| The Magazine of the CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES |
|
|
|
|
|
Letters To The Editor Why Inventory?
In the “Letter from the Field” (Winter 2002), there is a photo with a caption that reads “the team of scientists returns with a vast array of unusual specimens.” How does this “science” protect endangered species again? Tell it to me again, I’ve forgotten what the rationale is. Typically hypocritical, two-faced, irresponsible and insensitive, “scientists” have played a sizable part in contributing to the demise of a “vast array” of species worldwide, by collecting truckloads of specimens with seemingly little or no thought about what they are doing. Ignorance is their Science! Felicia Smith Brian Fisher responds: What kinds of living things exist? Where do they live? How are they related? One can identify any bird in North America with a small field guide, so it is easy to think that we know enough about life on this planet and that nineteenth century field collecting is no longer needed. But we know very little about the diversity of life on this planet. Systematists have identified 1.7 million species—a mere fraction of the creatures living among us. For instance, even though ants are a dominant life form in the United States, it is difficult to identify ants and many species are poorly understood. The problem is much greater in tropical countries. In Madagascar where I work, for example, 75 percent of the ant species are undescribed and we have found over 700 new species of ants in the last few years. Some readers may understand this, but still be more concerned with conservation than with increasing biological knowledge. Why should we invest in collection and analysis of biodiversity information globally, you may think, when habitat and species are disappearing so fast? Shouldn’t we instead support their protection and preservation? Maybe we don’t need to know that much about them to protect them. How can collecting and understanding species help conserve them? Conserving tropical biodiversity into perpetuity consists of three basic and overlapping steps—save it, know it, and use it. The direct “save it” step often requires knowledge of where a species is found, which requires limited inventories—as small species cannot usually be identified in the field—and mapping diversity. However, our experiences in the tropics lead us to feel that if only this first step is executed, the “conserved” tropical wildland has very little chance of long-term survival, no matter how scientifically well-founded, legally bound, or emotionally attractive. “Inventorying,” an action that demands some taxonomic infrastructure, is not merely making a list but rather building up a picture of biodiversity for people in all areas of society. The users may be children on a guided tour of a park, bioprospectors looking for medicinal plants, national park managers, farmers, or visitors. An initial inventory can provide evidence of the need to set aside land for conservation or other relatively non-damaging uses. Thus, we will be much more motivated and effective at protecting something (and at a much lower cost), when we understand it. Systematics, and the collections it requires, are the foundations for long-term conservation. Whose Bat House? The bat house plans printed in California Wild, Fall 2002, should have been credited to the U.S. Geological Survey’s Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. |
