scholarly journals Biodiversity gains from efficient use of private sponsorship for flagship species conservation

2015 ◽  
Vol 282 (1805) ◽  
pp. 20142693 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Bennett ◽  
Richard Maloney ◽  
Hugh P. Possingham
Keyword(s):  
Threatened Species ◽  
Species Conservation ◽  
Flagship Species ◽  
Ancillary Benefits ◽  
Private Funding ◽  
Additional Species ◽  
Private Sponsorship ◽  
Hypothetical Scenario ◽  
Conservation Actions ◽  
Private Donations

To address the global extinction crisis, both efficient use of existing conservation funding and new sources of funding are vital. Private sponsorship of charismatic ‘flagship’ species conservation represents an important source of new funding, but has been criticized as being inefficient. However, the ancillary benefits of privately sponsored flagship species conservation via actions benefiting other species have not been quantified, nor have the benefits of incorporating such sponsorship into objective prioritization protocols. Here, we use a comprehensive dataset of conservation actions for the 700 most threatened species in New Zealand to examine the potential biodiversity gains from national private flagship species sponsorship programmes. We find that private funding for flagship species can clearly result in additional species and phylogenetic diversity conserved, via conservation actions shared with other species. When private flagship species funding is incorporated into a prioritization protocol to preferentially sponsor shared actions, expected gains can be more than doubled. However, these gains are consistently smaller than expected gains in a hypothetical scenario where private funding could be optimally allocated among all threatened species. We recommend integrating private sponsorship of flagship species into objective prioritization protocols to sponsor efficient actions that maximize biodiversity gains, or wherever possible, encouraging private donations for broader biodiversity goals.

scholarly journals The Best Bang for the Bucks: Rethinking Global Investment in Biodiversity Conservation

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (21) ◽  
pp. 9252
Author(s):  
Sebastián Cordero ◽  
Gabriel J. Castaño-Villa ◽  
Francisco E. Fontúrbel
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Threatened Species ◽  
Species Conservation ◽  
Biodiversity Loss ◽  
Education Investment ◽  
Conservation Actions ◽  
Socio Economic Variables ◽  
Generalized Linear Mixed Effects ◽  
People’S Attitudes ◽  
Positive Effect

Biodiversity loss is a central issue in conservation biology, with protected areas being the primary approach to stop biodiversity loss. However, education has been identified as an important factor in this regard. Based on a database of threatened species and socio-economic features for 138 countries, we tested whether more protected areas or more education investment is associated with a lower proportion of threatened species (for different groups of vertebrates and plants). For this, we fitted generalized linear mixed-effects models (GLMM) to assess the relative importance of socio-economic variables on the proportion of threatened species. We found that education investment was negatively associated with the proportion of threatened species in 2007 and 2017, as well as with their change rates. Conversely, the percentage of protected land was significant for reptiles but showed weak relationships with other groups. Our results suggest that only increasing protected areas will not stop or reduce biodiversity loss, as the context and people’s attitudes towards wildlife also play major roles here. Therefore, investing in education, in addition to protected areas, would have the missing positive effect on achieving effective species conservation actions worldwide.

scholarly journals Predator-prey interaction between two threatened species in a Brazilian hotspot

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustavo Rodrigues Canale ◽  
Christine Steiner São Bernardo
Keyword(s):  
Threatened Species ◽  
Conservation Planning ◽  
Nest Predation ◽  
Wild Population ◽  
Species Conservation ◽  
Capuchin Monkeys ◽  
Egg Predation ◽  
Predator Prey ◽  
Conservation Actions ◽  
Prey Interaction

Conflicts in conservation may arise if two or more threatened species are involved in prey-predator interaction. Predators may have a profound effect on small prey populations, thus conservation actions must consider inter-specific interactions involving threatened species. Here we report nest predation events on a wild population of the Endangered red-billed curassow Crax blumenbachii Spix, 1825 by a group of the Critically Endangered yellow-breasted capuchin monkeys Sapajus xanthosternosWied-Neuwied, 1820 in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest. This is the first study to report egg predation of an threatened gamebird by an threatened primate. We recommend that systematic conservation planning for these threatened species consider interactions, especially considering upcoming reintroduction programs indicated in the National Action Plans for these species conservation.

scholarly journals Corporate support for threatened species recovery efforts: three case studies from the 2019–20 Australian bushfire season

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Mo ◽  
Mike Roache ◽  
Tania Reid ◽  
Damon L. Oliver ◽  
Linda Broome ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Case Studies ◽  
Threatened Species ◽  
Species Conservation ◽  
Food Storage ◽  
Eastern Coast ◽  
Flying Foxes ◽  
Diverse Range ◽  
Species Recovery ◽  
Conservation Actions ◽  
Corporate Support

ABSTRACT A diverse range of corporations, businesses and organisations play an important role in threatened species conservation. During the unprecedented bushfire season in Australia in the 2019–20 summer, corporations, businesses and organisations contributed significant financial and in-kind support for the Saving our Species Program’s threatened species recovery efforts. On the eastern coast, a combination of food shortages and heat stress events resulted in large numbers of Grey-headed Flying-foxes Pteropus poliocephalus requiring rescue and rehabilitation. Prolonged drought and intense bushfires reduced available foraging resources for the Brush-tailed Rock-wallaby Petrogale penicillata and Mountain Pygmy-possum Burramys parvus. Corporations donated produce to feed flying-foxes in care and provide supplementary feeding for wild populations of rock-wallabies and pygmy-possums. Local businesses and organisations also supplied resources, funding and food storage capacity to support these conservation actions. The contributions from corporations, businesses and organisations in these case studies totalled more than $70,000.

scholarly journals Estimating the benefit of well-managed protected areas for threatened species conservation

Oryx ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 276-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen G. Kearney ◽  
Vanessa M. Adams ◽  
Richard A. Fuller ◽  
Hugh P. Possingham ◽  
James E. M. Watson
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Threatened Species ◽  
Protected Area ◽  
Species Conservation ◽  
Area Network ◽  
Protected Area Network ◽  
Adequate Funding ◽  
Conservation Actions ◽  
Threat Management ◽  
Almost All

AbstractProtected areas are central to global efforts to prevent species extinctions, with many countries investing heavily in their establishment. Yet the designation of protected areas alone can only abate certain threats to biodiversity. Targeted management within protected areas is often required to achieve fully effective conservation within their boundaries. It remains unclear what combination of protected area designation and management is needed to remove the suite of processes that imperil species. Here, using Australia as a case study, we use a dataset on the pressures facing threatened species to determine the role of protected areas and management in conserving imperilled species. We found that protected areas that are not resourced for threat management could remove one or more threats to 1,185 (76%) species and all threats to very few (n = 51, 3%) species. In contrast, a protected area network that is adequately resourced to manage threatening processes within their boundary could remove one or more threats to almost all species (n = 1,551; c. 100%) and all threats to almost half (n = 740, 48%). However, 815 (52%) species face one or more threats that require coordinated conservation actions that protected areas alone could not remove. This research shows that investing in the continued expansion of Australia's protected area network without providing adequate funding for threat management within and beyond the existing protected area network will benefit few threatened species. These findings highlight that as the international community expands the global protected area network in accordance with the 2020 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity, a greater emphasis on the effectiveness of threat management is needed.

scholarly journals The best bang for the bucks: rethinking global investment on biodiversity conservation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco E. Fontúrbel ◽  
Sebastián Cordero ◽  
Gabriel J. Castaño-Villa
Keyword(s):  
Protected Areas ◽  
Conservation Biology ◽  
Threatened Species ◽  
Species Conservation ◽  
Biodiversity Loss ◽  
Lower Proportion ◽  
Education Investment ◽  
Conservation Actions ◽  
People’S Attitudes ◽  
Positive Effect

AbstractBiodiversity loss is a central issue in conservation biology, being protected areas the primary approach to stop biodiversity loss. However, education has been identified as an important factor in this regard. Based on a database of threatened species and socio-economic features for 138 countries, we tested whether more protected areas or more education investment are associated with a lower proportion of threatened species (for different groups of vertebrates and plants). We found that education investment was negatively associated with the proportion of threatened species in 2007 and 2017, as well as with their change rates. Conversely, the percentage of protected land was significant for reptiles, but show weak relationships with other groups. Our results suggest that only increasing protected areas will not stop or reduce biodiversity loss, as the context and people’s attitudes towards wildlife also play major roles here. Therefore, investing in education, in addition to protected areas, would have a positive effect missing to achieve effective species conservation actions worldwide.

scholarly journals How many bird extinctions have we prevented?

Oryx ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 266-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart H.M. Butchart ◽  
Alison J. Stattersfield ◽  
Nigel J. Collar
Keyword(s):  
Invasive Species ◽  
Captive Breeding ◽  
Extinction Risk ◽  
Bird Species ◽  
Iucn Red List ◽  
Additional Species ◽  
Conservation Actions ◽  
Declining Populations ◽  
Population Sizes ◽  
Principal Actions

Considerable resources and efforts have been directed at biodiversity conservation in recent years, but measures of the success of conservation programmes have been limited. Based on information on population sizes, trends, threatening processes and the nature and intensity of conservation actions implemented during 1994–2004, we assessed that 16 bird species would have probably become extinct during this period if conservation programmes for them had not been undertaken. The mean minimum population size of these 16 species increased from 34 to 147 breeding individuals during 1994–2004. In 1994, 63% of them had declining populations but by 2004, 81% were increasing. Most of these species (63%) are found on islands. The principal threats that led to their decline were habitat loss and degradation (88%), invasive species (50%) and exploitation (38%), a pattern similar to that for other threatened species, but with exploitation and invasive species being relatively more important. The principal actions carried out were habitat protection and management (75% of species), control of invasive species (50%), and captive breeding and release (33%). The 16 species represent only 8.9% of those currently classified as Critically Endangered, and 1.3% of those threatened with extinction. Many of these additional species slipped closer to extinction during 1994–2004, including 164 that deteriorated in status sufficiently to be uplisted to higher categories of extinction risk on the IUCN Red List (IUCN, 2006). Efforts need to be considerably scaled up to prevent many more extinctions in the coming decades. The knowledge and tools to achieve this are available, but we need to mobilize the resources and political will to apply them.

scholarly journals The 10 Lords of the Universe respond to Lim

1997 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 319 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Adam ◽  
Tony Auld ◽  
Doug Benson ◽  
Peter Catling ◽  
Chris Dickman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Threatened Species ◽  
New South ◽  
New South Wales ◽  
Species Conservation ◽  
Scientific Committee ◽  
South Wales ◽  
The Universe

Lim (1997) has recently presented a critique of aspects of the New South Wales Threatened Species Conservation Act (TSCA), and in particular of the role of the Scientific Committee established by the Act.

scholarly journals Why and how might genetic and phylogenetic diversity be reflected in the identification of key biodiversity areas?

2015 ◽  
Vol 370 (1662) ◽  
pp. 20140019 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. M. Brooks ◽  
A. Cuttelod ◽  
D. P. Faith ◽  
J. Garcia-Moreno ◽  
P. Langhammer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Diversity ◽  
Threatened Species ◽  
Phylogenetic Diversity ◽  
Species Population ◽  
Threatened Taxa ◽  
Conservation Actions ◽  
Ecosystem Diversity ◽  
Species Specific ◽  
A Site ◽  
Specific Conservation

‘Key biodiversity areas' are defined as sites contributing significantly to the global persistence of biodiversity. The identification of these sites builds from existing approaches based on measures of species and ecosystem diversity and process. Here, we therefore build from the work of Sgró et al. (2011 Evol. Appl. 4 , 326–337. ( doi:10.1111/j.1752-4571.2010.00157.x )) to extend a framework for how components of genetic diversity might be considered in the identification of key biodiversity areas. We make three recommendations to inform the ongoing process of consolidating a key biodiversity areas standard: (i) thresholds for the threatened species criterion currently consider a site's share of a threatened species' population; expand these to include the proportion of the species' genetic diversity unique to a site; (ii) expand criterion for ‘threatened species' to consider ‘threatened taxa’ and (iii) expand the centre of endemism criterion to identify as key biodiversity areas those sites holding a threshold proportion of the compositional or phylogenetic diversity of species (within a taxonomic group) whose restricted ranges collectively define a centre of endemism. We also recommend consideration of occurrence of EDGE species (i.e. threatened phylogenetic diversity) in key biodiversity areas to prioritize species-specific conservation actions among sites.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document