Blue space: The importance of water for preference,affect, and restorativeness ratings of natural and built scenes

Although theorists have suggested that aquatic environments or “blue space” might have particular restorative potential, to date there is little systematic empirical research on this issue. Indeed the presence of water has, unintentionally, been a confounding factor in research comparing people’s reactions to built and natural environments. Whereas aquatic features (rivers, lakes, coasts) are frequently present in visual stimuli representing natural environments they are rarely incorporated in stimuli portraying built environments. As many towns are, for good reason, located near water this is a potentially significant oversight. The current research collated a set of 120 photographs of natural and built scenes, half of which contained “aquatic” elements. Proportions of “aquatic”/“green”/“built” environments in each scene (e.g. 1/3rd, 2/3rds) were also standardised. Two studies investigated preferences (attractiveness, willingness to visit and willingness to pay for a hotel room with the view), affect and perceived restorativeness ratings for these photographs. As predicted, both natural and built scenes containing water were associated with higher preferences, greater positive affect and higher perceived restorativeness than those without water. Effect sizes were consistently large. Intriguingly, images of “built” environments containing water were generally rated just as positively as natural “green” space. We propose a number of avenues for further research including exploration of the mechanisms underlying these effects.     

Recycled Polyethylene Composites Reinforced with Jute Fabric from Sackcloth: Part II-Impact Strength Evaluation

Environmental problems are motivating recycling actions and reuse alternatives for materials with main focus for the application of those renewable and biodegradable materials such as lignocellulosic fibers. Composites reinforced with such fibers are being considered by several industrial sectors, not only from the environmental safety, but also from economic considerations and improved properties. This paper, which is continuation of the work (Part I) by the authors’ use of the recycled polyethylene and used jute fabrics, presents evaluation of its toughness measured by the impact energy using both Izod and Charpy methods. Fabric content used is up to 40 wt. %. It is found that the incorporation of both types (new and used) of jute fabric significantly increased the impact energy of composites, with higher values associated with the new jute fabric. Fractographic analysis revealed that weaved configuration of the jute fibers and their low interfacial resistance with the matrix are responsible for the observed impact performance of these composites.     

A Comparison of Data Sets Varying in Spatial Accuracy Used to Predict the Occurrence of Wildlife-Vehicle Collisions

Wildlife-vehicle collisions (WVCs) pose a significant safety and conservation concern in areas where high-traffic roads are situated adjacent to wildlife habitat. Improving transportation safety, accurately planning highway mitigation, and identifying key habitat linkage areas may all depend on the quality of WVC data collection. Two common approaches to describe the location of WVCs are spatially accurate data derived from global positioning systems (GPS) or vehicle odometer measurements and less accurate road-marker data derived from reference points (e.g., mile-markers or landmarks) along the roadside. In addition, there are two common variable types used to predict WVC locations: (1) field-derived, site-specific measurements and (2) geographic information system (GIS)-derived information. It is unclear whether these different approaches produce similar results when attempting to identify and explain the location of WVCs. Our first objective was to determine and compare the spatial error found in road-marker data (in our case the closest mile-marker) and landmark-referenced data. Our second objective was to evaluate the performance of models explaining high- and low-probability WVC locations, using congruent, spatially accurate (<3-m) and road-marker (<800-m) response variables in combination with field- and GIS-derived explanatory variables. Our WVC data sets were comprised of ungulate collisions and were located along five major roads in the central Canadian Rocky Mountains. We found that spatial error (mean ± SD) was higher for WVC data referenced to nearby landmarks (516 ± 808 m) than for data referenced to the closest mile-marker data (401 ± 219 m). The top-performing model using the spatially accurate WVC locations contained all explanatory variable types, whereas GIS-derived variables were only influential in the best road-marker model and the spatially accurate reduced model. Our study showed that spatial error and sample size, using road-marker data for ungulate species, are important to consider for model output interpretation, which will impact the appropriate scale on which to apply modeling results. Using road-marker references <1.6 km or GPS-derived data locations may represent an optimal compromise between data acquisition costs and analytical performance. Electronic supplementary material  The online version of this article (doi:) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

International consensus principles for ethical wildlife control

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.