DOCSLIB.ORG

Spending Limited Resources on De-Extinction Could Lead to Net Biodiversity Loss

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Spending Limited Resources on De-Extinction Could Lead to Net Biodiversity Loss 1 Spending limited resources on de-extinction could lead to net biodiversity loss 2 Joseph R. Bennett1, Richard F. Maloney2, Tammy E. Steeves3, James Brazill-Boast4, Hugh P. 3 Possingham5,6, Phillip J. Seddon7 4 1. Department of Biology 5 Carleton University 6 1125 Colonel By Dr 7 Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6 8 Canada 9 [email protected] 10 ph: 613-520-2600 x 3124 11 fax: 613-520-3539 12 13 2. Science and Policy Group 14 Department of Conservation 15 70 Moorhouse Ave 16 Addington 17 Christchurch 8011 18 New Zealand 19 20 3. School of Biological Sciences 21 University of Canterbury 22 Private Bag 4800 23 Christchurch 8140 24 New Zealand 25 26 4. NSW Office of Environment and Heritage 27 59 Goulburn St 28 Sydney, Australia 29 30 5. University of Queensland 31 ARC Centre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions 32 School of Biological Sciences 33 St Lucia, QLD, Australia 34 35 6. Conservation Science 36 The Nature Conservancy 37 245 Riverside Drive 38 West End, QLD 4101 39 Australia 40 41 7. University of Otago 42 Department of Zoology 43 340 Great King Street 44 Dunedin 9016 45 New Zealand 46 1 47 There is contentious debate surrounding the merits of de-extinction as a biodiversity 48 conservation tool. Here, we use extant analogues to predict conservation actions for 49 potential de-extinction candidate species from New Zealand and New South Wales, and 50 use a prioritization protocol to predict the impacts of reintroducing and maintaining 51 populations of these species on conservation of extant threatened species. Even using the 52 optimistic assumptions that resurrection of species is externally sponsored, and that 53 actions for resurrected species can share costs with extant analogue species, public 54 funding for conservation of resurrected species would lead to fewer extant species that 55 could be conserved, suggesting net biodiversity loss. If full costs of establishment and 56 maintenance for resurrected species populations were publicly funded, there could be 57 substantial sacrifices in extant species conservation. If conservation of resurrected 58 species populations could be fully externally sponsored, there could be benefits to extant 59 threatened species. However, such benefits would be outweighed by opportunity costs, 60 assuming such discretionary money could directly fund conservation of extant species. 61 Potential sacrifices in conservation of extant species should be a crucial consideration in 62 deciding whether to invest in de-extinction or focus our efforts on extant species. 63 Technological advances are reducing the barriers to resurrecting extinct species or their close 64 genetic proxies, allowing de-extinction to be considered as a biodiversity conservation tool1,2. 65 Arguments in favour of de-extinction include necessity, driven by the rapid rate of species 66 and habitat loss3,4, an ethical duty to redress past mistakes5, as well as potential technological 67 and ecological knowledge that could stem from de-extinction programs4. Counter-arguments 68 include high risk of failure due to difficulties of cloning for some species6, technical risks 69 inherent in re-introductions7,8,9, loss of culture in resurrected animal species8, and lack of 70 remaining habitat for some species10,11, as well as negative consequences for extant species 2 71 including reduced incentive for traditional conservation12, and ecological impacts of 72 introducing long-absent or genetically-modified species12. 73 The relative cost versus benefit for biodiversity is fundamental to the debate surrounding de- 74 extinction. Assuming species are resurrected to be released into former habitats, the cost of 75 de-extinction includes the process of producing initial founder populations, translocating 76 individuals, then monitoring and managing new wild populations. If conservation funds are 77 re-directed from extant to resurrected species, there is risk of perverse outcomes whereby net 78 biodiversity might decrease as a result of de-extinction12,13. Although private agencies might 79 fund the resurrection of extinct species out of technical or philanthropic interest, the 80 subsequent ongoing management of such species (many of which would face the same threats 81 that made them extinct) would fall upon government agencies as commonly occurs with 82 extant threatened species. Alternatively, if private agencies are willing to provide new 83 funding for post de-extinction management, there could be additional benefits to species 84 sharing habitats or threats. 85 Here, we test the potential impact of establishing and sustaining wild populations of 86 resurrected extinct species (or proxies of such species) on the conservation of extant species. 87 Specifically, we use long-term conservation programs for extant analogue species in New 88 Zealand (NZ) and the Australian state of New South Wales (NSW), to infer potential 89 conservation actions for resurrected species, and predict the impact of resurrected species 90 programs on conservation of extant species. We use these datasets because they contain 91 detailed prescriptions and costs of actions designed to achieve population recovery for most 92 of the extant threatened species requiring specific management actions in either jurisdiction. 93 We estimate the net number of extant species that can be conserved, using the following 94 scenarios: 1) resurrected species become the burden of government conservation programs; 95 and 2) establishment and maintenance of resurrected species populations are funded 3 96 externally using non-public resources. In Scenario 1 the use of government resources on 97 resurrected species results in less funding for extant species programs, but provides potential 98 benefits for species that share actions with resurrected species. In Scenario 2 there are also 99 potential benefits to extant species conservation programs through shared conservation 100 actions. However, there are potential opportunity costs, if private agencies use resources they 101 could otherwise have used on conservation of extant species. Our analysis assumes that 102 species would be resurrected to be re-introduced into their former habitats, rather than for 103 other potential reasons such as research or public display. 104 Because little is known about the costs of producing viable initial populations of resurrected 105 species, we do not consider this in our analysis, and assume it is covered by a private agency. 106 Instead, we focus on the long-term cost of conservation for resurrected species, assuming that 107 such species would have small founder populations that require conservation actions similar 108 to those required for extant threatened species. 109 Although there is considerable uncertainty regarding necessary conservation actions for many 110 extinct species should they be resurrected7, we assume that such species would share many 111 actions with closely related extant species that share habitats, threats, and ecological roles. 112 We therefore chose focal extinct species from among the endemic, fully extinct species from 113 our study areas, based on similarity in taxonomy, range, habitat, life history, and threats with 114 an extant threatened analogue species. Among 70 recently extinct (1000 AD to present) 115 species in NZ, we found 11 for which we could assign reasonable analogues (Supplementary 116 Information Table 1). For NSW, we considered 29 recently extinct species, and found 5 with 117 reasonable extant analogues. Our inferred conservation programs for the extinct species 118 (assuming they were resurrected), were the same as for their analogue extant species, with the 119 addition of captive breeding and translocation costs, based on average costs of captive 120 breeding and translocation from extant species of the same taxonomic group (e.g. bird, 4 121 amphibian). Although cost and shared actions were not criteria for choosing our focal 122 species, our chosen group represented a broad range of estimated costs and number of extant 123 species with shared actions (Supplementary Information Table 1). We note that using 124 analogues in this way likely underestimates both cost and risk of failure, and that we assume 125 actions could be completely shared between resurrected and extant analogue species. It is 126 somewhat unlikely that an effective conservation program for a resurrected species would 127 completely share actions with that of an extant species. We also note that our analysis makes 128 the largely untested assumption that technical barriers to creating initial populations of these 129 species can be overcome6,14. Thus, our results should be regarded as being optimistic in 130 favour of net benefits of resurrected species conservation programs. 131 To assess the potential influence of resurrected species on extant species conservation, we 132 incorporated the proposed programs for resurrected species into threatened species project 133 prioritization protocols developed for the New Zealand Department of Conservation (NZ 134 DOC) and NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (see Methods for details). Costs of 135 shared actions (e.g. predator control that benefits several species sharing a site) were shared 136 among prioritized species recovery projects. Thus, if private funding covers the cost of 137 actions for a resurrected species, the cost of the same actions for any other species (including 138 the resurrected species’ analogue) would also be covered, potentially allowing more species 139 to be conserved within a given budget.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Economics of Threatened Species Conservation: a Review and Analysis
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff U.S. Department of Agriculture: Animal and Publications Plant Health Inspection Service 2009 The Economics of Threatened Species Conservation: A Review and Analysis Ray T. Sterner U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, Colorado Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdm_usdanwrc Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Sterner, Ray T., "The Economics of Threatened Species Conservation: A Review and Analysis" (2009). USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff Publications. 978. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/icwdm_usdanwrc/978 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Department of Agriculture: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USDA National Wildlife Research Center - Staff Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. In: ÿ and book of Nature Conservation ISBN 978-1 -60692-993-3 Editor: Jason B. Aronoff O 2009 Nova Science Publishers, Inc. Chapter 8 Ray T. Sterner1 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, National Wildlife Research Center, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521-2154, USA Stabilizing human population size and reducing human-caused impacts on the environment are lceys to conserving threatened species (TS). Earth's human population is =: 7 billion and increasing by =: 76 million per year. This equates to a human birth-death ratio of 2.35 annually. The 2007 Red List prepared by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) categorized 16,306 species of vertebrates, invertebrates, plants, and other organisms (e.g., lichens, algae) as TS.
    [Show full text]
  • Status and Protection of Globally Threatened Species in the Caucasus
    STATUS AND PROTECTION OF GLOBALLY THREATENED SPECIES IN THE CAUCASUS CEPF Biodiversity Investments in the Caucasus Hotspot 2004-2009 Edited by Nugzar Zazanashvili and David Mallon Tbilisi 2009 The contents of this book do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of CEPF, WWF, or their sponsoring organizations. Neither the CEPF, WWF nor any other entities thereof, assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, product or process disclosed in this book. Citation: Zazanashvili, N. and Mallon, D. (Editors) 2009. Status and Protection of Globally Threatened Species in the Caucasus. Tbilisi: CEPF, WWF. Contour Ltd., 232 pp. ISBN 978-9941-0-2203-6 Design and printing Contour Ltd. 8, Kargareteli st., 0164 Tbilisi, Georgia December 2009 The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) is a joint initiative of l’Agence Française de Développement, Conservation International, the Global Environment Facility, the Government of Japan, the MacArthur Foundation and the World Bank. This book shows the effort of the Caucasus NGOs, experts, scientific institutions and governmental agencies for conserving globally threatened species in the Caucasus: CEPF investments in the region made it possible for the first time to carry out simultaneous assessments of species’ populations at national and regional scales, setting up strategies and developing action plans for their survival, as well as implementation of some urgent conservation measures. Contents Foreword 7 Acknowledgments 8 Introduction CEPF Investment in the Caucasus Hotspot A. W. Tordoff, N. Zazanashvili, M. Bitsadze, K. Manvelyan, E. Askerov, V. Krever, S. Kalem, B. Avcioglu, S. Galstyan and R. Mnatsekanov 9 The Caucasus Hotspot N.
    [Show full text]
  • Listing a Species As a Threatened Or Endangered Species Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Listing a Species as a Threatened or Endangered Species Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, is one of the most far- reaching wildlife conservation laws ever enacted by any nation. Congress, on behalf of the American people, passed the ESA to prevent extinctions facing many species of fish, wildlife and plants. The purpose of the ESA is to conserve endangered and threatened species and the ecosystems on which they depend as key components of America’s heritage. To implement the ESA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service works in cooperation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), other Federal, State, and local USFWS Susanne Miller, agencies, Tribes, non-governmental Listed in 2008 as threatened because of the decline in sea ice habitat, the polar bear may organizations, and private citizens. spend time on land during fall months, waiting for ice to return. Before a plant or animal species can receive the protection provided by What are the criteria for deciding whether refer to these species as “candidates” the ESA, it must first be added to to add a species to the list? for listing. Through notices of review, the Federal lists of threatened and A species is added to the list when it we seek biological information that will endangered wildlife and plants. The is determined to be an endangered or help us to complete the status reviews List of Endangered and Threatened threatened species because of any of for these candidate species. We publish Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11) and the List the following factors: notices in the Federal Register, a daily of Endangered and Threatened Plants n the present or threatened Federal Government publication.
    [Show full text]
  • Reforestation with Native Species in the Dry Lands of Panama
    Reforestation with Native Species in the Dry Lands of Panama Raíces Nativas Carla Chízmar, José De Gracia & Mauricio Hoyos Conservation Leadership Programme: Final Report ID: 02141513 Project name: Reforestation with Native Species in the Dry Lands of Panama Host country/site location: Republic of Panama/La Toza, Nata, Cocle Authors: Carla Chízmar, Mauricio Hoyos and José De Gracia Contact address: Bella Vista, #37, 2A, Panama, Republic of Panama. E-mail [email protected] [email protected] Website: https://www.facebook.com/reforestaciontoza Date completed: September 24th, 2015 2 Conservation Leadership Programme: Final Report Table of Contents Project Partners & Collaborators Page 4 Section 1 Summary Page 4 Introduction Page 5 Project members Page 5 Section 2 Aim and objectives Page 6 Changes to original project plan Page 6 Methodology Page 7 Outputs and Results Page 7 Communication & Application of results Page 15 Monitoring and Evaluation Page 15 Achievements and Impacts Page 16 Capacity Development and Leadership capabilities Page 17 Section 3 Conclusion Page 17 Problems encountered and lessons learnt Page 17 In the future Page 18 Financial Report Page 19 Section 4 Appendices Page 19 3 Conservation Leadership Programme: Final Report Project Partners & Collaborators Miambiente - Panama's environmental ministry regulates all activities affecting the protection, conservation, improvement and restoration of the country's environment. Formerly known as environment authority ANAM. They helped us with trainers and seeds to start the nursery facilities. Ministry of Education of Panama - They supported us with the space for nursery facilities and permitted us to develop all the training activities in the local school grounds.
    [Show full text]
  • The Environmental, Economic and Community Benefits of Source Water Protection
    Beyond the Source The environmental, economic and community benefits of source water protection EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Healthy source watersheds are vital natural infrastructure for cities around the world Photo: © Mark Godfrey Executive Summary Healthy source watersheds are vital infrastructure urban source watersheds will be tapped by up to two-thirds of the global population Healthy source watersheds are vital natural infrastructure for nearly all cities though they represent one-third of the Earth’s land surface. Cities—as hubs for around the world. They collect, store and filter water and provide benefits for employment, services and investment—will clearly be the drivers of economic biodiversity conservation, climate change adaptation and mitigation, food security, growth. To grow sustainably, cities will need to play an active role in protecting the and human health and well-being. Today, an estimated 1.7 billion people living water sources on which people and nature depend, but they can’t do it on their own. in the world’s largest cities depend on water flowing from source watersheds Source watersheds are a nexus for action for those working to build resilient cities, sometimes located hundreds, if not thousands, of kilometers away. By 2050, those improve water security, drive sustainable development and create a stable climate. Current and potential urban source watersheds Figure ES.1. Watershed areas that currently or could potentially provide surface water supply to cities with populations greater than 100,000 Source watershed areas by percent overlap people. Darker colors indicate overlapping watershed areas, where multiple withdrawal points collect surface runoff from the same upstream land areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Youth Engagement 2016 Impact Report Photo to Come Thank You for Making This a Remarkable Year for Youth Engagement at the Nature Conservancy
    Youth Engagement 2016 Impact Report Photo to come Thank you for making this a remarkable year for Youth Engagement at The Nature Conservancy. With your support, we have made great strides in empowering the next generation of conservation leaders. I’ve seen the impact of our partnership in communities around the world—from Los Angeles to New York City to Hong Kong—and heard from students, teachers and young leaders about the effect that our work has had on their lives. And, I’m proud to say that this impact has been profound. Through our efforts, we have provided high-quality environmental education curriculum, offered environmental volunteer opportunities for young people in their own schools and communities, and provided paid high school and college internships to equip and empower our future conservation leaders. Understanding the role that nature plays in our everyday lives is the first step to protecting our natural resources, and our efforts to educate today’s youth on a large scale ensures that the next generation grows up with a conservation ethic. Empowering young people to take volunteer action on behalf of the environment ensures future advocates for our natural resources. And, training and supporting youth as they embark on their college and professional careers in conservation ensures that our future leaders will represent the rich cultural and ethnic diversity of our nation’s largest cities. I am inspired by the positive impacts that we have been able to achieve this year, and I am truly thankful for your generous support of The Nature Conservancy’s Youth Engagement Programs, and for your partnership in helping us to build stronger communities, a healthier world and an educated and empowered generation of young people.
    [Show full text]
  • Anne Maura Trainor
    Anne Maura Trainor The Nature Conservancy African Program 820G Rieveschl Hall Cincinnati, OH 45221 Email: [email protected] Phone 919.619.4678 DEGREES University of North Carolina, Ph.D., Geography, 2006 to 2011 Integrated field ecology with remote sensing identify and conserve critical dispersal habitats for the federally endangered species and provide scientific insights that prioritize mitigation measures while mediating conflicting land-use needs between a U.S. military installation, privately held lands, and public spaces in a highly fragmented landscape. Colorado State University, M.S., Wildlife Management and Conservation, 2001 to 2004 Incorporated animal movement behavior and geospatial analyses to refine habitat regulations and evaluated the effectiveness of mitigation efforts for federally protected species. University of New Hampshire, B.Sc., Biology (Focus: Ecology and Evolution), 1992 to 1996 PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS THE NATURE CONSERVANCY Smart Growth Director, 2015 to Present I conduct spatial and statistical analysis related to The Nature Conservancy’s Development by Design approach – proactive scenario planning to avoid, minimize or offset the negative environmental impact of development throughout Africa. UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Adjunct Assistant Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, 2014 to Present THE NATURE CONSERVANCY AND YALE UNIVERSITY, New Haven, CT Postdoctoral Fellow, NatureNet Fellowship, 2013 to 2015 I lead two projects balancing the need for energy production while minimizing impacts and risks on biodiversity, provision of ecosystem services, and climate change mitigation. • Conducting an in-depth analysis predicting future land-use requirements under various energy development scenarios produced by the Energy Information Administration. This project also highlights how land-use intensity greatly varies among renewable, conventional, and unconventional energy productions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nature Conservancy, with Partners, Works to Prevent New Invasions and Contain Established Invasive Species
    invasive species Preventing and containing the global spread of invaders Invasive species are threatening environments, economies and human health around the world. The Nature Conservancy, with partners, works to prevent new invasions and contain established invasive species. With more than two decades experience in invasive species management, the Conservancy is tackling the challenge through science leadership, effective land and water management, and encouraging better business practices and stronger public policies. invasive species threaten lives & economies around the world The estimated damage from invasives Invasive species are those non-native plants, animals and microorganisms that spread quickly and aggressively when worldwide totals more than $1.4 trillion– introduced outside their normal ranges. Often these introduced five percent of the global economy. species cause dramatic environmental changes and may lead to extinctions of native species or populations. Invasive species are spreading around the world at an accelerating rate due to Invasive species form the most common threat to the special places exponential increases in global trade and travel. No ecosystem on where The Nature Conservancy works. Often they threaten human the planet is immune from these invasions, which are contributing to well-being as well. The Nature Conservancy is the leading organization the greatest extinction of species since the death of the dinosaurs. working to prevent invasive species damage, deploying strategies to block invasive species introduction and reduce impacts at the Invasive species are the second leading global level, in key nations, and at critical conservation sites. cause for the loss of biodiversity. The Global Invasive Species Team focuses on preventing new introductions through partnerships with businesses and by Invasive species not only harm biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • ROBERT MCDONALD Senior Scientist for Sustainable Land-Use the Nature Conservancy 4245 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203 +1 703-841-2093 Rob [email protected]
    ROBERT MCDONALD Senior Scientist for Sustainable Land-Use The Nature Conservancy 4245 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203 +1 703-841-2093 [email protected] Research Themes: Ecosystem service supply and demand in urban areas; Land-use planning and conservation; Energy policy and land-use change; Sustainable agriculture. EDUCATION DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, May 2004 University Program in Ecology The Graduate School Duke University, Durham, NC Dissertation: Forest fragmentation and forest response in the North Carolina Piedmont. Concentration: Carbon sequestration, forest conservation, land-use change, landscape ecology, remote sensing. Awards: Aleane Webb Fellowship for excellence in Duke University Doctoral Research, 2003; NASA-MSU Travel Grant, International Association of Landscape Ecology Annual Meeting, 2002; National Science Foundation Pre-Doctoral Research Fellowship, 2001-2004; James B. Duke Fellowship for Academic Excellence, 2000; Bill and Melinda Gates Fellowship for Interdisciplinary Research, 2000. BACHELOR OF SCIENCE, cum laude, June 2000 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Major: Biology Minor: Chemistry. Honors thesis: Increased dominance by Acer rubrum and the decline of the Quercus- Carya climax in the North Carolina Piedmont. Honors: J.N. Couch Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Research, 2000; F.J. LeClair Award for Excellence in Botanical Research, 2000; Phi Beta Kappa, 1999; Order of the Golden Key, 1999. PROFESSIONAL Lead scientist, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) EXPERIENCE Lead scientist for the Conservancy’s urban conservation strategy, which works to both preserve biodiversity near cities and to maintain ecosystem services that urban dwellers depend on. Also provides science support to our energy policy team, particularly thinking about how energy policy will affect land-use, water-use, and biodiversity.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 SHEILA REDDY, PH.D. I Have Over Five Years of Experience Providing Scientific Leadership and Capacity to High-Profile Strategi
    SHEILA REDDY, PH.D. SUMMARY I have over five years of experience providing scientific leadership and capacity to high-profile strategic sustainability and conservation initiatives and a total of seven years of research experience since obtaining my PhD. I have managed cross- sectoral and interdisciplinary teams of professionals to deliver on complex research and pilot projects. In addition to publishing over 20 scientific papers, my commitment to communicating to diverse audiences is demonstrated through my frequent public speaking engagements and blogging. Two defining successes are a Fortune 50 company committing to a first-ever sustainability goal to find $1 Billion in projects that are good for business and ecosystems and insights from new economics research informing the strategies of a global and regional priority of The Nature Conservancy. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Apr 2015- THE NATURE CONSERVANCY Present Behavioral Economics Scientist, Office of the Chief Scientist • Providing scientific leadership and capacity to integrate behavioral economics into conservation • Leading science to test interventions (e.g., economic and social incentives) to promote adoption of agricultural practices that enhance carbon sequestration and water quality • Leading pilot to test the Nature Goal process at 7 sites globally–Dow’s sustainability goal to generate $1 Billion in projects that are good for business and ecosystems • Quantifying Millennials’ consumer and environmental behaviors to inform strategy for Global Cities • Investigating how social
    [Show full text]
  • Curriculum Vitae
    Curriculum Vitae Edward T Game [email protected] Nationality: Australian Current Address: The Nature Conservancy Level 1, 48 Montague Road South Brisbane, QLD 4101 Australia Web: http://www.nature.org/ourscience/ourscientists/eddie-game.xml http://blog.nature.org/science/author/egame/ Education 02/05-03/08 PhD (Catastrophes, resilience, and the theory of designing marine reserves) University of Queensland, Australia Supervised by Professor Hugh Possingham 02/99-10/02 Bachelor of Marine Biology (First Class Honors) James Cook University, Australia Minor in Anthropology and Archaeology Employment Summary 04/15-Pres. Lead Scientist, Asia-Pacific, The Nature Conservancy • Providing leadership on the direction of conservation planning, monitoring and conservation science in TNC, and the staff capacity needed to support this direction. • Manage project teams from across the organization. • Work closely with senior leadership to ensure appropriate science support for major organizational decisions. • Technical support for priority projects. 08/13-04/15 Senior Scientist, Conservation Science Division, The Nature Conservancy • Providing leadership on the direction of conservation planning, monitoring and conservation science in TNC, and the staff capacity needed to support this direction. • Manage project teams from across the organization. • Work closely with senior leadership to ensure appropriate science support for major organizational decisions. • Technical support for priority projects. 11/09-Pres. Adjunct Senior Lecturer, School of Biological Sciences, University of Queensland • Undergraduate and graduate program lectures. • Co-supervision of students. • Establishing collaborations between university staff and The Nature Conservancy. 08/08-08/13 Conservation Planning Specialist, Conservation Science Division, The Nature Conservancy • Provide direct conservation planning support to TNC projects globally.
    [Show full text]
  • ESA (Endangered Species Act) Basics
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service ESA Basics 40 Years of Conserving Endangered Species When Congress passed the Endangered Critical habitat may include areas that are Species Act (ESA) in 1973, it recognized not occupied by the species at the time of that our rich natural heritage is of listing but are essential to its conservation. “esthetic, ecological, educational, An area can be excluded from critical recreational, and scientifc value to habitat designation if an economic analysis our Nation and its people.” It further determines that the benefts of excluding expressed concern that many of our it outweigh the benefts of including it, nation’s native plants and animals were in unless failure to designate the area as danger of becoming extinct. critical habitat may lead to extinction of the listed species. The purpose of the ESA is to protect and recover imperiled species and the Candidates for Listing ecosystems upon which they depend. The FWS also maintains a list of The Interior Department’s U.S. Fish USFWS “candidate” species. These are species for and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the which the FWS has enough information to Commerce Department’s National warrant proposing them for listing but is Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) precluded from doing so by higher listing administer the ESA. The FWS has priorities. While listing actions of higher primary responsibility for terrestrial priority go forward, the FWS works with and freshwater organisms, while the States, Tribes, private landowners, private responsibilities of NMFS are mainly partners, and other Federal agencies to marine wildlife such as whales and carry out conservation actions for these anadromous fsh such as salmon.
    [Show full text]