Perhaps we in forestry and other natural resources tend more toward a pragmatic viewpoint, consistent with our utilitarian traditions. Conserving biological diversity just makes sense, because the surest way to sustain yields of natural resource products and services is to maintain the integrity and productivity of the ecological systems that produce them. Hence the wisdom of keeping a full diversity of flora and fauna, lest we let some species of potential value go extinct. Consider also the weighty ethical questions concerning our obligation to future generations. We can only speculate about the possible long-term consequences that current losses of biological diversity may have on ecological systems of the future, including humans.
Biological diversity is a buffer against environmental change and uncertain events.
Given the evidence of a rapidly changing global environment, we may be losing genetic resources at a time when diversity is needed the most. The loss of a few charismatic species, where most popular attention is focused, pales in significance compared to the real threat, which is endangerment of the very process of evolution along a path that includes humans. Whether conserving biological diversity is regarded as an ethical responsibility, a ecological necessity, or just another legal requirement, we need systems to measure biological diversity and detect whether change is occurring. In other words, biological diversity must be addressed by inventory and monitoring procedures that are both practical and effective in telling us what we really need to know. That sounds simple enough, but it is a challenge that eludes ecologists and natural resource managers alike.