Restoring and maintaining megafauna in today’s human‐dominated landscapes is a major challenge for conservation. The refugee species concept (Kerley et al ., 2011) is helpful in reminding us that species’ habitat use might have changed over time, and that the option space for restoring such species can therefore be wider than appreciated. In this context, Kerley et al . (2020) express concerns that

Conservation science is about developing a robust understanding of how to reduce threats and extinction risks for biodiversity, as expressed in the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Conservation Action Plan approach (IUCN/SSC, 2013). As a branch of science, it must therefore follow the scientific best practice of considering alternative hypotheses in order to minimise the risk

As we sit in the vortex of the Covid‐19 outbreak, individual energies are focused on staying safe and juggling the personal, social and financial impacts of the pandemic and political responses to it. These impacts are profoundly re‐shaping our lives, with many commentators suggesting that ‘normality’ will be permanently redefined for all sectors of society. The future is not clear because the maelstrom

Each year, millions of animals are captured, transported and sold – both legally and illegally. The overexploitation of commonly traded species is driving wild populations towards extinction, with consumer demand for rarer species resulting in a strengthening feedback loop between supply and demand (Tournan et al., 2012). The direct impact of the removal of traded species can also have indirect consequences

Sanchez‐Mercado et al. (2019) provide one of the first studies to use social network analysis to critically examine a case study of a songbird in the wildlife trade. This framework for evaluating factors impacting trade could be useful in addressing the knowledge gap in other hunted systems. In particular, the study is able to identify specific nodes and actors upon which conservation action may be

The illegal trafficking of wildlife is a prominent threat to biodiversity, human health and security, and sustainable development (Gore et al., 2019). The taxa and geographies impacted are diverse, as are the socioeconomic drivers of this illicit trade. As legal and illegal wildlife markets commingle and varied traditional uses of wildlife persist, evolve and converge across the planet, there are increasingly

The challenges faced by small organizations confronting illegal wildlife trade (IWT) networks can be large and frightening. In a context of high corruption, political instability and social upheaval, obtaining information about actor identities, connections and trade flows may come with risks to personal security. Yet it is precisely in these contexts that illegal wildlife trade may flourish, piggybacking

Gaston, K.J. (2019). Skyglow extends into the world’s Key Biodiversity Areas. Anim Conserv. 23, 153–159. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12480 In Garrett et al. (2019), we reported the results of an analysis of the extent to which, at a global scale, Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) experienced skyglow and some of the factors associated with variation in this extent. Unfortunately, in the course of this analysis

In the commentary by Faith (2019), published in the December 2019 issue of Animal Conservation, an error was accidentally introduced to the article title. The word ‘phylogenetiic’ has been corrected in the online version to read as follows: EDGE of existence and phylogenetic diversity We sincerely apologize for this error.

Conflict with humans is one of the primary reasons why large carnivore populations are declining worldwide. Rates of human‐carnivore conflict (HCC) are particularly high in East Africa, where human settlements tend to surround protected areas, maximizing potential for human‐carnivore interactions. Despite extensive HCC research in this region, HCC persists and carnivore populations continue to decline