Disease Risks of Wildlife Translocations

Threats posed to conservation programs by the translocation of pathogens along with the translocation of host species are being increasingly recognized. However, publications on this subject have appeared primarily in veterinary literature which often is not read widely by those who fund, plan, or carry out the majority of wildlife translocations. The problem of wildlife disease and translocations has been written about in detail recently, but in almost all cases has been limited to exploring the immediate effects of pathogens on the target species. I discuss the possible adverse effects of wildlife translocations that result from disease transmission. In addition to examining the effects on target species, I discuss the possible direct and indirect effects of parasite translocations on sympatric species and on the evolution of ecosystems in the long-term. To reduce potential disease risks presented by wildlife translocations, I propose some guidelines for hygiene and quarantine procedures and for monitoring the parasite status of both captive and free-living animals.     

Wildlife collection for scientific purposes

Illegal transfer of wildlife has 2 main purposes: trade and scientific research. Trade is the most common, whereas scientific research is much less common and unprofitable, yet still important. Biopiracy in science is often neglected despite that many researchers encounter it during their careers. The use of illegally acquired specimens is detected in different research fields, from scientists bioprospecting for new pharmacological substances, to taxonomists working on natural history collections, to researchers working in zoos, aquariums, and botanical gardens. The practice can be due to a lack of knowledge about the permit requirements in different countries or, probably most often, to the generally high level of bureaucracy associated with rule compliance. Significant regulatory filters to avoid biopiracy can be provided by different stakeholders. Natural history collection hosts should adopt strict codes of conduct; editors of scientific publications should require authors to declare that all studied specimens were acquired legally and to cite museum catalog numbers as guarantee of best practices. Scientific societies should actively encourage publication in peer-reviewed journals of work in which specimens collected from the wild were used. The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature could require newly designated types based on recently collected specimens to be accompanied by statements of deposition in recognized scientific or educational institutions. We also propose the creation of an online platform that gathers information about environmental regulations and permits required for scientific activities in different countries and respective responsible governmental agencies and the simplification of the bureaucracy related to regulating scientific activities. This would make regulations more agile and easier to comply with. The global biodiversity crisis means data need to be collected ever faster, but biopiracy is not the answer and undermines the credibility of science and researchers. It is critical to find a modus vivendi that promotes compliance with regulations and scientific progress.     

Wildlife Connectivity Approaches and Best Practices in U.S. State Wildlife Action Plans

As habitat loss and fragmentation threaten biodiversity on large geographic scales, creating and maintaining connectivity of wildlife populations is an increasingly common conservation objective. To assess the progress and success of large‐scale connectivity planning, conservation researchers need a set of plans that cover large geographic areas and can be analyzed as a single data set. The state wildlife action plans (SWAPs) fulfill these requirements. We examined 50 SWAPs to determine the extent to which wildlife connectivity planning, via linkages, is emphasized nationally. We defined linkage as connective land that enables wildlife movement. For our content analysis, we identified and quantified 6 keywords and 7 content criteria that ranged in specificity and were related to linkages for wide‐ranging terrestrial vertebrates and examined relations between content criteria and statewide data on focal wide‐ranging species, spending, revenue, and conserved land. Our results reflect nationwide disparities in linkage conservation priorities and highlight the continued need for wildlife linkage planning. Only 30% or less of the 50 SWAPs fulfilled highly specific content criteria (e.g., identifying geographic areas for linkage placement or management). We found positive correlations between our content criteria and statewide data on percent conserved land, total focal species, and spending on parks and recreation. We supplemented our content analysis with interviews with 17 conservation professionals to gain specific information about state‐specific context and future directions of linkage conservation. Based on our results, relevant literature, and interview responses, we suggest the following best practices for wildlife linkage conservation plans: collect ecologically meaningful background data; be specific; establish community‐wide partnerships; and incorporate sociopolitical and socioeconomic information. Acercamientos a la Conectividad de Vida Silvestre y las Mejores Prácticas en los Planes de Acción de Vida Silvestre Estatales en los Estados Unidos     

Wildlife and wildlife management in Tanzania

Tanzania, arguably mainland Africa's most important nation for conservation, is losing habitat and natural resources rapidly. Moving away from a charcoal energy base and developing sustainable finance mechanisms for natural forests are critical to slowing persistent deforestation. Addressing governance and capacity deficits, including law enforcement, technical skills, and funding, across parts of the wildlife sector are key to effective wildlife protection. These changes could occur in tandem with bringing new models of natural resource management into play that include capacity building, corporate payment for ecosystem services, empowering nongovernmental organizations in law enforcement, greater private‐sector involvement, and novel community conservation strategies. The future of Tanzania's wildlife looks uncertain—as epitomized by the current elephant crisis—unless the country confronts issues of governance, embraces innovation, and fosters greater collaboration with the international community.     

Remote Forest Refugia for Fijian Wildlife

Abstract:  On Pacific islands non-native rats and mongooses threaten many native species. In Fiji we compared visitation rates of rats and mongooses at bait stations and measured biomass of leaf-litter invertebrates to assess the relative predation pressure from these species in forest areas at different distances from the forest edge. Forest areas over 5 km from the forest edge had significantly fewer baits encountered by rats or mongooses than did natural forest areas nearer agricultural and urban habitats. Remote forest areas may function as a last refuge for island species threatened by predation from non-native rats and mongooses. The biomass of leaf-litter invertebrates in remote forest areas was higher, indicating a refuge effect for some taxa targeted by rats and mongooses. Protection of the few remaining large blocks of natural forests on Pacific islands may be the most cost-effective approach for conserving many island endemics threatened by rats and mongooses. Logging roads can compromise this refuge effect by acting as dispersal routes for rats into natural forests.     

Changes in Wildlife Communities Near Edges

Abstract: Wildlife managers and land managers have traditionally considered edges as beneficial to wildlife because species diversity generally increases near habitat edges. Explanations for this edge effect include greater vegetative complexity at edges or the simultaneous availability of more than one landscape element. However, edges can have negative consequences for wildlife by modifying distribution and dispersal and by increasing incidence of nest predation and parasitism Edges also may be detrimental to species requiring large undisturbed areas because increases in edge generally result in concommitant reductions in size and possible isolation of patches and corridots. Thus, both wildlife and land managers should be cautious when describing the benefits of edges to wildlife: particularly when dealing with species that require forest interiors.
Changes in wildlife communities associated with habitat edges are not easily assessed because defining edge species and measuring edge dimensions can be difficult in field studies Also, there is no general consensus as to how edge effect is best measured. Well-designed long-term studies of edges in various landscapes are needed (1) to better understand the positive and negative impacts of edges on wildlife communities, guilds, or key species, and (2) to effectively quantify edge effect and thereby develop management recommendations to improve the quality of edges for wildlife. Additional studies of edge effect are timely because greater amounts of edge will continue to be created in future landscapes due to extensive agriculture and other land-use-practices, and because developing knowledge in conservation biology and landscape ecology will facilitate multidisciplinary approaches to edge and landscape management for the benefit of wildlife.     

Discrepancies in Reported Levels of International Wildlife Trade

Abstract:  The international wildlife trade is a principal cause of biodiversity loss, involving hundreds of millions of plants and animals each year, yet wildlife trade records are notoriously unreliable. We assessed the precision of wildlife trade reports for the United States, the world's largest consumer of endangered wildlife, by comparing data from the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) with U.S. Customs data. For both U.S. imports and exports, CITES and Customs reported substantially different trade volumes for all taxa in all years. Discrepancies ranged from a CITES-reported volume 376% greater than that reported by Customs (live coral imports, 2000) to a Customs' report 5202% greater than CITES (conch exports, 2000). These widely divergent data suggest widespread inaccuracies that may distort the perceived risk of targeted wildlife exploitation, leading to misallocation of management resources and less effective conservation strategies. Conservation scientists and practitioners should reexamine assumptions regarding the significance of the international wildlife trade.