Richard Branson: Noble Conservationist or Meddling Entrepreneur?

The interest of Sir Richard Branson, chairman of Virgin Group, seems to have returned to Earth from its holidays in space, but it seems that his head may have gotten stuck in the clouds. It's been widely reported that he plans to import lemurs to one of his islands in the Caribbean in a misguided effort to conserve them. Studies tell us that ecosystems are delicately balanced, and the consequences of meddling can be severe.

Most species of lemurs, which are primates native to Madagascar, are threatened; 16 percent of species are classed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as critically endangered. Branson told the BBC that his existing efforts to save lemurs in Madagascar were failing due to continual deforestation and political unrest.¹ Now he wants to provide a haven for thirty individuals on Moskito, one of the two islands that he owns.

"We brought in experts from South Africa," Branson said, "and they say it would be an absolutely perfect place where lemurs can be protected and breed."

At first glance, this seems a noble gesture from a billionaire that need not care. But conservation experts were quick to point out how his plan could do more harm than good. Invasive species bring with them new pathogens, predation, and competition for resources, all of which impact the existing ecosystem. Previous introductions, most famously of the rabbit in Australia, have been devastating to the existing ecology.² If this is not enough, recent research has shown just how finely balanced an ecosystem can be.

The study used a mathematical model to demonstrate how competing species can coexist in the same habitat. It showed that a complex network of "rock-paper-scissors" games between species, where none can outcompete all of the others, allows species diversity to be maintained.³ The consequences of disrupting this network can be devastating as coauthor of the paper Stefano Allesina, Assistant Professor of Evolution and Ecology at the University of Chicago, explained to me in an interview for Cosmos magazine.

"Coexistence is an emergent property of the community," he said. "If you remove one species . . . this would cause other extinctions."

Equally, introducing a new species will disrupt the network by changing the balance of predators and prey and altering the resources available to existing species. This could also lead to extinctions.

What's more, there is nothing to say that the lemurs will survive and breed in their new home. The fact that coexistence is so finely balanced suggests that, while the environment may be "absolutely perfect" now, the introduction of lemurs could disrupt the system to their own detriment. On top of this, Branson plans to import the lemurs from zoos. If they fail to prosper in his proposed haven, 30 more individuals may be lost; their survival and breeding is much more controllable where they are now.

The question is, then, is it worth the risk of disrupting the ecosystem on Moskito, possibly endangering native species, for the sake of an attempt — that is not guaranteed to work — at saving another species from half way round the world? I don't think so, and it seems wrong that an individual can choose to take these risks simply because of his money and influence. Music stores, airlines, multimedia services, and space tourism are one thing, but conservation of endangered species is quite another. While Branson's intentions may be well-placed, perhaps it would be better if he just gave his money to someone who knows what he's doing.

--Ian Fyfe

Image Credit: Rvb (via Wikimedia)

References:

1. Black, R. "Richard Branson's lemur plan raises alarm." BBC News. April 15, 2011.
2. Department of Primary Industries. Rabbits and Their Impact. State Government: Victoria, Australia. October 2010.
3. Allesina S., & Levine J. M. (2011). A competitive network theory of species diversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 108, 5638–5642 PMID: 21415368