Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
(1988)
1988 IUCN red list of threatened animalsConservation Biology
P. E. Nye, P. Riexinger (1981)
A system for designating endangered and threatened fish and wildlife species in New York State
B. A. Millsap, J. A. Gore, D. E. Runde, S. I. Cerulean (1990)
Setting priorities for the conservation of fish and wildlife species in Florida, 111
J.J. Fay, W. L. Thomas (1983)
Endangered and threatened species listing and recovery priority guidelines. Federal Register, USFish and Wildlife Service, 48
G. Mace, R. Lande (1991)
Assessing Extinction Threats: Toward a Reevaluation of IUCN Threatened Species CategoriesConservation Biology, 5
G.A. Mace, R. Lande (1991)
Assessing extinction threats: towards a reevaluation of IUCN threatened species categoriesWildl. Monogr., 5
(1988)
Natural heritage program operations manual
L. E. Morse (1987)
Rare plant protection, conservancy style, 37
(1991)
Criteria for assigning official state status designations: Virginia's native plant and animal species
(1981)
Seven forms of rarity
D. Rabinowitz (1981)
The Biological Aspects of Rare Plant Conservation
(1986)
Technical advisory committee guidelines for listing endangered, threatened, probably extirpated and special concern species in MichiganThe Nature Conservancy Magazine
The purpose of this comment is to discuss and to compare briefly some systems for prioritizing species for Conservation attention. This comment is written in response to a proposed new International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) hierarchical categorization, described in Conservation Biology by Mace and Lande (1991), and based on a speciesâ probability of extinction. Resources (e.g., time and money) available for the conservation of species and ecosystems are invariably in short supply relative to the needs for those resources. Accordingly, setting priorities for conservation actions is a necessary and major preoccupation of governmental and nongovernmental organizationsconcerned with the conservation of species and ecosystems. Priorities for the allocation of resources to individual species are often based primarily on an assessment of the threats to those species, and secondarily on other factors. For example, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has two priority species ranking systems-one for listing actions and one for recovery actions. For listing as âendangeredâ or âthreatened,â species are ranked on a scale of 1 through 12 based on magnitude (high or moderate to low) and immediacy (imminent or nonimminent) of threat, and taxonomic distinctness (monotypic genus, species, or subspecies). For
Conservation Biology – Wiley
Published: Dec 1, 1991
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.