Search

The unsustainable use of wildlife is a primary driver of global biodiversity loss. No comprehensive global dataset exists on what species are in trade, their geographic origins, and trade's ultimate impacts, which limits our ability to sustainably manage trade. The United States is one of the world's largest importers of wildlife, with trade data compiled in the US Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS). The LEMIS provides the most comprehensive publicly accessible wildlife trade database of non-the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) listed species. In total, 21,097 species and over 2.85 billion individuals were traded over the past 22 y (2000-2022). When LEMIS data are combined with CITES records, the United States imported over 29,445 wild species, including over 50% of all globally described species in some taxonomic groups. For most taxa, around half of the individuals are declared as sourced from the wild. Although the LEMIS provides the only means to assess trade volumes for many taxa, without any associated data on most wild populations, it is impossible to assess the impact on biodiversity, sustainability of trade, or any potential risk of pest or pathogen spread. These insights underscore the considerable underestimation of trade and the urgent need for other countries to adopt similar mechanisms to accurately record trade., Competing Interests: Competing interests statement:The authors declare no competing interest.

The Earth BioGenome Project (EBP) is an audacious endeavor to obtain whole-genome sequences of representatives from all eukaryotic species on Earth. In addition to the project's technical and organizational challenges, it also faces complicated ethical, legal, and social issues. This paper, from members of the EBP's Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues (ELSI) Committee, catalogs these ELSI concerns arising from EBP. These include legal issues, such as sample collection and permitting; the applicability of international treaties, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol; intellectual property; sample accessioning; and biosecurity and ethical issues, such as sampling from the territories of Indigenous peoples and local communities, the protection of endangered species, and cross-border collections, among several others. We also comment on the intersection of digital sequence information and data rights. More broadly, this list of ethical, legal, and social issues for large-scale genomic sequencing projects may be useful in the consideration of ethical frameworks for future projects. While we do not-and cannot-provide simple, overarching solutions for all the issues raised here, we conclude our perspective by beginning to chart a path forward for EBP's work., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interest., (Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.)

Globally, 15,521 animal species are listed as threatened by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, and of these less than 3% have genomic resources that can inform conservation management. To combat this, global genome initiatives are developing genomic resources, yet production of a reference genome alone does not conserve a species. The reference genome allows us to develop a suite of tools to understand both genome-wide and functional diversity within and between species. Conservation practitioners can use these tools to inform their decision-making. But, at present there is an implementation gap between the release of genome information and the use of genomic data in applied conservation by conservation practitioners. In May 2020, we launched the Threatened Species Initiative and brought a consortium of genome biologists, population biologists, bioinformaticians, population geneticists, and ecologists together with conservation agencies across Australia, including government, zoos, and nongovernment organizations. Our objective is to create a foundation of genomic data to advance our understanding of key Australian threatened species, and ultimately empower conservation practitioners to access and apply genomic data to their decision-making processes through a web-based portal. Currently, we are developing genomic resources for 61 threatened species from a range of taxa, across Australia, with more than 130 collaborators from government, academia, and conservation organizations. Developed in direct consultation with government threatened-species managers and other conservation practitioners, herein we present our framework for meeting their needs and our systematic approach to integrating genomics into threatened species recovery., Competing Interests: Competing interest statement: All authors are members of the Threatened Species Initiative Steering Committee., (Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by PNAS.)

Listing endangered and threatened species under the US Endangered Species Act is presumed to offer a defense against extinction and a solution to achieve recovery of imperiled populations, but only if effective conservation action ensues after listing occurs. The amount of government funding available for species protection and recovery is one of the best predictors of successful recovery; however, government spending is both insufficient and highly disproportionate among groups of species, and there is significant discrepancy between proposed and actualized budgets across species. In light of an increasing list of imperiled species requiring evaluation and protection, an explicit approach to allocating recovery funds is urgently needed. Here I provide a formal decision-theoretic approach focusing on return on investment as an objective and a transparent mechanism to achieve the desired recovery goals. I found that less than 25% of the $1.21 billion/year needed for implementing recovery plans for 1,125 species is actually allocated to recovery. Spending in excess of the recommended recovery budget does not necessarily translate into better conservation outcomes. Rather, elimination of only the budget surplus for "costly yet futile" recovery plans can provide sufficient funding to erase funding deficits for more than 180 species. Triage by budget compression provides better funding for a larger sample of species, and a larger sample of adequately funded recovery plans should produce better outcomes even if by chance. Sharpening our focus on deliberate decision making offers the potential to achieve desired outcomes in avoiding extinction for Endangered Species Act-listed species.

Separating myth and reality is essential for evaluating the effectiveness of laws. Section 7 of the US Endangered Species Act (Act) directs federal agencies to help conserve threatened and endangered species, including by consulting with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or National Marine Fisheries Service on actions the agencies authorize, fund, or carry out. Consultations ensure that actions do not violate the Act's prohibitions on "jeopardizing" listed species or "destroying or adversely modifying" these species' critical habitat. Because these prohibitions are broad, many people consider section 7 the primary tool for protecting species under the Act, whereas others believe section 7 severely impedes economic development. This decades-old controversy is driven primarily by the lack of data on implementation: past analyses are either over 25 y old or taxonomically restricted. We analyze data on all 88,290 consultations recorded by FWS from January 2008 through April 2015. In contrast to conventional wisdom about section 7 implementation, no project was stopped or extensively altered as a result of FWS finding jeopardy or adverse modification during this period. We also show that median consultation duration is far lower than the maximum allowed by the Act, and several factors drive variation in consultation duration. The results discredit many of the claims about the onerous nature of section 7 but also raise questions as to how federal agencies could apply this tool more effectively to conserve species. We build on the results to identify ways to improve the effectiveness of consultations for imperiled species conservation and increase the efficiency of consultations.