Conservation biology is a uniquely interdisciplinary science with strong roots in ecology, but it also embraces a value-laden and mission-oriented framework. This combination of science and values causes conservation biology to be at the center of critique regarding the discipline's scientific credibility-especially the division between the realms of theory and practice. We identify this dichotomy between seemingly objective (fact-based) and subjective (value-laden) practices as the measure-value dichotomy, whereby measure refers to methods and analyses used in conservation biology (i.e., measuring biodiversity) and value refers to nonepistemic values. We reviewed and evaluated several landmark articles central to the foundation of conservation biology and concepts of biodiversity with respect to their attempts to separate measures and values. We argue that the measure-value dichotomy is false and that conservation biology can make progress in ways unavailable to other disciplines because its practitioners are tasked with engaging in both the realm of theory and the realm of practice. The entanglement of measures and values is by no means a weakness of conservation biology. Because central concepts such as biodiversity contain both factual and evaluative aspects, conservation biologists can make theoretical progress by examining, reviewing, and forming the values that are an integral part of those concepts. We suggest that values should be included and analyzed with respect to the methods, results, and conclusions of scientific work in conservation biology.

1. Restoration of degraded lands often depends on knowledge of invasive plant species’ ecology coupled with well‐timed treatments to control them. Little is known about the reproductive phenology of Verbesina encelioides (golden crownbeard), which is a highly invasive annual forb species at Midway Atoll National Wildlife Refuge (NWR). Efforts to control V. encelioides on Midway Atoll NWR were challenging, especially when targeted plants went to seed before being treated. 2. To obtain this information, we documented the timing of key reproductive life cycle events in cohorts of V. encelioides plants on Midway Atoll NWR for 12 months beginning in August 2016; we visited these plants every 3–7 days and noted which phenophases the plants exhibited. 3. We found that it took an average of 76 days for V. encelioides to transition from leaves to seed drop, although the time required varied across the year (range: 31–175 days). Accordingly, invasive plant control schedules were adjusted to re‐treat infested areas every 30 days. 4. By incorporating phenology information into invasive plant control operations at Midway Atoll NWR, efforts to eradicate V. encelioides will have a higher chance of succeeding. Standardized methods, such as those from the USA National Phenology Network, provided useful tools for optimizing the timing of management practices; moreover, these data may help to better inform management of invasive plant species with regard to restoration efforts at a global scale.

Islands support unique plants, animals, and human societies found nowhere else on the Earth. Local and global stressors threaten the persistence of island ecosystems, with invasive species being among the most damaging, yet solvable, stressors. While the threat of invasive terrestrial mammals on island flora and fauna is well recognized, recent studies have begun to illustrate their extended and destructive impacts on adjacent marine environments. Eradication of invasive mammals and restoration of native biota are promising tools to address both island and ocean management goals. The magnitude of the marine benefits of island restoration, however, is unlikely to be consistent across the globe. We propose a list of six environmental characteristics most likely to affect the strength of land–sea linkages: precipitation, elevation, vegetation cover, soil hydrology, oceanographic productivity, and wave energy. Global databases allow for the calculation of comparable metrics describing each environmental character across islands. Such metrics can be used today to evaluate relative potential for coupled land–sea conservation efforts and, with sustained investment in monitoring on land and sea, can be used in the future to refine science-based planning tools for integrated land–sea management. As conservation practitioners work to address the effects of climate change, ocean stressors, and biodiversity crises, it is essential that we maximize returns from our management investments. Linking efforts on land, including eradication of island invasive mammals, with marine restoration and protection should offer multiplied benefits to achieve concurrent global conservation goals.

No abstract

No abstract