Homework on Madeline Bottrill et al, "Is conservation triage just smart decision making?"


These questions are about the Bottril et al reading.

1. What is conservation triage? Explain in your own words. (2pts)

2. The authors say that conservation triage is already implicitly practiced by people involved in conservation. They say it will be better if it is explicitly practiced.
a. Why do they think this is true? (1pt)
b. What are some reasons that it might be better that conservation triage not be explicit, even if it is still implicitly practiced? (1pt)

3. The authors say that properly determining where resources should be allocated requires considering the relevant values. They say that higher value is often given to "charismatic species" and those that provide "functional support to ecosystems."
a. What do these two terms mean? (You may have to do some outside research) (1pt)
b. Is it appropriate to act like charismatic species or those that provide functional support to ecosystems have more value? Why or why not? (1pt)

4. One important question is who should engage in conservation triage. Is it possible that it is permissible for some people to engage in conservation triage but not others? If not, why not? If so, for whom would triage be wrong and for whom permissible? (2pts)

5. The authors say on page 1, "rather than being an ethical position, conservation triage is simply an unavoidable step..."
a. What do you think they mean when they say that conservation triage is not an ethical position? (1pt)
b. Do you agree? (1pt)