Species concepts and conservation: a response to Hazevoet

1 June 1996

journal article
research article
Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Bird Conservation International

Vol. 6 (2) , 197-200
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0959270900003075

Abstract

Whether they are “mere subspecies” or “phylogenetic species”, the omission of such forms from the ICBP (now BirdLife International) Red Data Book (RDB) was my personal decision, and I have long been sensitive to the type of charge contained in Hazevoet's paper (preceding pages). This decision, taken back in 1982, was based on the time, space and cost that would have been involved in the systematic review and inclusion of subspecies (RDBs being much fuller treatments than those in Birds to watch 2, the work criticized for the omission by Hazevoet), and on the fact that the future of the many “full” species needing urgent documentation and action consequently stood to be compromised.

Keywords

This publication has 3 references indexed in Scilit:

The reasons for Red Data Books
Oryx, 1996
Systematics and the Biodiversity Crisis
BioScience, 1995
Bird conservation in Kenya: creating a national strategy
Bird Conservation International, 1991