Assessing the impact of the U.S. Endangered Species Act recovery planning guidelines on managing threats for listed species

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of the United States was enacted in 1973 to prevent the extinction of species. Recovery plans, required by 1988 amendments to the ESA, play an important role in organizing these efforts to protect and recover species. To improve the use of science in the recovery planning process, the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) commissioned an independent review of endangered species recovery planning in 1999. From these findings, the SCB made key recommendations for how management agencies could improve the recovery planning process, after which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service redrafted their recovery planning guidelines. One important recommendation called for recovery plans to make threats a primary focus, including organizing and prioritizing recovery tasks for threat abatement. We sought to determine the extent to which results from the SCB study were incorporated into these new guidelines and whether the SCB recommendations regarding threats manifested in recovery plans written under the new guidelines. Recovery planning guidelines generally incorporated the SCB recommendations, including those for managing threats. However, although recent recovery plans have improved in their treatment of threats, many fail to adequately incorporate threat monitoring. This failure suggests that developing clear guidelines for monitoring should be an important priority in improving ESA recovery planning.     

Current practices in the identification of critical habitat for threatened species

The term critical habitat is used to describe the subset of habitat that is essential to the survival and recovery of species. Some countries legally require that critical habitat of listed threatened and endangered species be identified and protected. However, there is little evidence to suggest that the identification of critical habitat has had much impact on species recovery. We hypothesized that this may be due at least partly to a mismatch between the intent of critical habitat identification, which is to protect sufficient habitat for species persistence and recovery, and its practice. We used content analysis to systematically review critical habitat documents from the United States, Canada, and Australia. In particular, we identified the major trends in type of information used to identify critical habitat and in occupancy of habitat identified as critical. Information about population viability was used to identify critical habitat for only 1% of the species reviewed, and for most species, designated critical habitat did not include unoccupied habitat. Without reference to population viability, it is difficult to determine how much of a species’ occupied and unoccupied habitat will be required for persistence. We therefore conclude that the identification of critical habitat remains inconsistent with the goal of protecting sufficient habitat to support persistence and recovery of the species. Ensuring that critical habitat identification aligns more closely with its intent will improve the accuracy of the designations and may therefore help improve the benefits to species recovery when combined with adequate implementation and enforcement of legal protections.     

我国废弃电子电器产品的回收体系研究

分析了废弃电子电器产品的特点，介绍了国内外废弃电丰电器产品的回收处理现状，结合生产者责任延伸制度，从观念、法律、管理、企业、收费等方面对我国废弃电子电器产品回收体系的建设进行了探讨，并提出了建议。     

目的地旅游危机后恢复管理系统模型构建研究

从旅游危机的影响路径和旅游危机影响机理可知,旅游危机后恢复管理模型应建立在旅游者风险感知基础之上。旅游危机后恢复过程主要有停滞期、起步期、发展期、归位期和分异期等5个阶段,按照递进关系,旅游危机后恢复管理系统模型主要由贯穿整个管理系统的信息沟通管理系统、外在政策环境支持系统、旅游恢复管理措施系统等三部分构成。     

城市污泥的资源化与防治措施

本文根据有关资料，简要介绍了污水污泥的几种处理和再利用的方法．指出污水污泥的再利用即资源化是污泥处理的重要方向。     

不同复苏方法对阴树脂复苏效果的影响研究

研究了直接酸洗复苏法、树脂转为氯型后酸洗复苏法、氯化钠转型后用次氯酸钠氧化复苏法、次氯酸钠氧化后用盐碱混液复苏法、双氧水氧化后用盐碱混液复苏法等五种不同的复苏方法对铁和有机物污染树脂复苏效果的影响。结果表明：复苏方法不同时，亚铁离子污染树脂的复苏效果和铁离子污染树脂的复苏效果是不相同的，同时可看出，双氧水氧化后盐碱混液复苏法复苏铁污染树脂的效果最好；五种不同的复苏方法对腐植酸污染的树脂都有较好的复苏效果，且复苏效果相差不大。     

Lessons for long-term social recovery following the 2004 tsunami: Community,livelihoods, tourism and housing

The Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004 galvanized world attention like no other natural disaster before. Unprecedented amounts of aid were given and a record number of international aid agencies were involved in relief and recovery operations. Major reviews of the response to the disaster have suggested that the immediate relief effort was better than expected. However, weaknesses in the longer term recovery work were identified within months of the disaster and yet the same weaknesses were being confirmed four and five years later. Even though many studies have been published on the tsunami disaster there are still many lessons to be learnt, particularly in relation to social recovery as distinct from the restoration of destroyed or damaged infrastructure. This paper presents an overview of the findings of a study that was conducted over a period of four years across five different tsunami-affected local areas of Sri Lanka and southern India. The study focused on lessons to be learnt in relation to rebuilding community, restoring livelihoods, recreating an appropriate tourism industry and providing relevant housing and planned settlements for disaster survivors. The paper argues that ‘build back better’ is possible, but only if ‘asset replacement’ strategies are replaced by integrated physical and social planning to address local needs in culturally appropriate ways. Much of what the authors advocate may seem to be little more than ‘common sense’ and many of our findings echo those of many other post-tsunami evaluations. Yet patient and well-integrated approaches to disaster recovery are all too rare in a world that is experiencing so many natural disasters. Because the 2004 tsunami evoked an unprecedented global response it is important to ensure that the lessons of the recovery effort are clearly learnt and this paper aims to convert research findings into a clear strategy for long-term social recovery.     

Improvement actions in waste management systems at the provincial scale based on a life cycle assessment evaluation

This paper reports some of the findings of the ‘GERLA’ project: GEstione Rifiuti in Lombardia – Analisi del ciclo di vita (Waste management in Lombardia – Life cycle assessment). The project was devoted to support Lombardia Region in the drafting of the new waste management plan by applying a life cycle thinking perspective. The present paper mainly focuses on four Provinces in the Region, which were selected based on their peculiarities. Life cycle assessment (LCA) was adopted as the methodology to assess the current performance of the integrated waste management systems, to discuss strengths and weaknesses of each of them and to design their perspective evolution as of year 2020.Results show that despite a usual business approach that is beneficial to all the provinces, the introduction of technological and management improvements to the system provides in general additional energy and environmental benefits for all four provinces. The same improvements can be easily extended to the whole Region, leading to increased environmental benefits from the waste management sector, in line with the targets set by the European Union for 2020.     

A Framework for Developing Objective and Measurable Recovery Criteria for Threatened and Endangered Species

For species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service are tasked with writing recovery plans that include “objective, measurable criteria” that define when a species is no longer at risk of extinction, but neither the act itself nor agency guidelines provide an explicit definition of objective, measurable criteria. Past reviews of recovery plans, including one published in 2012, show that many criteria lack quantitative metrics with clear biological rationale and are not meeting the measureable and objective mandate. I reviewed how objective, measureable criteria have been defined implicitly and explicitly in peer‐reviewed literature, the ESA, other U.S. statutes, and legal decisions. Based on a synthesis of these sources, I propose the following 6 standards be used as minimum requirements for objective, measurable criteria: contain a quantitative threshold with calculable units, stipulate a timeframe over which they must be met, explicitly define the spatial extent or population to which they apply, specify a sampling procedure that includes sample size, specify a statistical significance level, and include justification by providing scientific evidence that the criteria define a species whose extinction risk has been reduced to the desired level. To meet these 6 standards, I suggest that recovery plans be explicitly guided by and organized around a population viability modeling framework even if data or agency resources are too limited to complete a viability model. When data and resources are available, recovery criteria can be developed from the population viability model results, but when data and resources are insufficient for model implementation, extinction risk thresholds can be used as criteria. A recovery‐planning approach centered on viability modeling will also yield appropriately focused data‐acquisition and monitoring plans and will facilitate a seamless transition from recovery planning to delisting. Un Marco de Referencia para Desarrollar Criterios de Recuperación Objetivos y Medibles para Especies Amenazadas y en Peligro