Shelby C Carlson, John A Vucetich, L Mark Elbroch, Shelby Perry, Lydia A Roe, Tom Butler, Jeremy T Bruskotter
{"title":"政府在恢复美国野生化以遏制生物多样性危机中的作用","authors":"Shelby C Carlson, John A Vucetich, L Mark Elbroch, Shelby Perry, Lydia A Roe, Tom Butler, Jeremy T Bruskotter","doi":"10.1093/biosci/biad099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A critical but underattended feature of the biodiversity crisis is the contraction of geographic range experienced by most studied terrestrial vertebrates. In the United States, the primary policy tool for mitigating the biodiversity crisis is a federal law, the Endangered Species Act (ESA). For the past two decades, the federal agencies that administer the ESA have interpreted the act in a manner that precludes treating this geographic element of the crisis. Therefore, the burden of mitigating the biodiversity crisis largely falls on wildlife agencies within state government, which are obligated to operate on behalf of the interests of their constituents. We present survey research indicating that most constituents expect state agencies to prioritize species restoration over other activities, including hunting. This prioritization holds even among self-identified hunters, which is significant because state agencies often take the provisioning of hunting opportunity as their top priority. By prioritizing rewilding efforts that restore native species throughout portions of their historic range, state agencies could unify hunting and nonhunting constituents while simultaneously stemming the biodiversity crisis.","PeriodicalId":9003,"journal":{"name":"BioScience","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of governance in rewilding the United States to stem the biodiversity crisis\",\"authors\":\"Shelby C Carlson, John A Vucetich, L Mark Elbroch, Shelby Perry, Lydia A Roe, Tom Butler, Jeremy T Bruskotter\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/biosci/biad099\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A critical but underattended feature of the biodiversity crisis is the contraction of geographic range experienced by most studied terrestrial vertebrates. In the United States, the primary policy tool for mitigating the biodiversity crisis is a federal law, the Endangered Species Act (ESA). For the past two decades, the federal agencies that administer the ESA have interpreted the act in a manner that precludes treating this geographic element of the crisis. Therefore, the burden of mitigating the biodiversity crisis largely falls on wildlife agencies within state government, which are obligated to operate on behalf of the interests of their constituents. We present survey research indicating that most constituents expect state agencies to prioritize species restoration over other activities, including hunting. This prioritization holds even among self-identified hunters, which is significant because state agencies often take the provisioning of hunting opportunity as their top priority. By prioritizing rewilding efforts that restore native species throughout portions of their historic range, state agencies could unify hunting and nonhunting constituents while simultaneously stemming the biodiversity crisis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9003,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BioScience\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BioScience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biad099\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BioScience","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biad099","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The role of governance in rewilding the United States to stem the biodiversity crisis
A critical but underattended feature of the biodiversity crisis is the contraction of geographic range experienced by most studied terrestrial vertebrates. In the United States, the primary policy tool for mitigating the biodiversity crisis is a federal law, the Endangered Species Act (ESA). For the past two decades, the federal agencies that administer the ESA have interpreted the act in a manner that precludes treating this geographic element of the crisis. Therefore, the burden of mitigating the biodiversity crisis largely falls on wildlife agencies within state government, which are obligated to operate on behalf of the interests of their constituents. We present survey research indicating that most constituents expect state agencies to prioritize species restoration over other activities, including hunting. This prioritization holds even among self-identified hunters, which is significant because state agencies often take the provisioning of hunting opportunity as their top priority. By prioritizing rewilding efforts that restore native species throughout portions of their historic range, state agencies could unify hunting and nonhunting constituents while simultaneously stemming the biodiversity crisis.
期刊介绍:
BioScience is a monthly journal that has been in publication since 1964. It provides readers with authoritative and current overviews of biological research. The journal is peer-reviewed and heavily cited, making it a reliable source for researchers, educators, and students. In addition to research articles, BioScience also covers topics such as biology education, public policy, history, and the fundamental principles of the biological sciences. This makes the content accessible to a wide range of readers. The journal includes professionally written feature articles that explore the latest advancements in biology. It also features discussions on professional issues, book reviews, news about the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS), and columns on policy (Washington Watch) and education (Eye on Education).