Main menu:
Conservation Priorities
One major factor that effects conservation efforts is the issue of resources and funding (Balmford et al., 2000). Conservationists cannot protect all the species that under threat because they simply cannot afford to. And this situation is only getting worse. Therefore there is a need for prioritizing. The question at the forefront of conservation planning is determining how much can be protected at the least cost. A systematic approach is to concentrate on the areas where the need is greatest and where the payoff would be greatest. Threats, cost, and oppurtunities must be incorporated into conservation priorities.
One approach is to identify 'hotspots' and concentrate on those areas. Norman Myers coined the term in 1988 (Myers, 1988), and now virtually every conservation biology textbook contains a map of the world's "Biodiversity Hotspots". A biodiversity hotspot is an area that features exceptional levels of endemic species along with exceptional experience of habitat loss. Thre are different kinds of hotspot. Some feature richness of rare or taxonomically unusual species, others concntrate on populations or ecological proccesses, but more often than not, species are recognised as the most promonent form of biodiversity (Marris, 2007; Jepson & Canney, 2001; Myers et al., 2000). This would seem to make sense since the species is recognised as the unit of conservation. To qualify as a hotspot, a region must meet two criteria. It must contain at least 1,500 species of vascular plants as endemics, and it has to have lost at least 70 percent of its original habitat. There have been 34 hotpots identified (Myers, 2003).
This strategy would make perfect sense if the exclusive goal of conservation was to conserve as many speceis as possible in the smallest possibe area. What about the biodiversity "Coldspots" (Kareiva & Marvier, 2003)? There are broader range of objectives to consider. These objectives include maintaining functioning ecosystems throughout the world, protecting as many lineages as possible for future evolutionary breakthroughs, and not to be undervalued - preserving landscapes and 'wild', natural landscapes that humans find both aesthetically pleasing and inspirational. If we base conservation efforts on the number of species that are protected, there is a risk of losing major ecosystems because they do not contain a large number of species. One more point is that it would be a shame for conservation to become a purely financial endeavour. Natural landscapes and ecosystems have their own intrinsic value that cannot be measured by how much you can get back for your currency.