Conservation & Human Need (AQA A Level Biology): Revision Note
Exam code: 7402
Conservation & human need
Humans use Earth’s resources such as land, water, wood, and fossil fuels
As population and economic development increase, so does the demand for these resources
This leads to environmental damage, affecting ecosystems, climate, and biodiversity, creating a conflict between human needs and conservation
Conservation involves managing species and habitats sustainably, meeting present needs without compromising the future
Some oppose this due to short-term economic impacts, but careful resource management is essential to balance current use with long-term sustainability
Methods of conservation
Type of conservation | How it manages conflict & promotes sustainability |
|---|---|
National & marine parks | Protects habitats with legal restrictions on access, development and hunting, balancing biodiversity with controlled land use |
Public engagement | Generates income through tourism; provides local jobs and funding for services, increasing community support for conservation |
Zoos (captive breeding) | Captive breeding helps restore species populations and supports research, reducing pressure on wild populations |
Botanic gardens | Conserves rare plants using lab techniques and enables reintroduction; supports research and education to maintain biodiversity |
Frozen zoos | Preserves genetic material for future reintroduction; reduces pressure on wild populations and supports long-term planning |
Seed banks | Stores plant diversity safely; allows future crop restoration and species recovery; offsets habitat loss |
Evaluating data about conservation issues
Being able to evaluate evidence and data concerning issues relating to the conservation of species and habitats is an important skill
The example below demonstrates these data evaluation techniques using data on white-clawed crayfish and signal crayfish
The signal crayfish is an invasive species in the UK that arrived from America and has since caused major declines in our native species, the white-clawed crayfish, through competition for resources and the transmission of a disease that is fatal to white-clawed crayfish (but not signal crayfish)
Worked Example
A biological investigation was conducted to find out if removing invasive signal crayfish would help to conserve native white-clawed crayfish. Every year for six years the number of individuals of native crayfish in a 50m section of a stream was estimated using random sampling. After two years, all the signal crayfish in this section of the stream were removed (with regular removals continuing to be carried out after this time). A 50m section of a very similar stream (in terms of biotic and abiotic conditions), in which the signal crayfish were not removed, was used as a control site. The results are shown below. Describe and draw conclusions from the data, then evaluate the method used to collect the data.
Step One: Describe the data
Over the first two years, the number of native crayfish approximately halved, decreasing from 50 to 25. After the invasive species was removed, the number of native crayfish increased from 25 to 45 in 4 years
The control site showed a decrease in the number of native crayfish, from 60 to 20 over the six-year period
Step Two: Draw conclusions
The removal of the invasive crayfish led to an increase in the number of native crayfish over a four year period
This suggests that the decline in white-clawed crayfish populations in the UK could be due to competition with the signal crayfish
Step Three: Evaluate the method
Due to the control experiment, where the number of native crayfish continued to decrease throughout the six-year study, any other variables that could have affected the number of native crayfish (including abiotic factors such as water quality and biotic factors such as predation) can be discounted. This increases the validity of the results
As random sampling was used, the data will not be biased and will give a more accurate estimate of the whole area
Considering Conflicting Data About Conservation Issues
The results (data) from just one study are not normally enough to draw certain enough conclusions on which to base conservation actions
For example, although the results of the investigation outlined above seem to suggest that signal crayfish are causing the decline of white-clawed crayfish, it is unlikely that this one study would lead to conservation action to remove signal crayfish all across the UK
Instead, the results from multiple similar studies are normally required and if these results appear to agree, then a more certain conclusion can be drawn
Sometimes, however, two very similar studies may give different results that do not appear to agree
Being able to consider this conflicting evidence and its implications is an important skill
Worked Example
Another investigation into the effect of invasive crayfish on the numbers of native crayfish was carried out in a 20m section of a stream in a different part of the UK over a period of 18 months. The results are shown below. Describe and draw conclusions from the data, then evaluate the method used to collect the data.
Step One: Describe the data
Over the first six months, the number of native crayfish decreased from 25 to around 13. After the invasive species was removed, the number of native crayfish continued to decrease from 13 to around 9 over the next 12 months
Step Two: Draw conclusions
The removal of the invasive crayfish had no effect on the declining native crayfish population
The conflicts with the results of the previous study, which suggested that the decline in white-clawed crayfish populations in the UK could be due to competition with the signal crayfish
Step Three: Evaluate the method
There was no control site in this investigation, so the continuing decline of the native crayfish after the invasive species was removed could be due to another biotic or abiotic factor, such as the presence of a new predator or a change in the water quality or temperature
The length of this investigation was much shorter than the previous study, so the decline in native crayfish could simply be due to a natural population fluctuation, meaning that the population may increase again if studied over a longer time period
The study area was much smaller than in the previous study, so the estimated population size values may be less accurate
You've read 0 of your 5 free revision notes this week
Unlock more, it's free!
Did this page help you?
