Impact and Acceptance of the Hotspots Strategy: Response to Ovadia and to Brummitt and Lughadha

We thank Ovadia, and Brummitt and Lughadha, for assessing the limitations of the species-area analysis in our two publications. They are correct that their alternative approach produces different findings relative to the "hottest" of our 25 hotspots, though the species-area criterion was only one of five in determining our own ranking. Indeed we have dealt with this same factor (in this same journal; Brooks et al. 2002), with results similar to those presented by these authors. More important, and as we were at pains to emphasize repeatedly in both our publications (Mittermeier et al. 1999; Myers et al. 2000), all 25 hotspots warrant priority efforts for enhanced protection on the grounds that they contain the last remaining habitats of perhaps 40% of all terrestrial species in localities facing imminent threat of habitat destruction. The hotspots strategy could knock a huge dent in the whole mass extinction problem. That these vital findings have received widespread acceptance is reflected in the $750 million mobilized in support of the hotspots. Some further points follow: