How should we prioritize conservation programs and why?

Question

Given the enormity of our biodiversity resources and the apparent lack of funds

Answer 1

We usually go with the programs that give the "biggest bang for the buck", show the greatest results for the least expenditure of time or money. Preference can also be given to those that are time-constrained, such as breeding programs for rapidly-disappearing species.

Answer 2

The most essential priority should be dealing with desertification. In a combination of normal drought cycles exascerbated by climate change and the economics of rich and poor nations we are denuding arable land into worthlessness at the rate of 1-1.5 million hectares annually.

In the United States desert lands are about 10% as productive as they were before Europeans arrived, this almost entirely from over-grazing. What we see today was radically and forever changed by nineteenth century and early twentieth century grazing on semi-arid lands during droughts.

This land is very difficult to restore to productivity, taking natural processes 45-60 years to restore minor disturbances, with soil compaction the period can quickly rise to hundreds of years. Essentially there is no way to recover these lands without intervention.

To restore semi-arid lands costs a lot of money and while it seems not worth it, an example from Tuscon, AZ, was studied where one flash flood caused by over-grazing on the watershed cost more than restoration would have, one flood.

So, it's a matter of awareness and wisdom to work to relieve these lands of over-grazing, the single most destructive force in desertification, having global affects from dust, high runoff, gullying and loss of soil structure and biological symbiotic communities needed for plants and animals to thrive again.

Next is a move to reduce water pollution. The current "dead zone" caused by too much fertilizer in the Mississippi River into the Gulf of Mexico is a prime example of losing a huge fishery to land mismanagement. I include people taking care of their lawns as one of the largest contributors to this effluent, not just big Agriculture.

Our societies pollute water at astounding rates, as if it doesn't matter, but the economic cost of this is very high, much more than treating the water. We see a global privatization of water sources that also is very alarming as pure water supplies dwindle. This forces the poorest of the world to look elsewhere for water, resulting in millions of people dying and suffering diseases, parasites and other health effects for no reason other than to make a profit.

In the not too distant future we will see every landfill dug up for the resources there because the system of resource extraction for profit will end up there since it will be the cheapest place to get those resources: Metals, plastics, paper, organics and everything else in there is worth money in the end. We must recycle everything, that's everything, no exceptions.

Finally, we must work towards an economic system that doesn't force the poor to capture, kill and sell every animal on earth just to survive in a monetary system. Until this is part of the plan, nothing will matter, we are denuding the earth, overpopulating it and all without it seems any serious effort at dealing with it all, perhaps from NIMBI'ism since things look OK, but mainly from feeling helpless at the size of what needs to be done.

Fortunately, one step at a time works just fine to get the job done.