Ethics and Conservation Management: Why Conserve Wildlife?

Abstract

This chapter deals with one of the most important aspects of conservation management: why we do it. It is not an easy chapter: there are no clearly defined, or widely accepted, rights or wrongs. It is entirely a matter of opinion or belief. My intention, therefore, is simply to provoke thought and debate. When sites, particularly legally protected areas, are managed by organisations that have policies to guide management there may be little reason to consider conservation ethics when preparing a plan (though anyone engaged in nature conservation should at least be aware of the ethical considerations). Where there is no formal guidance, legislation or policy, planners must understand why they are managing the site. It is only by understanding ‘why’ that we are able to decide what we are trying to achieve and what we must do. Human values are considered, with an emphasis on scientific values and conservation ethics. One conclusion is that scientific values, if they exist, must be supplemented with the full range of other human values. The biocentric/ anthropocentric (ecosystem services) divide represents perhaps the most significant issue in conservation ethics. Some authors suggest that this has done more harm than good. Norton (1991) offers a ‘convergence hypothesis’ and argues that the ­outcome, i.e. environmental protection, will be a consequence of either ethical position. There is, however, at least one significant difference: the burden of proof. An anthropocentric approach implies that conservationists should prove that a habitat or species has value to people, whereas a biocentric approach requires developers to justify their position. There is no consensus, no single and universally accepted conservation ethos. Conservation managers should be aware of the breadth of the debate and attempt to develop a personal ethical position.

Is it not enough for you to feed on the good pasture, that you must tread down with your feet the rest of your pasture; and to drink of clear water, that you must muddy the rest of the water with your feet? (Ezekiel 34:18)

The world grows smaller and smaller, more and more interdependent… today more than ever before life must be characterized by a sense of Universal Responsibility not only nation to nation and human to human, but also human to other forms of life. (His Holiness the Dalai Lama 1987)

Someday children coming upon the picture of a tiger will view it the way we view dinosaurs, wondering if such creatures ever really existed. But the extinction of tigers – and the gorillas and the wolves and the whales – will be different. We will have exterminated these species, unthinkingly, without purpose, without remorse. (Roszak 2001)