Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Trends and biases in the listing and recovery planning for threatened species: an Australian case study

  • Jessica C. Walsh (a1), James E. M. Watson (a1), Madeleine C. Bottrill (a1), Liana N. Joseph (a1) and Hugh P. Possingham (a1)...
Abstract

Many countries rely on formal legislation to protect and plan for the recovery of threatened species. Even though the listing procedures in threatened species legislation are designed to be consistent for all species there is usually a bias in implementing the laws towards charismatic fauna and flora, which leads to uneven allocation of conservation efforts. However, the extent of bias in national threatened species lists is often unknown. Australia is a good example: the list of threatened species under the Environmental Protection and Biological Conservation Act has not been reviewed since 2000, when it was first introduced. We assessed how well this Act represents threatened species across taxonomic groups and threat status, and whether biases exist in the types of species with recovery plans. We found that birds, amphibians and mammals have high levels of threatened species (12–24%) but < 6% of all reptiles and plants and < 0.01% of invertebrates and fish are considered threatened. Similar taxonomic biases are present in the types of species with recovery plans. Although there have been recent improvements in the representation of threatened species with recovery plans across taxonomic groups, there are still major gaps between the predicted and listed numbers of threatened species. Because of biases in the listing and recovery planning processes many threatened species may receive little attention regardless of their potential for recovery: a lost opportunity to achieve the greatest conservation impact possible. The Environmental Protection and Biological Conservation Act in Australia needs reform to rectify these biases.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Trends and biases in the listing and recovery planning for threatened species: an Australian case study
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Trends and biases in the listing and recovery planning for threatened species: an Australian case study
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Trends and biases in the listing and recovery planning for threatened species: an Australian case study
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
(Corresponding author) E-mail jessica.walsh@uqconnect.edu.au
References
Hide All
Bottrill, M.C., Joseph, L.N., Carwardine, J., Bode, M., Cook, C., Game, E.T. et al. (2008) Is conservation triage just smart decision making? Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 23, 649654.
Bottrill, M.C., Walsh, J.C., Watson, J.E.M., Joseph, L.N., Ortega-Argueta, A. & Possingham, H.P. (2011) Does recovery planning improve the status of threatened species? Biological Conservation, 44, 15951601.
Burgman, M.A. (2002) Are listed threatened plant species actually at risk? Australian Journal of Botany, 50, 113.
Chapman, A.D. (2009) Numbers of Living Species in Australia and the World. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, Australia.
Commonwealth of Australia (2001) Guidelines for Assessing the Conservation Status of Native Species According to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (The EPBC Act) and EPBC Regulations 2000. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, Canberra, Australia. Http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/pubs/guidelines-species.pdf [accessed 3 July 2012].
Commonwealth of Australia (2009) Species and communities. In Assessment of Australia's Terrestrial Biodiversity 2008 (eds Biotext Pty Ltd & Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts), pp. 75148. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, Australia.
Commonwealth of Australia (2010a) Conservation Advices. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, Australia. Http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/conservation-advices.html [accessed 17 November 2010].
Commonwealth of Australia (2010b) EPBC Act List of Threatened Ecological Communities. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, Australia. Http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publiclookupcommunities.pl [accessed 17 November 2010].
Commonwealth of Australia (2010c) Recovery Plans—Threatened Species and Ecological Communities. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, Australia. Http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/recovery.html [accessed 17 November 2010].
Commonwealth of Australia (2010d) Species Profiles and Threats Database. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, Australia. Http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl [accessed 17 November 2010].
Commonwealth of Australia (2010e) Threatened Species under the EPBC Act. Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Canberra, Australia. Http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/species.html [accessed 17 November 2010].
Cork, S., Sattler, P. & Alexandra, J. (2006) Biodiversity: Theme Commentary Prepared for the 2006 Australian State of the Environment Committee. Department of the Environment and Heritage, Canberra, Australia.
Evans, M.C., Watson, J.E.M., Fuller, R.A., Venter, O., Bennett, S.C., Marsack, P.R. & Possingham, H.P. (2011) The spatial distribution of threats to species in Australia. BioScience, 61, 281289.
Farrier, D., Whelan, R. & Mooney, C. (2007) Threatened species listing as a trigger for conservation action. Environmental Science and Policy, 10, 219229.
Ferraro, P.J., McIntosh, C. & Ospina, M. (2007) The effectiveness of the US endangered species act: an econometric analysis using matching methods. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 54, 245261.
Findlay, C.S., Elgie, S., Giles, B. & Burr, L. (2009) Species listing under Canada's Species at Risk Act. Conservation Biology, 23, 16091617.
Garrett, P. (2009) Address to the 10th International Ecology Conference. 17 August 2009, Brisbane, Australia.
Harvey, E., Hoekstra, J.M., O'Connor, R.J. & Fagan, W.F. (2002) Recovery plan revisions: progress or due process? Ecological Applications, 12, 682689.
Hawke, A. (2009) Biodiversity. In The Australian Environment Act—Report of the Independent Review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (ed. Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts), pp. 121139. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, Australia.
Hoekstra, J.M., Clark, J.A., Fagan, W.F. & Boersma, P.D. (2002) A comprehensive review of Endangered Species Act recovery plans. Ecological Applications, 12, 630640.
Hutchings, P. (2004) Invertebrates and threatened species legislation. In Threatened Species Legislation: Is it Just an Act? (eds Hutchings, P., Lunney, D. & Dickman, C.), pp. 8893. Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Mosman, Australia.
IUCN (2011) The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species v. 2011.1. Summary Statistics. Http://www.iucnredlist.org/about/summary-statistics [accessed 20 September 2011].
Johnson, C.N. (2006) Australia's Mammal Extinctions: A 50,000 Year History. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Joseph, L.N., Maloney, R.F., O'Connor, S.M., Cromarty, P., Jansen, P., Stephens, T. & Possingham, H.P. (2008) Improving methods for allocating resources among threatened species: the case for a new national approach in New Zealand. Pacific Conservation Biology, 14, 154158.
Joseph, L.N., Maloney, R.F. & Possingham, H.P. (2009) Optimal allocation of resources among threatened species: a project prioritization protocol. Conservation Biology, 23, 328338.
Joseph, L.N., Maloney, R.F., Watson, J.E.M. & Possingham, H.P. (2011) Securing non-flagship species from extinction. Conservation Letters, 4, 324325.
Kingsford, R.T., Watson, J.E.M., Lundquist, C.J., Venter, O., Hughes, L., Johnston, E.L. et al. (2009) Major conservation policy issues for biodiversity in Oceania. Conservation Biology, 23, 834840.
Lavelle, P., Decaens, T., Aubert, M., Barot, S., Blouin, M., Bureau, F. et al. (2006) Soil invertebrates and ecosystem services. European Journal of Soil Biology, 42, S3S15.
Laycock, H., Moran, D., Smart, J., Raffaelli, D. & White, P. (2009) Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of conservation: the UK Biodiversity Action Plan. Biological Conservation, 142, 31203127.
Lindenmayer, D.B. (2007) On Borrowed Time: Australia's Environmental Crisis and What We Must Do About It. CSIRO Publishing, Camberwell, Australia.
Lydeard, C., Cowie, R.H., Ponder, W.F., Bogan, A.E., Bouchet, P., Clark, S.A. et al. (2004) The global decline of nonmarine mollusks. BioScience, 54, 321330.
May, R.M. (2011) Why should we be concerned about loss of biodiversity? Comptes Rendus Biologies, 334, 346350.
McCarthy, M. (2006) Ecological perspectives on the EPBC Act. Biodiversity Summit 2006: Proceedings (ed. Blakers, M.). Green Institute and Lawyers for Forests, Melbourne, Australia.
Metrick, A. & Weitzman, M.L. (1996) Patterns of behavior in endangered species preservation. Land Economics, 72, 116.
Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G. & Gil, P.R.E. (1997) Megadiversity: Earth's Biologically Wealthiest Nations. CEMEX, Mexico City, Mexico.
Mooers, A.Ø., Prugh, L.R., Festa-Bianchet, M. & Hutchings, J.A. (2007) Biases in legal listing under Canadian endangered species legislation. Conservation Biology, 21, 572575.
Ortega-Argueta, A. (2008) Evaluating recovery planning for threatened species. PhD thesis. University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Rodrigues, A.S.L. (2006) Are global conservation efforts successful? Science, 313, 10511052.
Saunders, D., Beattie, A., Eliott, S., Fox, M., Hill, B., Pressey, B. et al. (1996) Biodiversity. In Australia: State of the Environment 1996 (eds State of the Environment Advisory Council, Alexander, N. & Taylor, R.), pp. 4.14.59. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, Australia.
Schatz, G.E. (2009) Plants on the IUCN Red List: setting priorities to inform conservation. Trends in Plant Science, 14, 638642.
Schwartz, M.W. (2008) The performance of the Endangered Species Act. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 39, 279299.
Shields, J.M. (2004) Threatened species legislation and threatened species recovery: does the former lead to the latter? In Threatened Species Legislation: Is it just an Act? (eds Hutchings, P., Lunney, D. & Dickman, C.), pp. 135144. Royal Zoological Society of New South Wales, Mosman, Australia.
Stuart, S.N., Wilson, E.O., McNeely, J.A., Mittermeier, R.A. & Rodriguez, J.P. (2010) The barometer of life. Science, 328, 177.
Taylor, M.F.J., Suckling, K.F. & Rachlinski, J.J. (2005) The effectiveness of the Endangered Species Act: a quantitative analysis. BioScience, 55, 360367.
Watson, J.E.M., Bottrill, M.C., Walsh, J.C., Joseph, L.N. & Possingham, H.P. (2010) Evaluating Threatened Species Recovery Planning in Australia. Prepared by the University of Queensland on behalf of the Commonwealth of Australia Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, Brisbane, Australia.
Whittaker, R.J., Araujo, M.B., Jepson, P., Ladle, R.J., Watson, J.E.M. & Willis, K.J. (2005) Conservation biogeography: assessment and prospect. Diversity and Distributions, 11, 323.
Wilcove, D.S., Rothstein, D., Dubow, J., Phillips, A. & Losos, E. (1998) Quantifying threats to imperilled species in the United States. BioScience, 48, 607615.
Zamin, T.J., Baillie, J.E.M., Miller, R.M., Rodriguez, J.P., Ardid, A. & Collen, B. (2010) National red listing beyond the 2010 target. Conservation Biology, 24, 10121020.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Oryx
  • ISSN: 0030-6053
  • EISSN: 1365-3008
  • URL: /core/journals/oryx
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed