The efforts to protect animals are increasing worldwide, but attention to species is not necessarily related to their risk of extinction. An analysis of the financing in fauna protection projects and of animals research articles confirmed that the most charismatic and close to human beings are given greater preference, well above other species that do need support .
In the last 25 years, 2,000 million dollars have been allocated to Earth’s biodiversity conservation projects. 83% of the resources were allocated to vertebrate animals, while 6.6% of the financing was aimed at invertebrate plants and animals. The organisms that are at the end of the priority list are fungi and algae, with a budget allocated to only 0.2%.
When reviewing 14,000 studies on animals in four scientific journals, it was found that 89% talked about a single group of 27 large vertebrates. This result is contrasting, since vertebrate species only represent 4% of total life forms on earth. Science has a name for these outstanding animals: charismatic megafauna. Bears, lions, tigers, wolves, pandas, gorillas and rhinos are just some examples.
For the authors of the report, from different universities, the results are, in part, contradictory. There are articles on animal conservation that focus on species with low conservation priority, while many species in serious danger of extinction are excluded from investment funds for conservation or plans for the increase in their population.
Not all tender animals are in extreme danger
For some biologists who did not participate in the investigation, this aesthetic bias is no surprise. The charismatic megafauna dominates animals for decades, but studies such as the recent one, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of SciencesThey can help distribute more equitable the budget for the protection of less graceful species, according to human standards.
“The most charismatic and larger species usually receive greater attention and financing for their conservation. However, other species that are not considered as attractive but that are in a more vulnerable situation do not receive the support, Immaculate Álvarez-Manzaneda Salcedo, postdoctoral researcher at the University of Granada, explained.
“We must take into account that the value of a species is not due to its appearance; fungi, amphibians or reptiles also have a fundamental role in the functioning of ecosystems, they are already often unnoticed,” added the specialist in biodiversity conservation, In a statement to the portal Social Media Center Spain.
“With such a poor distribution of money, the worst news of this article may be that only 6% of world -threatened species have had some conservation project. In the end, inequality in the distribution of funds between fauna and threatened flora It looks like economic inequality in human society, ”said Andy Green, research professor at the Doñana Biological Station, for the same agency.
The red list of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) It is a critical indicator of the health of world biodiversity. On your page web is one of the biggest catalogs about kingdom species Animalia, Plantae and Fungilabeled according to their level on the risk scale. It is also a tool to inform and encourage actions for the conservation of biodiversity and the change of public policies.
For IUCN, of the total species evaluated, more than 46,300 are threatened species. In addition, for the organism there are different levels of threat: minor concern, almost threatened, vulnerable, in danger of extinction, in critical danger of extinction, extinct in the wild and extinct state.
#Ugly #animals #victims #preservation #bias #time #save
