Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Beyond species counts for assessing, valuing, and conserving biodiversity: response to Wallach et al. 2019

  • Ninon F.V. Meyer
  • , Niko Balkenhol
  • , Trishna Dutta
  • , Maarten Hofman
  • , Jean Yves Meyer
  • , Euan G. Ritchie
  • , Charlotte Alley
  • , Chad Beranek
  • , Cassandra K. Bugir
  • , Alex Callen
  • , Simon Clulow
  • , Michael V. Cove
  • , Kaya Klop-Toker
  • , Omar R. Lopez
  • , Michael Mahony
  • , Robert Scanlon
  • , Sandeep Sharma
  • , Elen Shute
  • , Rose Upton
  • , Emy Guilbault
  • Andrea S. Griffin, Edwin Hernández Pérez, Lachlan G. Howell, John Paul King, Dean Lenga, Patrick O Donoghue, Matt W. Hayward

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debatepeer-review

73 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Wallach et al. (2019) propose including all non-native species when determining species richness, distribution, and threat status for biodiversity management and conservation purposes. Although contesting prevailing conservation paradigms is a useful way to critically examine and refine practice and policy, we argue that their proposal would lead to an artificial inflation in species counts and downplay the harm some non-native species cause to native species, human livelihoods, culture, and safety. Their approach, therefore, risks poor outcomes for conservation and society.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)369-372
Number of pages4
JournalConservation Biology
Volume35
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2021
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Beyond species counts for assessing, valuing, and conserving biodiversity: response to Wallach et al. 2019'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this