When all life counts in conservation
| العنوان: | When all life counts in conservation |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Erick J. Lundgren, Scott P. Carroll, Daniel Ramp, Wayne L. Linklater, Chelsea Batavia, Arian D. Wallach, Jamie Steer, Michael Paul Nelson, Esty Yanco, Danielle Celermajer, Kate Brandis |
| المصدر: | Conservation Biology. 34:997-1007 |
| بيانات النشر: | Wiley, 2020. |
| سنة النشر: | 2020 |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: | 0106 biological sciences, Ecology, business.industry, 010604 marine biology & hydrobiology, media_common.quotation_subject, Immigration, Wildlife, Biodiversity, Distribution (economics), 15. Life on land, 010603 evolutionary biology, 01 natural sciences, Emigration, Geography, Threatened species, IUCN Red List, Species richness, business, Socioeconomics, Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Nature and Landscape Conservation, media_common |
| الوصف: | Conservation science involves the collection and analysis of data. These scientific practices emerge from values that shape who and what is counted. Currently, conservation data are filtered through a value system that considers native life the only appropriate subject of conservation concern. We examined how trends in species richness, distribution, and threats change when all wildlife count by adding so-called non-native and feral populations to the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List and local species richness assessments. We focused on vertebrate populations with founding members taken into and out of Australia by humans (i.e., migrants). We identified 87 immigrant and 47 emigrant vertebrate species. Formal conservation accounts underestimated global ranges by an average of 30% for immigrants and 7% for emigrants; immigrations surpassed extinctions in Australia by 52 species; migrants were disproportionately threatened (33% of immigrants and 29% of emigrants were threatened or decreasing in their native ranges); and incorporating migrant populations into risk assessments reduced global threat statuses for 15 of 18 species. Australian policies defined most immigrants as pests (76%), and conservation was the most commonly stated motivation for targeting these species in killing programs (37% of immigrants). Inclusive biodiversity data open space for dialogue on the ethical and empirical assumptions underlying conservation science. |
| تدمد: | 1523-1739 0888-8892 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/cobi.13447 |
| URL الوصول: | https://explore.openaire.eu/search/publication?articleId=doi_________::0847ee84ec266171896c6c92fe2e8e25 https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13447 |
| Rights: | OPEN |
| رقم الانضمام: | edsair.doi...........0847ee84ec266171896c6c92fe2e8e25 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | OpenAIRE |
| تدمد: | 15231739 08888892 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1111/cobi.13447 |