What Is Conservation Biology? Gary K. Meffe, C. Ronald Carroll, and Martha J. Groom When the last individual ofa race ofliving things breathes no more, another heaven ‘and another earth must pass before such a one can be again. William: Beste, 1906 Expanding Human Demands on Earth ‘The natural world isa far diferent place now than it was 10,000 years ago, or even 100 ‘years ago, Every natural ecosystem on the planet has been altered by humanity, some {othe point of collapse. Many species have gone prematurely extinct, natural hydro~ logic anc chemical cycles have been disrupted, billions of tons of topsoil have been lost, _enetic diversity has eroded, and the very climate ofthe planet may have been dis- rupted significantly. What is the cause of such vast environmental change? Very sim- ply. the cumulative impacts of 6 billion people (Figure 1.1), have stressed the many ‘ecological support systems ofthe planet. Although it took hunclreds of years forthe human powation to reac 1 billion people, we increased to six times that size ina litle ‘more than a century. Asa consequence, biological diversity (biodiversity, for shor), the grand result of evolutionary processes are evens racing back several billion years, fs telat stake and rapidly declining. One of the many species suffering the conse {quences of ecological destruction is Homo sapiens the perpetrator of itll [All people should recognize the degree to which human impacts affect the natu- al world, and in turn, diminish our abilities to prosper. Our population explosion ‘over the past century isnot yet over, as annually the world’s population increases by 7 millon each year (he equivalent of aiding the population ofthe United States every 38 year), Fortunately, global population growth rate finaly slowed beginning in the 1980s. Worldwide, human populations should reach nearly 9 billion by 2050 (8 92 bil- lion, range 7-10. billion; World Population Prospects 2002; United Nations 2008), and our population is unlikely to stabilize ata size much below 9-11 billion (United Nations 2008) Figure 2), But ts not solely how many of us that is the problem, but how damaging our use of resources has been.4 Chapter FigueL1_ stated gate human vinnie st Age ite pasunslaneatre tees rents of human pops ‘owihancethe nual Reva {nNoece ft we che alton poopie nie and now mamber more ant baion : Papin iis} “The fraction of the world's natural resources com sumed by humans is staggering For example, 35% of productivity fom the ocean shelf (Pauly and Chils- fensen 19%) ard 8% of reshwater runoff are claimed. foruurase (Postel eta 1986 Net primary productivi- ty (NPP)—the energy fom the sun tha is transformed iio plant Biomass, and that isthe tase of all food tebe corcpted to an alarming extent by our species, Ini estimates ranging from 20% (Imhof etal. 2008) 0 31% 32% globully (hese higher estimates include ss of productivity due to and clearing Vitousek et l 1986; Rojstacer etl 2001. Per capita consumption worl i : - [ee ertunan pplason goth : $50, (Ota em UN Wee fp fon Dison old Ppalstion Prospects 302) wide has increased 3 pee year forthe past 30 years [Baveken etal 193) and wileontinae to ereasein the fore. importantly the evel of human appropriation of NPP Ishighty unegual Uuoughout the word with cites inn ‘stralized nations of Nomth Ameria and Western Eu- Tope ard the large populations in Southeast Asia com ing upto 60! of their egonal NP eat et fa 2000, Consumprion levels in the US. particolnly ae {insussinale and vastly higher than those in other ounlses For example, with about 4% of the world's ‘population, the US. alone accounts for of world’s13. Nueofpal ears pe pr eet Sepstomeatiiyceate OUR bas on SEINGiaTion Routine dally oi consumption (US. Departenentof Energy 2002), ‘280 mes as much as India which has about asbth ‘the woee’s population (Myers 1987). As cme es n> lustalized, but more dersely populated counties, Such as Chia, adopt cultural consumprive habits ere Simlarto the US, te mereasing demands ll beer ‘mos and unsustainable "To help place these impacts in perspective, several studies estimate theecologil footprint of urimpacts “on the gabe (eg, Weckeragel etal 2002). An ecco Footprint cleats Row much land and water reso ‘Wecansue row our fod, support ou lest and ‘silts our wastes. The aggregate portale sober ing—beginningin the mic-197¥s oar consumption pat gute 14 Map he human opin Oak it em an development han hgh Me {Rinse the ernti srtacese seongl sence {Se trom Sandorcon tal 302), Whats Conservation Bology? 5 tems exes Ears nna production apy and Sur deans cndne gr de Weer neesng trands for ene, ood and fonts gre 13). Aram: Soro forprin acs ae avaiable for in us topes rough estimate of sr one imps an om peti consumplon ats wih howe exer inthe (Roll fey a worwanyfootpinton). Many connie Sed ecl communes or uring hee indi for ube ‘Shcston and mora planing ewer roe SRrosoure ne These nes ndcate tht ould ake fara oupport the words population at the evel seanxmpton esol he US (Wilson 22) ‘RfinalSmpeling portato “human Footprint” ves erly pdt Ba shore that moe han of Tes sine bears the imprint four acts {Sanderson etl 2052) By everaying dates depicting ‘Numan population dena land at data showing Se {eve eaafrmation fon stalls ol op Seas, toad dense and oer means of aces rake ‘alares, and networks of eet pera he le, Sanderson and his colleagues wer able Yo po: ‘idea more tangle map of our mp tha sneer Spey asthe cola footprint cleulaons ae, ‘or etc to npc on NPE The map shows tht ‘2. hand sutaeisinuenced by ane oF mor {he flowing: human popslaion dent rete than {iho ngcaltral land se, Sul yp aes, secs seth 1 kn fe ond tor ser or tat ad might ne light ght enough oe pled py satlitesen sors (Figure 1). Farther fle lands that ean gro? tenes, ce, oF maine ae sles entirely transformed (om Sanders ta 300) vedo man