Reply to Brown et al.: Species and places are the priorities for conservation, not economic efficiency

Brown et al. (1) outline an approach to biodiversity conservation that will not protect it. The “most species for the buck” strategy is mathematically elegant. It may sometimes achieve progress. More often, it confuses the biological priorities for conservation with the obstacles we must overcome to protect them. Many existing protected areas in the United States were so designated because they were inexpensive, expedient, or had impressive scenery, and not because of their biological importance (2). Brown et al. (1) formalize a mindset that produced a system of protected areas with nearly the opposite pattern of biodiversity priorities. We aim to reverse that.