Search

Illegal or unsustainable wildlife trade is growing at a global level, threatening the traded species and coexisting biota, and promoting the spread of invasive species. From the loss of ecosystem services to diseases transmitted from wildlife to humans, or connections with major organized crime networks and disruption of local to global economies, its ramifications are pervading our daily lives and perniciously affecting our well-being. Here we build on the manifesto 'World Scientists' Warning to Humanity, issued by the Alliance of World Scientists. As a group of researchers deeply concerned about the consequences of illegal or unsustainable wildlife trade, we review and highlight how these can negatively impact species, ecosystems, and society. We appeal for urgent action to close key knowledge gaps and regulate wildlife trade more stringently. • Illegal or unsustainable wildlife trade threatens numerous species. • Both targeted and non-targeted species are affected by wildlife trade. • Invasive species and the loss of ecosystem services exacerbate problems. • Disease transmission to humans is currently a major concern. • Criminal networks and effects on local and global economies are pervasive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Despite their high diversity and importance for humankind, invertebrates are often neglected in biodiversity conservation policies. We identify seven impediments to their effective protection: (1) invertebrates and their ecological services are mostly unknown to the general public (the public dilemma); (2) policymakers and stakeholders are mostly unaware of invertebrate conservation problems (the political dilemma); (3) basic science on invertebrates is scarce and underfunded (the scientific dilemma); (4) most species are undescribed (the Linnean shortfall); (5) the distribution of described species is mostly unknown (the Wallacean shortfall); (6) the abundance of species and their changes in space and time are unknown (the Prestonian shortfall); (7) species ways of life and sensitivities to habitat change are largely unknown (the Hutchinsonian shortfall). Numerous recent developments in taxonomy, inventorying, monitoring, data compilation, statistical analysis and science communication facilitate overcoming these impediments in both policy and practice. We suggest as possible solutions for the public dilemma: better public information and marketing. For the political dilemma: red-listing, legal priority listing and inclusion in environmental impact assessment studies. For the scientific dilemma: parataxonomy, citizen science programs and biodiversity informatics. For the Linnean shortfall: biodiversity surrogacy, increased support for taxonomy and advances in taxonomic publications. For the Wallacean shortfall: funding of inventories, compilation of data in public repositories and species distribution modeling. For the Prestonian shortfall: standardized protocols for inventorying and monitoring, widespread use of analogous protocols and increased support for natural history collections. For the Hutchinsonian shortfall: identifying good indicator taxa and studying extinction rates by indirect evidence. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The IUCN Red List is the most useful list of species that are at risk for extinction worldwide, as it relies on a number of objective criteria. Nevertheless, there is a taxonomic bias that excludes species with small body sizes, narrow distribution ranges and low dispersal abilities, which constitute the vast majority of the planet’s biota, particularly local endemics. By evaluating each IUCN criterion separately, we (i) identify the shortcomings for invertebrate applications, (ii) explain how risk categories may be wrongly applied due to inapplicable and/or misleading thresholds, (iii) suggest alternative ways of applying the existing criteria in a more realistic way and (iv) suggest possible new criteria that were not considered in the current evaluation framework but that could allow a more comprehensive and effective assessment of invertebrates. By adapting the criteria to rely more explicitly on the Area of Occupancy and the Extent of Occurrence, their respective trends and by using ecological modelling methods, the criteria’s applicability would be increased. The change in some thresholds or, eventually, the creation of sub-categories would further increase their adequacy. Additionally, co-extinction could be introduced as an explicit part of the classification process. As a case study, we evaluated 48 species of Azorean arthropods and Iberian spiders according to the current criteria. More than one-quarter (27%) of all evaluated species were classified as Critically Endangered, 19% as Endangered, 6% as Vulnerable and 8% as Least Concern. The remaining 40% did not have enough data to reach a classification. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]