Proactive conservation is essential—but not sufficient: why biodiversity still needs species-specific protections

Single-species conservation is often criticised as costly, inefficient, biased, and ineffective. Yet, these reactive conservation approaches are important for addressing the needs of species that have not been adequately safeguarded through broader conservation measures. Drawing on conservation data from Canada, we demonstrate that many Threatened or Endangered species are at risk due to extremely limited distributions or small population sizes. While many of these species would benefit from habitat protections, they likely require additional focused actions (e.g., captive breeding, translocation, management of predation, or competition) to increase their likelihood of persistence. We also show that key threats, including biological resource use, pollution, climate change, and invasive species, are not addressed with habitat protections alone. We argue that single-species conservation remains essential for addressing non-habitat threats and for empowering direct recovery actions for species that are nearing extinction or extirpation. Proactive, area-, and ecosystem-based approaches are essential for conserving biodiversity but are not a universal solution for the challenges facing many at-risk species. Conservation professionals must address the limitations but continue to recognise the necessity of single-species protections and recovery actions.