This paper presents an interview with Australian conservation scientist Chris Dickman, conducted in December 2025 as part of a broader inquiry into conservation and introduced species. The inquiry explored areas of both agreement and disagreement among 16 conservation scientists and practitioners, with the aim of identifying ways to work productively across differing perspectives in pursuit of better conservation outcomes. This paper presents only the interview with Chris, and rather than presenting a formal academic argument, it retains Chris’s personal voice and reflections on a lifetime of conservation research and practice. The interview foregrounds Chris’s personal reflections and way of thinking, and accumulated experience. It explores the experiences that shaped his views on biodiversity loss, introduced species, nativeness, and conservation policy. Across these topics, Chris combines deep concern for Australia’s declining biodiversity with a scientific curiosity that resists simple solutions. He reflects on the limitations of broadscale culling programs, the importance of evaluating conservation success through outcomes for native species, the ecological value of dingoes, and the need to explore a wider range of humane management approaches, including habitat restoration, genetic resilience, and emerging tools such as chemical camouflage. A key issue identified is the lack of public awareness about the biodiversity crisis among the Australian public and helping people develop stronger relationships with Australia’s unique environment. The interview offers insight into a conservation perspective characterised by scientific rigour, humility, adaptability, and respect for differing viewpoints while maintaining an unwavering commitment to preventing further extinctions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chapple et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: