Terrible news from the northern Pacific

My friend and colleague Lois Englberger has just written to say that the building which housed the Secretariat of the Pacific Community office in Pohnpei and the headquarters of the Island Food Community of Pohnpei burned down during the early morning of 4 April. Losses were great, though thankfully nobody was hurt. Both SPC and IFCP are active promoters of traditional foods, and have done great work documenting and conserving traditional varieties of Pacific crops, and not just in Pohnpei. What’s happened is a terrible blow, but I’m sure both organizations will make a full and rapid recovery and continue their vital work. My thoughts and best wishes are with Lois, Konrad, Adelino and all my other friends affected by this in Pohnpei and around the Pacific.

fire-area-inside-office.jpg

Classifying conservation actions

An article in PLoS Biology recently suggested that IUCN should change the classification system it uses for protected areas (PAs). ((Change the IUCN Protected Area Categories to Reflect Biodiversity Outcomes Boitani L, Cowling RM, Dublin HT, Mace GM, Parrish J, et al. PLoS Biology Vol. 6, No. 3, e66 doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060066.)) Currently reflecting management intent (e.g. “National Park: managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation”), the idea would be for the new categories to rather “be based on the quality and quantity of the contribution of each PA to conservation of biodiversity (and associated sociocultural values).” So: actual result, rather than intent; and “what ” and “how much” rather than “how.” Seems like a pretty good idea. And it also seems like the concept could be applied not just to protected areas, but to conservation actions in general. That would spell the doom of the tired old in situ/ex situ dichotomy. Not a minute too soon, as far as I’m concerned.

Nibbles: Tangled Bank