Biodiversity in the Anthropocene

In a new study biologists from Zurich and Denmark have argued more direct intervention is necessary for the conservation of biodiversity.  Christoph Kueffer and Christopher N Kaiser-Bunbury say it is too late to hold on to a Victorian ideal of preserving nature as something separate from human contamination. They argue  we must be flexible in using conservation strategies, accepting the human-altered landscapes and ecosystems in order to make them as sustainable as possible.

As a case study the team studied the Seychelles islands. This archipelago presents a valuable resource for conservationist research; being isolated, containing fragmented landscapes, and surrounded by other islands with similar ecosystems. This case study led to their recommendation of four main strategies 1) maintaining those parts of the world yet untouched by humans, 2) creating artificial inter situ, in situ and ex situ conservation settings  resilient to future human interference, 3) introducing novel ecosystems, and 4) promoting biodiversity  through economic activities.

The researchers’ emphasis on direct human intervention has not escaped criticism, partly because it is so hard to predict the consequences of any interference, and also because isolated islands such as the Seychelles cannot directly inform knowledge of ecosystem reactions in mainland environments. Kueffer and Kaiser-Bunbury’s call to reevaluate traditional conservation methods is, however, in common with a branch of conservation studies that sees the world as irretrievably altered by humans. The use of the word ‘Anthropocene’, an informal term emphasising the impact of humans on the nature of our present epoch, is being used more and more often, and Kueffer and Bunbury will not be the last ones to suggest more drastic measures to preserve our biodiversity.

http://www.esajournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1890/120201