The current perception that climate change is the principal threat to biodiversity is at best premature. Although highly relevant, it detracts focus and effort from the primary threats: habitat destruction and overexploitation. We collated causes of vertebrate extinctions since 1900, threat information for amphibia, birds, and mammals from the IUCN Red List, and scrutinized others' attempts to compare climate change with commensurate anthropogenic threats. In each analysis, none of the arguments founded on climate change's wide-ranging effects are as urgent for biodiversity as those for habitat loss and overexploitation. Present conservation efforts must refocus on these issues. Conserving ecosystems by focusing on these major threats not only protects biodiversity but is the only available, economically viable, global strategy to reverse climate change.

No abstract

Most animals need to spend time being vigilant for predators, at the expense of other activities such as foraging. Group-living animals can benefit from the shared vigilance effort of other group members, with individuals reducing personal vigilance effort as group size increases. Behaviors like active scanning or head lifting are usually used to quantify vigilance but may not be accurate measures of this. We suggest that measuring an animal's blinking rate gives a meaningful measure of vigilance: increased blinking implies reduced vigilance, as the animal cannot detect predators when its eyes are closed. We describe an observational study of a captive population of red deer, where we measured the blinking rates of individual deer from groups of differing sizes (where mean group size ranged between 1 and 42.7 individuals). We demonstrate that as group size increases in red deer, individuals increase their blink rate, confirming the prediction that vigilance should decrease. Blinking is a simple non-invasive measure and offers a useful metric for assessing the welfare of animals experiencing an increase in perceived predation risk or other stressors.

Avoiding detection through camouflage is often key to survival. However, an animal's appearance is not the only factor affecting conspicuousness: background complexity also alters detectability. This has been experimentally demonstrated for both artificially patterned backgrounds in the laboratory and natural backgrounds in the wild, but only for targets that already match the background well. Do habitats of high visual complexity provide concealment to even relatively poorly camouflaged animals? Using artificial prey which differed in their degrees of background matching to tree bark, we were able to determine their survival, under bird predation, with respect to the natural complexity of the background. The latter was quantified using low-level vision metrics of feature congestion (or ‘visual clutter’) adapted for bird vision. Higher background orientation clutter (edges with varying orientation) reduced the detectability of all but the poorest background-matching camouflaged treatments; higher background luminance clutter (varying achromatic lightness) reduced average mortality for all treatments. Our results suggest that poorer camouflage can be mitigated by more complex backgrounds, with implications for both camouflage evolution and habitat preferences.