 It appears then that there are epistemic and non-epistemic values in the sciences. Whether the latter should take precedence over the former is the subject of current philosophical discussions. Conservation biology might very well be such a science where non-epistemic values should take precedence over epistemic ones. Nevertheless, we are thus left with several questions. First, how do we distinguish between epistemic and non-epistemic values in the sciences? Second, if we can distinguish between them, are non-epistemic values sometimes more important than epistemic ones? Third, if non-epistemic values are sometimes more important than epistemic ones, does this occur in conservation biology? Can these non-epistemic values include moral and political values? It is to issues concerning these values that we now turn.