Sir

Pierre L. Ibisch and colleagues, in Correspondence (“Biodiversity needs the help of global change managers, not museum-keepers” Nature 438, 156; 200510.1038/438156a), suggest that conservationists should not focus on single-species approaches in conservation science and practice. But the concept of ecosystem function may be difficult to explain to the general public. Many non-scientific conservationists I know would be more willing to donate money to save ‘cute’ or impressive animals, such as the Florida panther or the aptly named resplendent quetzal, than to support a theoretical science-based concept such as ecosystem services.

Valuing single species does not rule out using the services aspect of ecosystems. Take ecotourism, for instance: a ‘service’ as defined by the international Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. A Guatemalan farmer may not care about the resplendent quetzal if he is hungry and destroying more forest will give him more agricultural land. But if the farmer is offered a share in ecotourism projects organizing tours for bird-watchers who wish to see the resplendent quetzal, he may work to preserve the forests.

Many conservation organizations — both applied and science-based — need to focus on a single species in order to raise public money and support. But successful conservation probably needs to include ecosystem function and services to be successful in the long-term. Strategists should ask themselves: What can we do? What can we explain to the broad public? What can we explain to the locals? And what goals can we realistically achieve?

In the end, we need to be both global change managers and museum keepers.