Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T05:05:30.405Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Implications of changing species definitions for conservation purposes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2007

Stephen T. Garnett  and
Les Christidis
Stephen T. Garnett*
Affiliation:
School for Environmental Research, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT, 0909 Australia
Les Christidis
Affiliation:
Australian Museum, Sydney, NSW, 2010 Australia and Department of Genetics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic, 3052, Australia
*
*Author for correspondence. e-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Concern has been expressed that failure to adopt phylogenetic or related species concepts will result in biodiversity loss. Here we describe how widespread adoption of such concepts may affect conservation administration and the social contract with elected governments that fund management of threatened species. We then review threatened species legislation, showing that most laws and international conventions avoid arguments over species' definitions altogether, thus negating arguments that such definitions should be changed to further species' conservation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bird Conservation International , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , September 2007 , pp. 187 - 195
Copyright
Copyright © Birdlife International 2007