Cited by 172Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife EducationEnvironmental Conservation and ManagementEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The contribution of policy, law, management, research, and advocacy failings to the recent extinctions of three Australian vertebrate species

Abstract

Extinctions typically have ecological drivers, such as habitat loss. However, extinction events are also influenced by policy and management settings that may be antithetical to biodiversity conservation, inadequate to prevent extinction, insufficiently resourced, or poorly implemented. Three endemic Australian vertebrate species—the Christmas Island pipistrelle ( Pipistrellus murrayi ), Bramble Cay melomys ( Melomys rubicola ), and Christmas Island forest skink ( Emoia nativitatis )—became extinct from 2009 to 2014. All 3 extinctions were predictable and probably preventable. We sought to identify the policy, management, research, and other shortcomings that contributed to their extinctions or failed to prevent them. These included a lack within national environmental legislation and policy of explicit commitment to the prevention of avoidable extinctions, lack of explicit accountability, inadequate resources for conservation (particularly for species not considered charismatic or not of high taxonomic distinctiveness), inadequate biosecurity, a slow and inadequate process for listing species as threatened, recovery planning that failed to consider the need for emergency response, inability of researchers to identify major threatening factors, lack of public engagement and involvement in conservation decisions, and limited advocacy. From these 3 cases, we recommend: environmental policy explicitly seeks to prevent extinction of any species and provides a clear chain of accountability and an explicit requirement for public inquiry following any extinction; implementation of a timely and comprehensive process for listing species as threatened and for recovery planning; reservation alone not be assumed sufficient to maintain species; enhancement of biosecurity measures; allocation of sufficient resources to undertake actions necessary to prevent extinction; monitoring be considered a pivotal component of the conservation response; research provides timely identification of factors responsible for decline and of the risk of extinction; effective dissemination of research results; advocacy by an informed public for the recovery of threatened species; and public involvement in governance of the recovery process. These recommendations should be applicable broadly to reduce the likelihood and incidence of extinctions.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/cobi.12852

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Climate change is already a substantial driver of changes to nature and its contributions to people in many places, even causing extinction in some cases, but it is not yet globally the most important.

    “Although climate change is already a substantial driver of changes to nature and its contributions to people in many places (Fig. 3), even causing extinction in some cases [for example, ( 66 )], it is not yet globally the most important.”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. Auditor‐General, 2007, The conservation and protection of national threatened species and ecological communities
  2. Cogger HG, 1999, The terrestrial reptiles of Christmas Island: a reappraisal of their status
  3. Commonwealth of Australia, 2015, Threatened species strategy
  4. Dennis A, 1998, Conservation and taxonomic status of the Bramble Cay melomys, Melomys rubicola
  5. Gynther I, 2016, Confirmation of the extinction of the Bramble Cay melomys Melomys rubicola on Bramble Cay, Torres Strait: results and conclusions from a comprehensive survey in August–September 2014
  6. James DJ, 2004, Christmas Island biodiversity monitoring programme: third quarterly report for the period April to June 2004
  7. James DJ, 2007, Christmas Island biodiversity monitoring programme: research into the conservation status and threats of the Christmas Island pipistrelle (Pipistrellus murrayi), 2004–2006
  8. Latch P, 2008, Recovery plan for the Bramble Cay Melomys Melomys rubicola
  9. Lumsden L, 2009, The extinction of the Christmas Island pipistrelle, The Australian Bat Society Newsletter, 33, 21
  10. Lumsden L, 1997, Report on a preliminary investigation of the Christmas Island pipistrelle, Pipistrellus murrayi, in June–July 1994
  11. Lumsden L, 2009, Captive breeding and future in‐situ management of the Christmas Island Pipistrelle Pipistrellus murrayi
  12. Lumsden L, 2007, Investigation of the threats to the Christmas Island Pipistrelle
  13. Lumsden L, 1999, Population dynamics and ecology of the Christmas Island Pipistrelle Pipistrellus murrayi on Christmas Island
  14. Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council, 2010, Australia's biodiversity conservation strategy 2010–2030
  15. Rumpff H, 1992, Distribution, population structure and ecological behaviour of the introduced South‐East Asian Wolf Snake Lycodon aulicus capucinus on Christmas Island, Indian Ocean
  16. Schulz M, 2008, A terrestrial reptile survey of Christmas Island, May–June 2008
  17. Schulz M, 2004, National recovery plan for the Christmas Island pipistrelle Pipistrellus murrayi
  18. Suppiah R, 2010, Observed and future climates of the Torres Strait region
  19. WoinarskiJ DriscollD CoggerH.2014b.Vale Gump: the last known Christmas Island Forest Skink. The Conversation 8 August 2014. Available fromhttps://theconversation.com/vale-gump-the-last-known-christmas-island-forest-skink-30252. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Woinarski, J. C. Z., Garnett, S. T., Legge, S. M., & Lindenmayer, D. B.
Affiliations
  • Charles Darwin University (AU)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Australian National University (AU)
Corresponding author
Woinarski, John C.Z.
Venue
Conservation Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-11-09
Volume
31
Issue
1
Pages
13-23
ISSN
  • 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-1739
OpenAlex
W2529806683
Cited by
172
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 10
FWCI
3.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Conservation Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Environmental Science Programme
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Environmental Conservation and Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
extinction prevention, environmental policy, conservation management, biosecurity, threatened species listing, recovery planning, emergency response, citizen participation, conservation advocacy, conservation research, accountability, public inquiry, biodiversity conservation
MeSH terms
Animals, Australia, Conservation of Natural Resources, Vertebrates, Biodiversity, Extinction, Biological, Endangered Species

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review