On a football pitch, if each plays in his corner and speaks a different language, the team is not to win. Eleven researchers, emanating from eight international organisations of protection of nature, therefore undertook to collaborate to work out a common language. A lexicon which will allow, they hope for it, better one effectiveness of the programmes of protection of biodiversity. He is published in the magazine Conservation Biology.

Idea comes back there to Nick Salafsky (Foundation of Success, the United States), who reflected, as part of Conservation Measures Partnership, a federation of organisations of protection of nature, in the definition of a definite vocabulary to itemise the threats which influence a kind, animal or plant, and actions to be undertaken to protect her. A step which had hired for his/her part the international Union of conservation of nature (UICN), that notably publishes the red list of most threatened kinds. Both organisations therefore got closer, federating in the passage of so various entities as WWF, Birdlife International or Nature of serfdom, between others. Their job is already tested on a list of 1191 threatened kinds of birds and 737 plans of conservation, underline the researchers in Conservation Biology.

The idea of departure is relatively simple. Very science needs a common vocabulary to exist. Just as the classification of the living organisms of Linné, or the periodical table of the elements of Mendeleev in chemistry. Until now, the definition of terms relating to threatened kinds remained often vague. It is for example the case of 1191 guinea pigs, kinds of threatened birds spotted by international Birdlife. 90 % were considered as in danger because of the “disappearance of their habitat”. Without more precision. From now on, the lexicon offered in Conservation Biology differentiates this loss of habitat according to their reason: intensive agriculture, urbanization, deforestation. And every category is specified by subcategories. Urbanization is therefore subdivided according to threat: building urban, shopping centres, establishment of plants, tourist facilities, etc. Also, agriculture (and aquaculture) are possible put down various threats: agriculture of full field, plantations of industrial forests, animal husbandry, etc. Climatic change, also, causes several types of disturbance on kinds: impairment of the habitat (taken up by oceans, desertification, cast iron of the pergélisol, etc.), dryness, inundations and extreme phenomena (storms, tornadoes, hail, storms of dust, etc.). Naturally, every threat is not exclusive, and a kind can suffer at the same time from agriculture, from increase of periods of dryness and from pollution.

The lexicon is not interested that in reasons of the redemption of kinds. He also describes the symptoms of depopulation, the plans of preservation, the training of the administrators of plan and good on actions to be undertaken on the ground. Every term makes the object of a definite definition. So, they will speak of protection of the water and of lands for «actions aiming at identifying, at establishing or at spreading parks or other zones of protection, and to protect the rights of this resource». They will speak rather about management of the water and of lands, for «the actions which aim at conservation or restoration of sites, habitats and of environment».

This new classification is already used. From a list of 1191 threatened kinds of birds established by Birdlife International, it appears that more than 70 % are threatened by agriculture and aquaculture. 70 % are victims of an intensive usage of biological resources, and about 40 % presences of invasives kinds. It appears as as on 737 plans of conservation listed for these 1191 kinds, 65 % are affected by agriculture, 78 % by invasives kinds, and 30 % by the production of energy and mines.

Strong in this vocabulary, organisations are going to see again all plans. UICN, for example, will apply the lexicon to the totality of forty thousand kinds described in the edition 2008 of its red list. Birdlife International will rewrite the documents about ten thousand important zones for fowls.

Picture: © Denis Delbecq