Science supporting threatened species conservation

Australia is a part of the worldwide biodiversity crisis. Each loss of a species, population or community not only lessens the incredible richness of our biodiversity, it diminishes the resilience of our ecosystems and erodes our cultural identity. This Supplement illustrates the various dimensions of science which give support to threatened species conservation. It provides an opportunity to take stock. What have we learnt about threatened species conservation? How can we improve our efforts to conserve our national heritage and minimize the risk of further extinctions? Biodiversity conservation must start with a recognition and understanding of the problem. Scientific knowledge must be accompanied by appropriate legislation, a high level of community support and most importantly, political willingness to act. Currently, the prime legislation aimed at the conservation of biodiversity in New South Wales is the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (TSC Act). The strength of this act is that it provides a rigorous process for listing threatened entities (taxa, populations and ecological communities) and key threatening processes, which is underpinned by two crucial elements: transparency via wide community input through a public submission and notification process; and unimpeded critical scientific input through an independent committee. Its weakness, common to biodiversity conservation legislation worldwide, is its failure in implementation (rather than design) to achieve ecologically sustainable development because of the lack of significant ongoing resources to support on-ground recovery actions and threat abatement. This means that catastrophic biodiversity loss will continue until the conservation of ecosystems is as important as the health of ‘the economy’; only then is it likely that biodiversity conservation will be adequately resourced. Nevertheless, in New South Wales there is cause for some optimism. The case studies described in this Supplement demonstrate that success in threatened species conservation (i.e. species recovery or threat abatement) is typically characterized by: a detailed understanding of the causes of decline; a plan with well-reasoned actions underpinned by high-quality science; stakeholder involvement in both planning and implementation; flexibility of approach to actions; a champion to secure resources and ensure actions are implemented; scientific expertise in undertaking actions; critical evaluation and adaptive management; and a sustained, long-term effort, often spanning a decade or more. While the planning and science must come from a broad base, success will often depend on attention to detail and a commitment to tackle problems on the ground at specific sites that are fundamental to the persistence of key populations. The contributions in this Supplement show how advances in science can provide reliable data and strategic advice, as well as new concepts, approaches and methods, all of which are essential to improve our efforts to conserve species, populations and ecological communities at risk of extinction and to prevent others from becoming threatened. These scientific advances include: development of concepts, risk assessment techniques and expertise to carry out the listing process (Hughes, Keith); improved interfaces betweens science and environmental law (Keith, Larkin); diagnosis of conservation problems (Adam, Auld & Keith, Eldridge & James) and design of effective recovery strategies (Carlile et al., Crowther et al., Hunter et al., Wheeler & Priddel); new cost-efficient approaches to planning and prioritization (Brown & Baker, Downey et al., Joseph et al., Mahon); development and trial of new approaches to management and design of informative monitoring programmes (Mackenzie & Keith, Priddel & Carlile); essential data to support risk assessment, inform management and assess its performance (Baker, Carlile et al. Kendall & Snelson, Mackenzie & Keith, McClelland). What then for the next decade and beyond? Biodiversity is complex; it comprises innumerable components, which interact at multiple levels of organization (e.g. genes, species and ecosystems) in myriad ways. Building knowledge about these components and their interactions, particularly threatening processes, will be critical to conservation in the future. Conservation efforts involve substantial risks of failure unless causes of biodiversity decline are understood with reasonable certainty, a challenge that can only be met with best-practice science. A strong centralized capacity for research within the responsible state agency has proven to be an effective way to lead biodiversity conservation in New South Wales and a strong catalyst for quality research and collaboration external to the agency. We commend this approach to other jurisdictions and we support maintenance and renewal of the Department of Environment and Climate Change's in-house research capacity, together with an enhancement of resources to implement recovery actions and threat abatement. We hope that this collection of papers provides valuable guidance and reference material to encourage planners, managers and scientists confronting similar challenges and that it also sets clear directions for an ongoing agenda to improve conservation action informed by quality science. We share with Edward O. Wilson, the view ‘that every scrap of biological diversity is priceless, to be learned and cherished, and never to be surrendered without a struggle’ (Wilson 2001).