Literature DB >> 28092422

International consensus principles for ethical wildlife control.

Sara Dubois1,2, Nicole Fenwick1, Erin A Ryan1, Liv Baker3,4, Sandra E Baker5, Ngaio J Beausoleil6, Scott Carter7, Barbara Cartwright8, Federico Costa9, Chris Draper10,11, John Griffin12, Adam Grogan13, Gregg Howald14, Bidda Jones15,16, Kate E Littin17, Amanda T Lombard18, David J Mellor6, Daniel Ramp4, Catherine A Schuppli2, David Fraser2.   

Abstract

Human-wildlife conflicts are commonly addressed by excluding, relocating, or lethally controlling animals with the goal of preserving public health and safety, protecting property, or conserving other valued wildlife. However, declining wildlife populations, a lack of efficacy of control methods in achieving desired outcomes, and changes in how people value animals have triggered widespread acknowledgment of the need for ethical and evidence-based approaches to managing such conflicts. We explored international perspectives on and experiences with human-wildlife conflicts to develop principles for ethical wildlife control. A diverse panel of 20 experts convened at a 2-day workshop and developed the principles through a facilitated engagement process and discussion. They determined that efforts to control wildlife should begin wherever possible by altering the human practices that cause human-wildlife conflict and by developing a culture of coexistence; be justified by evidence that significant harms are being caused to people, property, livelihoods, ecosystems, and/or other animals; have measurable outcome-based objectives that are clear, achievable, monitored, and adaptive; predictably minimize animal welfare harms to the fewest number of animals; be informed by community values as well as scientific, technical, and practical information; be integrated into plans for systematic long-term management; and be based on the specifics of the situation rather than negative labels (pest, overabundant) applied to the target species. We recommend that these principles guide development of international, national, and local standards and control decisions and implementation.
© 2017 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  administración; animal welfare; bienestar de los animales; conflicto entre humanos y animales silvestres; control de plagas de vertebrados; human-wildlife conflict; justificación; justification; management; normas; policy; valores; values; vertebrate pest control

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28092422     DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12896

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conserv Biol        ISSN: 0888-8892            Impact factor:   6.560


  17 in total

1.  Killing wolves to prevent predation on livestock may protect one farm but harm neighbors.

Authors:  Francisco J Santiago-Avila; Ari M Cornman; Adrian Treves
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Defining animal welfare standards in hunting: body mass determines thresholds for incapacitation time and flight distance.

Authors:  Sigbjørn Stokke; Jon M Arnemo; Scott Brainerd; Arne Söderberg; Morten Kraabøl; Bjørnar Ytrehus
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-09-13       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 3.  "Feelings and Fitness" Not "Feelings or Fitness"-The Raison d'être of Conservation Welfare, Which Aligns Conservation and Animal Welfare Objectives.

Authors:  Ngaio J Beausoleil; David J Mellor; Liv Baker; Sandra E Baker; Mariagrazia Bellio; Alison S Clarke; Arnja Dale; Steve Garlick; Bidda Jones; Andrea Harvey; Benjamin J Pitcher; Sally Sherwen; Karen A Stockin; Sarah Zito
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2018-11-27

4.  Mesocarnivore community structure under predator control: Unintended patterns in a conservation context.

Authors:  Gonçalo Curveira-Santos; Nuno M Pedroso; Ana Luísa Barros; Margarida Santos-Reis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-17       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  How many to sample? Statistical guidelines for monitoring animal welfare outcomes.

Authors:  Jordan O Hampton; Darryl I MacKenzie; David M Forsyth
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-30       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  Animal Welfare in Predator Control: Lessons from Land and Sea. How the Management of Terrestrial and Marine Mammals Impacts Wild Animal Welfare in Human-Wildlife Conflict Scenarios in Europe.

Authors:  Laetitia Nunny
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2020-01-29       Impact factor: 2.752

7.  Not in My Backyard: Public Perceptions of Wildlife and 'Pest Control' in and around UK Homes, and Local Authority 'Pest Control'.

Authors:  Sandra E Baker; Stephanie A Maw; Paul J Johnson; David W Macdonald
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2020-01-30       Impact factor: 2.752

8.  Experimental validation of small mammal gut microbiota sampling from faeces and from the caecum after death.

Authors:  Dagmar Čížková; Ľudovít Ďureje; Jaroslav Piálek; Jakub Kreisinger
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 3.832

9.  Assessment of a Targeted Trap-Neuter-Return Pilot Study in Auckland, New Zealand.

Authors:  Sarah Zito; Glenn Aguilar; Shalsee Vigeant; Arnja Dale
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2018-05-13       Impact factor: 2.752

Review 10.  A Ten-Stage Protocol for Assessing the Welfare of Individual Non-Captive Wild Animals: Free-Roaming Horses (Equus Ferus Caballus) as an Example.

Authors:  Andrea M Harvey; Ngaio J Beausoleil; Daniel Ramp; David J Mellor
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2020-01-16       Impact factor: 2.752

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.