Marler Thomas E
College of Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Guam, Mangilao, Guam, USA.
Commun Integr Biol. 2019 Aug 19;12(1):133-143. doi: 10.1080/19420889.2019.1654348. eCollection 2019.
Recent conservation actions for Merr. and K.D. Hill in the Mariana Islands have illuminated some negative consequences associated with ill-informed agents representing permitting and funding agencies. Several cases from the islands of Guam and Tinian are discussed as ineffective conservation examples, and these are countered with two examples of successful conservation approaches. When biologists that act as points of contact for federal permitting and funding agencies do not possess education, knowledge, and experience that is germane to federally listed species, sound science may be marginalized from the conservation agenda. When rapid turnover of federal conservation agents introduces dysfunction, discontinuities in collaborations may thwart success. When lapses in conservation contracts are allowed, short-term extemporary contracting approaches are utilized, and conservation practitioners that lack the ability to include an experimental approach to conservation actions are employed, the co-production of new knowledge to enable decision support tools for future decision-makers may be hindered.
近期针对马里亚纳群岛的梅里尔（Merr.）和K.D.希尔（K.D. Hill）所采取的保护行动揭示了一些与代表许可和资助机构的信息不充分的人员相关的负面后果。来自关岛和天宁岛的几个案例被作为无效保护的例子进行了讨论，同时也列举了两个成功保护方法的例子来进行反驳。当作为联邦许可和资助机构联络点的生物学家不具备与联邦列出物种相关的教育、知识和经验时，合理的科学可能会被排除在保护议程之外。当联邦保护人员的快速更替导致功能失调时，合作的中断可能会阻碍成功。当允许保护合同出现漏洞、采用短期临时签约方式，并且雇用缺乏将实验方法纳入保护行动能力的保护从业者时，可能会阻碍新知识的共同产生，从而无法为未来的决策者提供决策支持工具。
