in Colombia, it is important to Conservation Program in Colombia 2021-2035.
recognize certain limitations inherent in our approach. One notable
limitation is our exclusive focus on roosting sites, which may not
encompass the entirety of suitable condor habitats (Frans et al., Appendix A. Supplementary data
2018). Our analysis did not include supplementary feeding sites, or
take account of the fact that, in common with most obligate avian Supplementary material related to this article can be
scavengers (Moreno-Opo et al., 2015; Delgado-González et al., found, in the online version, at doi:https://doi.org/10.1016
2022), Andean Condors can cover large distances in their forag- /j.pecon.2024.05.002.

7
G Model
PECON-330; No. of Pages 9 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.A. Parrado-Vargas, J.F. González-Maya, B. Reu et al. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Bibliography migratory birds. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv.,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2017.07.003.
Allen, M., Lockwood, J.L., Robinson, O.J., 2023. Integrating habitat models for Knight, A.T., Cowling, R.M., Campbell, B.M., 2006. An operational model for
threatened species with landownership information to inform coastal implementing conservation action. Conserv. Biol.,
resiliency and conservation planning. Environ. Conserv. 50, 31–39, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00305.x.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s037689292200039x. Lambertucci, S.A., Ruggiero, A., 2013. Cliffs used as communal roosts by andean
Amatulli, G., McInerney, D., Sethi, T., Strobl, P., Domisch, S., 2020. Geomorpho90m, condors protect the birds from weather and predators. PLoS One. 8, 1–8,
empirical evaluation and accuracy assessment of global high-resolution http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067304.
geomorphometric layers. Sci. Data. 7, 1–18, Lambertucci, S.A., Ruggiero, A., 2016. Cliff outcrops used as condor communal
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-0479-6. roosts are local hotspots of occupancy and intense use by other bird species.
Aresu, M., Pennino, M.G., De Rosa, D., Rotta, A., Berlinguer, F., 2022. Modelling the Biol. Conserv. 200, 8–16, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.013.
effect of environmental variables on the reproductive success of Griffon Lambertucci, S.A., Speziale, K.L., Rogers, T.E., Morales, J.M., 2009. How do roads
Vulture (Gyps fulvus) in Sardinia, Italy. Ibis 164, 255–266, affect the habitat use of an assemblage of scavenging raptors? Biodivers.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ibi.13012. Conserv. 18, 2063–2074, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10531-008-9573-3.
Badger, J., Davis, N., Hahmann, A., Larsen, X.G., Kelly, M., Olsen, B.T., Mortensen, Lambertucci, S.A., Alarcón, P.A.E., Hiraldo, F., Sanchez-Zapata, J.A., Blanco, G.,
N.G., Hans, E., Troen, I., Petersen, E.L., Volker, P., Lange, J., Badger, J., Hahmann, Donázar, J.A., 2014. Apex scavenger movements call for transboundary
A., Larsen, X.G., Badger, M., Davis, N., Olsen, B.T., Mortensen, N.G., 2015. The conservation policies. Biol. Conserv. 170, 145–150,
Global Wind Atlas - An EUDP project carried out by DTU Wind Energy. Final http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.12.041.
Report Project. López-López, P., García-Ripolĺs, C., Aguilar, J.M., Garcia-López, F., Verdejo, J., 2006.
BirdLife International, 2020. Vultur gryphus [WWW Document]. The IUCN Red List Modelling breeding habitat preferences of Bonelli’s eagle (Hieraaetus fasciatus)
of Threatened Species., in relation to topography, disturbance, climate and land use at different spatial
http://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2020-3.RLTS.T22697641A181325230.en. scales. J. Ornithol. 147, 97–106, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10336-005-0019-3.
Bolker, B.M., Brooks, M.E., Clark, C.J., Geange, S.W., Poulsen, J.R., Stevens, M.H.H., Margalida, A., Donázar, J.A., Bustamante, J., Hernández, F.J., Romero-Pujante, M.,
White, J.S.S., 2009. Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for 2008. Application of a predictive model to detect long-term changes in
ecology and evolution. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24, 127–135, nest-site selection in the Bearded Vulture Gypaetus barbatus: conservation in
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2008.10.008. relation to territory shrinkage. Ibis 150,
Botha, A., Andevski, J., Bowden, C.G., Gudka, M., Safford, R., Tavares, J., Williams, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2007.00768.x.
N.P., 2017. Multi-species Action Plan to Conserve African-Eurasian Vultures, Moreno-Opo, R., Trujillano, A., Margalida, A., 2015. Optimization of supplementary
5th–35th ed. Abu Dhabi; United Arab Emirates. feeding programs for European vultures depend on environmental and
Buechley, E.R., Santangeli, A., Girardello, M., Neate-Clegg, M.H.C., Oleyar, D., management factors. Ecosphere 6, 127.
McClure, C.J.W., Şekercioğlu, Ç.H., 2019. Global raptor research and Nandintsetseg, D., Bracis, C., Leimgruber, P., Kaczensky, P., Buuveibaatar, B.,
conservation priorities: Tropical raptors fall prey to knowledge gaps. Divers. Lkhagvasuren, B., Chimeddorj, B., Enkhtuvshin, S., Horning, N., Ito, T.Y., Olson,
Distrib. 25, 856–869, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12901. K., Payne, J., Walzer, C., Shinoda, M., Stabach, J., Songer, M., Mueller, T., 2019.
Canty, A., Ripley, B., 2022. Resampling methods in R: the boot package. In: The Variability in nomadism: environmental gradients modulate the movement
Newsletter of the R Project Volume 2.3., pp. 2–7. behaviors of dryland ungulates. Ecosphere 10,
Carwardine, J., Wilson, K.A., Watts, M., Etter, A., Klein, C.J., Possingham, H.P., 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2924.
Avoiding costly conservation mistakes: The importance of defining actions and Naveda-Rodríguez, A., Vargas, F.H., Kohn, S., Zapata-Ríos, G., 2016. Andean Condor
costs in spatial priority settings. PLoS One 3 (7), (Vultur gryphus) in Ecuador: geographic distribution, population size and
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0002586. extinction risk. PLoS One 11, http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151827.
Correa Ayram, C.A., Etter, A., Díaz-Timoté, J., Rodríguez Buriticá, S., Ramírez, W., Nori, J., Loyola, R., Villalobos, F., 2020. Priority areas for conservation of and
Corzo, G., 2020. Spatiotemporal evaluation of the human footprint in research focused on terrestrial vertebrates. Conserv. Biol. 34, 1281–1291,
Colombia: four decades of anthropic impact in highly biodiverse ecosystems. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13476.
Ecol. Indic. 117, 106630, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106630. Padró, J., Lambertucci, S.A., Perrig, P.L., Pauli, J.N., 2018. Evidence of genetic
Coz, D.M., Young, J.C., 2020. Conflicts over wildlife conservation: learning from the structure in a wide-ranging and highly mobile soaring scavenger, the Andean
reintroduction of beavers in Scotland. People Nat 2, 406–419, condor. Divers. Distrib. 24, 1534–1544, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ddi.12786.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10076. Padró, J., Lambertucci, S.A., Perrig, P.L., Pauli, J.N., 2020. Andean and California
De Kerckhove, D.T., 2008. A Primer on Fish Habitat Models. Canadian technical condors possess dissimilar genetic composition but exhibit similar
report of fisheries and aquatic sciences., pp. 2817–2871. demographic histories. Ecol. Evol. 10 (23), 13011–13021,
Delgado-González, A., Cortés-Avizanda, A., Serrano, D., Arrondo, E., Duriez, O., http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6887.
Margalida, A., Carrete, M., Oliva-Vidal, P., Sourp, E., Morales-Reyes, Z., Padró, J., Vargas, F.H., Lambertucci, S.A., Perrig, P.L., Pauli, J.N., Ortega, A., Kohn, S.,
García-Barón, I., De la Riva, M., Sánchez-Zapata, J.A., Donázar, J.A., 2022. Apex Navarrete, J., Heredia, S., Narváez, F., Andrade-Brito, D., Chaves, J.A., 2023.
scavengers from different European populations converge at threatened Demographic collapse threatens the long-term persistence of Andean condors
savannah landscapes. Sci. Rep. 12, 2500. in the northern Andes. Biol. Conserv. 285,
Etter, A., Wyngaarden, Wvan, 2016. Patterns of landscape transformation in http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2023.110217.
Colombia, with emphasis in the Andean Region patterns of landscape Perrig, P.L., Lambertucci, S.A., Cruz, J., Alarcón, P.A.E., Plaza, P.I., Middleton, A.D.,
transformation in Colombia, with emphasis in the Andean Region. Royal Blanco, G., Sánchez-Zapata, J.A., Donázar, J.A., Pauli, J.N., 2020. Identifying
Swedish Acad. Sci. 29, 432–439. conservation priority areas for the Andean condor in southern South America.
Frans, V.F., Augé, A.A., Edelhoff, H., Erasmi, S., Balkenhol, N., Engler, J.O., 2018. Biol. Conserv. 243, 108494, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108494.
Quantifying apart what belongs together: a multi-state species distribution Plaza, P.I., Lambertucci, S.A., 2020. Ecology and conservation of a rare species:
modelling framework for species using distinct habitats. Methods Ecol. Evol. 9, What do we know and What may we do to preserve Andean condors? Biol.
98–108, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12847. Conserv. 251, 108782, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108782.
Gordon, A., Langford, W.T., Todd, J.A., White, M.D., Mullerworth, D.W., Bekessy, S.A., Prieto, A.M.H., 2014. Tejiendo entre redes diversas: reflexiones a partir de una
2011. Assessing the impacts of biodiversity offset policies. Environ. Modell. etnografía multisituada con los pueblos indígenas de la Sierra Nevada de Santa
Software 26, 1481–1488, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2011.07.021. Marta, Caribe colombiano. Espaço ameríndio 8 (1), 135.
Greene, C.M., Stamps, J.A., 2001. Habitat selection at low population densities. Renjifo, L., Amaya, A., Burbano, J., Velasquez, J., 2016. Libro Rojo de Aves de
Ecology 82, 2091–2100, http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082 Colombia. Volumen II. Instituto Humboldt, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana.
[2091: HSALPD]2.0.CO;2. Restrepo-Cardona, J.S., Sáenz-Jiménez, F., Echeverry-Galvis, M.A., Betancur, A.,
Guerrero, A.M., McAllister, R.R.J., Corcoran, J., Wilson, K.A., 2013. Scale mismatches, Quintero, A.F., López, P.A., 2018. Breeding behavior of a reintroduced pair of
conservation planning, and the value of social-network analyses. Conserv. Biol. Andean Condor (Vultur gryphus) in the central Andes of Colombia. Ornitología
27, 35–44, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01964.x. Neotropical 29, 129–133.
Williams, H.J., Shepard, E.L.C., Holton, M.D., Alarcón, P.A.E., Wilson, R.P., Restrepo-Cardona, J.S., Parrado, M.A., Vargas, F.H., Kohn, S., Sáenz-Jiménez, F.,
Lambertucci, S.A., 2020. Physical limits of flight performance in the heaviest Potaufeu, Y., Narváez, F., 2022. Anthropogenic threats to the vulnerable
soaring bird. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 17884–17890, Andean Condor in northern South America. PLoS One 17, 1–10,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1907360117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0278331.
Hijmans, R., van Etten, M., Cheng, J., Baston, D., Bevan, A., Bivand, R., Busetto, L., Rodríguez, C.L., Barrera, M., Ciri-León, F., 2006. Programa Nacional para la
Canty, M., Fasoli, B., Forrest, D., Ghosh, A., Golicher, D., Gray, J., Greenberg, J., Conservación del cóndor Andino en Colombia- Plan de acción 2006-2016.
Hiemstra, P., Hingee, K., Ilich, A., Karney, C., Mattiuzzi, M., Mosher, S., Naimi, B., Ministerio de Ambiente, Vivienda y Desarrollo Territorial.
Nowosad, J., Pebesma, E., Racine, E., Venables, B., Wueest, R., 2023. Package Runge, C.A., Martin, T.G., Possingham, H.P., Willis, S.G., Fuller, R.A., 2014.
“raster” Type Package Title Geographic Data Analysis and Modeling. Conserving mobile species. Front. Ecol. Environ. 12, 395–402,
Hosmer, D.W., Lemeshow, S., 2000. Applied Logistic Regression, 2nd ed. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/130237.
Wiley-Interscience Publication, New York. Sáenz-Jiménez, F., 2020. Factores ambientales y antrópicos que determinan la
Imam, E., Kushwaha, S.P.S., 2013. Habitat suitability modelling for Gaur (Bos presencia y distribución del Cóndor Andino y la selección de lugares de
gaurus) using multiple logistic regression, remote sensing and GIS. J. Appl. anidación y descanso: un enfoque multiescalar. Pontificia Universidad
Anim. Res. 41, 189–199, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09712119.2012.739089. Javeriana, http://dx.doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.10554.47171.
Jahn, A.E., Bejarano, V., Cueto, V.R., Di Giacomo, A.S., Fontana, C.S., 2017. Movement
ecology research to advance conservation of South America’s grassland

8
G Model
PECON-330; No. of Pages 9 ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.A. Parrado-Vargas, J.F. González-Maya, B. Reu et al. Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Santangeli, A., Buechley, E.R., Mammola, S., Lambertucci, S.A., 2022. Priorities for Wallace, R.B., Reinaga, A., Piland, N., Piana, R., Vargas, F.H., Zegarra, R.E., Alvarado,
research and action to prevent a New World vulture crisis. Biological S., Kohn, S., Lambertucci, S.A., Alarcón, P., Méndez, D., Sáenz-Jiménez, F., Ciri, F.,
Conservation 270, 109563. Álvarez, J., Angulo, F., Astore, V., Cisneros, J., Gálvez-Durand, J., Vento, R.,
Solargis, World Bank Group, E., 2019. Global Solar Atlas 2.0 [WWW Document]. A Cóndor, C., Escobar, V., Funes, M., Kusch, A., Naveda-Rodríguez, A., Silva,
free web-based application developed and operated by the company solargis Claudia, Zapata-Ríos, G., Gargiulo, C., Gordillo, S., Heredia, J., Morales, R., More,
s.r.o. on behalf of the World Bank Group, utilizing solargis data, with funding A., Oehler, D., Ospina-Herrera, O., Ortega, A., Otero, J.A., Silva, Carlos, Wiemeyer,
provided by the Energy sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP). G., Zurita, L., 2021. Defining spatial conservation priorities for the Andean
https://globalsolaratlas.info/map. Condor (Vultur gryphus). J. Raptor Res. 56, http://dx.doi.org/10.3356/jrr-20-59.
Tittensor, D.P., Walpole, M., Hill, S.L.L., Boyce, D.G., Britten, G.L., Burgess, N.D., Wallace, R.B., Reinaga, A., Piland, N., Piana, R., Vargas, F.H., Zegarra, R.E., . . . Zurita,
Butchart, S.H.M., Leadley, P.W., Regan, E.C., Alkemade, R., Baumung, R., Bellard, L., 2022. Defining spatial conservation priorities for the Andean condor (Vultur
C., Bouwman, L., Bowles-Newark, N.J., Chenery, A.M., Cheung, W.W.L., gryphus). Journal of Raptor Research 56 (1), 1–16.
Christensen, V., Cooper, H.D., Crowther, A.R., Dixon, M.J.R., Galli, A., Gaveau, V., Wickham, https://github.com/tidyverse/tidyr, 2017.
Gregory, R.D., Gutierrez, N.L., Hirsch, T.L., Höft, R., Januchowski-Hartley, S.R., Wightman, C.S., Fuller, M.R., 2005. Spacing and physical habitat selection patterns
Karmann, M., Krug, C.B., Leverington, F.J., Loh, J., Lojenga, R.K., Malsch, K., of Peregrine Falcons in central West Greenland. Wilson Bulletin 117, 226–236,
Marques, A., Morgan, D.H.W., Mumby, P.J., Newbold, T., Noonan-Mooney, K., http://dx.doi.org/10.1676/04-036.1.
Pagad, S.N., Parks, B.C., Pereira, H.M., Robertson, T., Rondinini, C., Santini, L., Wilson, K., Cabeza, M., Klein, C.J., 2007. Fundamental Concepts of Spatial
Scharlemann, J.P.W., Schindler, S., Sumaila, U.R., Teh, L.S.L., Van Kolck, J., Conservation Prioritization, Spatial Conservation Prioritization: Quantitative
Visconti, P., Ye, Y., 2014. A mid-term analysis of progress toward international Methods and Computational Tools., pp. 16–17.
biodiversity targets. Science 346, 241–244, Yates, L.A., Aandahl, Z., Richards, S.A., Brook, B.W., 2023. Cross validation for model
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1257484. selection: a review with examples from ecology. Ecol. Monogr. 93,
Venables, W.N., Ripley, B.D., 2002. Random and Mixed Effects. Springer, pp. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ecm.1557.
271–300, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-21706-2 10.