LAUSR

Invertebrates possibly make up about 80% of all species, yet they rarely attract conservation attention compared to the more ‘charismatic’ vertebrates such as birds and mammals. There are several reasons why insects and allied organisms fare so poorly in the biodiversity conservation arena (Yen & Butcher 1997; New 2009; Cardoso et al. 2011b). First, most invertebrates (apart from butterflies, dragonflies, some beetles, giant silk moths and bees) have a poor public image, with a general lack of sympathy and understanding of their importance in ecological processes and ecosystem functioning. Second, their diversity is overwhelming, with a general lack of information on taxonomic identity and geographical distribution. Third, there is a general lack of understanding of conservation need among policy makers. Fourth, conservation resources are miniscule compared with funds allocated to vertebrates, both in terms of total expenditure invested and average expenditure per species (Cardoso et al. 2011b). However, another reason that has almost certainly contributed to their neglect is that the entomological community has been rather silent on conservation issues. Invertebrate conservation biologists are few in number, and, with few notable exceptions, entomologists tend not to raise their concerns when species, ecological communities or habitats are under threat. Yet, often it is these scientists who are in the best position to inform the general public, decision makers and land managers on conservation issues because they possess the very specialised knowledge (on nomenclature, identity, distribution and ecology) and expertise of the particular organisms that they study (Harvey et al. 2011). In this Editorial, I suggest that a more proactive approach is required, namely, the need for national Action Plans and the concomitant listing under Commonwealth legislation. The targeting of individual threatened species of invertebrates for protection and conservation management has a number of challenges that set them apart from vertebrates and vascular plants (New 2009). For instance, most species are small in size and thus often unnoticed, occupy specialised habitats, have small world distributions where they may be restricted to particular sites or microhabitats and frequently form complex population structures across the landscape. They may also have short generation times with pronounced seasonality or are highly irregular in incidence (with protracted life cycles lasting for years but adults appearing for only brief periods) so that targeted surveys and monitoring may be limited to a narrow window, which could be highly unpredictable between years (Sands & New 2008). Despite these limitations, species-oriented conservation of insects and other invertebrates threatened with extinction is extremely worthwhile given the global biodiversity crisis and estimated rates of anthropogenic species extinction (possibly as high as c. 3000 species/year) (New 1993; Thomas et al. 2004; Cardoso et al. 2011a). Threatened species conservation involves several steps (New et al. 1995; New & Yen 1995; New 2007, 2009, 2011), including (1) evaluating the status of the species of conservation concern; (2) listing the species under national and/or State/Territory legislation according to various criteria; (3) preparing an Action Plan and/or a Recovery Plan in which the conservation status may be formally reevaluated, patterns of decline summarised and key threatening processes attributing to that decline are identified and clarified; (4) providing a set of recommendations (recovery actions and management options) on how best to mitigate threats; (5) implementing management actions through a recovery team; and (6) monitoring recovery actions to ensure that management is working and the risk of extinction is prevented or minimised. Action Plans are key part of this process and are prepared primarily to facilitate the assessment of species conservation status and to some extent their recovery, although they may also be produced simply to fulfil legal obligations or as public relations exercises (New 2007, 2009). Action Plans are typically prepared for single species, although they may also be prepared for suites of species belonging to a particular higher taxonomic group (e.g. Garnett et al. 2010; Woinarski et al. 2012). Their main purpose is to identify taxa of conservation concern. Essentially, Action Plans set out to comprehensively collate information of the relevant species, or group of species, on their distribution and biology, critical habitat requirements, evidence of decline and key threatening processes impacting on populations, information which provides the basis for scientific evaluation of conservation status. They thus serve as a valuable advocacy role in raising awareness of conservation need. Action Plans are typically initiated and contracted by the Australian Department of the Environment and Energy and managed through their Species Expert Assessment Plan process (Commonwealth Department of the Environment and Energy 2017). In Australia, only one Action Plan at the national level has been prepared for an invertebrate group (butterflies), and that was published 15 years ago (Sands & New 2002). The Action Plan on Australian butterflies was novel in some respects because of the extensive consultation undertaken, with workshops held in each State/Territory to solicit expert opinion on conservation status evaluation, recognising that much knowledge resides in the domain of private collectors compared with the scant and fragmentary scientific literature. They also placed a strong emphasis on identifying threatening processes underlying patterns of decline.