What’s missing when it comes to securing the future of the planet’s threatened species and ecosystems? In this issue of Decision Point we present a range of CEED-related stories that answers this very question.
Up front our Director, Kerrie Wilson, paints us a rather confronting picture of where conservation scientists are focusing their effort and sadly it’s not in the places facing the biggest biodiversity conservation problems. Bit of a mismatch there.
Sam Banks and his colleagues from evolutionary biology make a case that conservation policy could do with a little more input from evolutionary biologists – and provide several compelling examples of how it can help.
Sayed Iftekhar does something similar with economics. He describes how economic principles and tools can enhance the success of a restoration project.
Kendall Jones reviewed the literature on conservation planning and was somewhat surprised to discover climate change is almost never factored in. Could that be true?!
And Kiran Dhanjal-Adams asks how much information do you need on migrating animals to better conserve their migratory networks? It turns out you can get valuable information from as few as 3 tracked migrating individuals to help you plan your conservation priorities. Which is fortunate because it seems our migrating species are in the direst of straights when it comes to looming extinctions.
Of course, what’s usually missing when it comes to biodiversity conservation is inadequate resources stemming from a lack of political will. At the end of the day, conservation doesn’t seem as important as defence or health.
And yet, as Danielle Shanahan describes, a dose of nature is exactly what we need to keep us healthy – and 30 minutes a week is all you need to get started.
Maybe this is a message we all need to start sharing with our political leaders.
David Salt (Editor)