Correlates of bushmeat hunting among remote rural households in Gabon, Central Africa

Hunted wild animals (i.e., bushmeat) are a main source of protein for many rural populations in the tropics, and the unsustainable harvest of these animals puts both human food security and ecosystem functioning at risk. To understand the correlates of bushmeat consumption, we surveyed 1219 households in 121 rural villages near three newly established national parks in Gabon. Through the surveys we gathered information on bushmeat consumption, income, and material assests. In addition, we quantified land cover in a 5-km radius around the village center and distance of the village center to the nearest park boundary. Bushmeat was not a source of income for most households, but it was the primary animal protein consumed. Ninety-seven percent of households consumed bushmeat at least once during a survey period of 12 days. Income or wealth, land cover, distance of village to the nearest park boundary, and level of education of the head of the household were among the factors that significantly related to the likelihood of consuming any of the 10 most commonly consumed species of bushmeat. Household size was the predictor most strongly associated with quantities of bushmeat consumed and was negatively related to consumption. Total bushmeat consumption per adult male equivalent increased as household wealth increased and decreased as distance of villages to park boundaries increased. Bushmeat consumption at the household level was not related to unit values (i.e., price estimates for a good that typically does not have a market value; estimates derived from willingness to sell or trade the good for items of known price) of bushmeat or the price of chicken and fish as potential substitutes. The median consumption of bushmeat at the village level, however, was negatively related to village mean unit values of bushmeat across all species. Our results suggest that a lack of alternative protein sources motivated even the wealthiest among surveyed households to consume bushmeat. Providing affordable, alternative protein sources to all households would likely reduce unsustainable levels of bushmeat consumption in rural Gabon.     

Reduced effect of Tasmanian devil facial tumor disease at the disease front

Pathogen-driven declines in animal populations are increasingly regarded as a major conservation issue. The Tasmanian devil (Sarcophilus harrisii) is threatened with extinction by devil facial tumor disease, a unique transmissible cancer. The disease is transmitted through direct transfer of tumor cells, which is possible because the genetic diversity of Tasmanian devils is low, particularly in the major histocompatibility complex genes of the immune system. The far northwest of Tasmania now holds the last remaining disease-free wild devil populations. The recent discovery of unique major histocompatibility complex genotypes in the northwestern region of Tasmania has raised the possibility that some animals may be resilient to the disease. We examined the differences in the epidemiology and population effects of devil facial tumor disease at 3 well-studied affected sites in eastern Tasmania and 1 in western Tasmania (West Pencil Pine). In contrast to the 3 eastern sites, there has been no rapid increase in disease prevalence or evidence of population decline at West Pencil Pine. Moreover, this is the only onsite at which the population age structure has remained unaltered 4 years after the first detection of disease. The most plausible explanations for the substantial differences in population effects and epidemiology of the disease between eastern and western sites are geographic differences in genotypes or phenotypes of devils and functional differences between tumor strains in the 2 regions. We suggest that conservation efforts focus on identifying whether either or both these explanations are correct and then, if resistance alleles exist, to attempt to spread the resistant alleles into affected populations. Such assisted selection has rarely been attempted for the management of wildlife diseases, but it may be widely applicable.     

Human perspectives and conservation of grizzly bears in Banff National Park, Canada

Some conservation initiatives provoke intense conflict among stakeholders. The need for action, the nature of the conservation measures, and the effects of these measures on human interests may be disputed. Tools are needed to depolarize such situations, foster understanding of the perspectives of people involved, and find common ground. We used Q methodology to explore stakeholders' perspectives on conservation and management of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) in Banff National Park and the Bow River watershed of Alberta, Canada. Twenty-nine stakeholders participated in the study, including local residents, scientists, agency employees, and representatives of nongovernmental conservation organizations and other interest groups. Participants rank ordered a set of statements to express their opinions on the problems of grizzly bear management (I-IV) and a second set of statements on possible solutions to the problems (A-C). Factor analysis revealed that participants held 4 distinct views of the problems: individuals associated with factor I emphasized deficiencies in goals and plans; those associated with factor II believed that problems had been exaggerated; those associated with factor III blamed institutional flaws such as disjointed management and inadequate resources; and individuals associated with factor IV blamed politicized decision making. There were 3 distinct views about the best solutions to the problems: individuals associated with factor A called for increased conservation efforts; those associated with factor B wanted reforms in decision-making processes; and individuals associated with factor C supported active landscape management. We connected people's definitions of the problem with their preferred solutions to form 5 overall problem narratives espoused by groups in the study: the problem is deficient goals and plans, the solution is to prioritize conservation efforts (planning-oriented conservation advocates); the problem is flawed institutions, the solution is to prioritize conservation efforts (institutionally-oriented conservation advocates); the problems have been exaggerated, but there is a need to improve decision-making processes (optimistic decision-process reformers); the problems have been exaggerated, but managers should more actively manage the landscape (optimistic landscape managers); and the problem is politicized decision making, solutions vary (democratizers). Although these 5 groups differed on many issues, they agreed that the population of grizzly bears is vulnerable to extirpation, human use of the area should be designed around ecological constraints, and more inclusive decision-making processes are needed. We used our results to inform a series of workshops in which stakeholders developed and agreed on new management strategies that were implemented by Parks Canada. Our research demonstrates the usefulness of Q method to illuminate people's perspectives and identify common ground in settings where conservation is contested.     

Challenges to interdisciplinary research in ecosystem-based management

Despite its necessity, integration of natural and social sciences to inform conservation efforts has been difficult. We examined the views of 63 scientists and practitioners involved in marine management in Mexico's Gulf of California, the central California coast, and the western Pacific on the challenges associated with integrating social science into research efforts that support ecosystem-based management (EBM) in marine systems. We used a semistructured interview format. Questions focused on how EBM was developed for these sites and how contextual factors affected its development and outcomes. Many of the traditional challenges linked with interdisciplinary research were present in the EBM projects we studied. However, a number of contextual elements affected how mandates to include social science were interpreted and implemented as well as how easily challenges could be addressed. For example, a common challenge is that conservation organizations are often dominated by natural scientists, but for some projects it was easier to address this imbalance than for others. We also found that the management and institutional histories that came before EBM in specific cases were important features of local context. Because challenges differed among cases, we believe resolving challenges to interdisciplinary research should be context specific.     

Assessing citizen contributions to butterfly monitoring in two large cities

Citizen science may be especially effective in urban landscapes due to the large pool of potential volunteers. However, there have been few evaluations of the contributions of citizen scientists to knowledge of biological communities in and around cities. To assess the effectiveness of citizen scientists' monitoring of species in urban areas, we compared butterfly data collected over 10 years in Chicago, Illinois (U.S.A.), and New York City, New York (U.S.A.). The dates, locations, and methods of data collection in Chicago were standardized, whereas data from New York were collected at any location at any time. For each city, we evaluated whether the number of observers, observation days (days on which observations were reported), and sampling locations were associated with the reported proportion of the estimated regional pool of butterfly species. We also compared the number of volunteers, duration of volunteer involvement, and consistency of sampling efforts at individual locations within each city over time. From 2001 to 2010, there were 73 volunteers in Chicago and 89 in New York. During this period, volunteers observed 86% and 89% of the estimated number of butterfly species present in Chicago and New York, respectively. Volunteers in New York reported a greater proportion of the estimated pool of butterfly species per year. In addition, more species were observed per volunteer and observation day in New York, largely due to the unrestricted sampling season in New York. Chicago volunteers were active for more years and monitored individual locations more consistently over time than volunteers in New York. Differences in monitoring protocol--especially length of sampling season and selection protocol for monitoring locations--influenced the relationship between species accrual and sampling effort, which suggests these factors are important in volunteer-based species-monitoring programs.     

Eliciting expert knowledge in conservation science

Expert knowledge is used widely in the science and practice of conservation because of the complexity of problems, relative lack of data, and the imminent nature of many conservation decisions. Expert knowledge is substantive information on a particular topic that is not widely known by others. An expert is someone who holds this knowledge and who is often deferred to in its interpretation. We refer to predictions by experts of what may happen in a particular context as expert judgments. In general, an expert-elicitation approach consists of five steps: deciding how information will be used, determining what to elicit, designing the elicitation process, performing the elicitation, and translating the elicited information into quantitative statements that can be used in a model or directly to make decisions. This last step is known as encoding. Some of the considerations in eliciting expert knowledge include determining how to work with multiple experts and how to combine multiple judgments, minimizing bias in the elicited information, and verifying the accuracy of expert information. We highlight structured elicitation techniques that, if adopted, will improve the accuracy and information content of expert judgment and ensure uncertainty is captured accurately. We suggest four aspects of an expert elicitation exercise be examined to determine its comprehensiveness and effectiveness: study design and context, elicitation design, elicitation method, and elicitation output. Just as the reliability of empirical data depends on the rigor with which it was acquired so too does that of expert knowledge.     

Acoustically detected year-round presence of right whales in an urbanized migration corridor

Species' conservation relies on understanding their seasonal habitats and migration routes. North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena glacialis), listed as endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, migrate from the southeastern U.S. coast to Cape Cod Bay, Massachusetts, a federally designated critical habitat, from February through May to feed. The whales then continue north across the Gulf of Maine to northern waters (e.g., Bay of Fundy). To enter Cape Cod Bay, right whales must traverse an area of dense shipping and fishing activity in Massachusetts Bay, where there are no mandatory regulations for the protection of right whales or management of their habitat. We used passive acoustic recordings of right whales collected in Massachusetts Bay from May 2007 through October 2010 to determine the annual spatial and temporal distribution of the whales and their calling activity. We detected right whales in the bay throughout the year, in contrast to results from visual surveys. Right whales were detected on at least 24% of days in each month, with the exception of June 2007, in which there were no detections. Averaged over all years, right whale calls were most abundant from February through May. During this period, calls were most frequent between 17:00 and 20:00 local time; no diel pattern was apparent in other months. The spatial distribution of the approximate locations of calling whales suggests they may use Massachusetts Bay as a conduit to Cape Cod Bay in the spring and as they move between the Gulf of Maine and waters to the south in September through December. Although it is unclear how dependent right whales are on the bay, the discovery of their widespread presence in Massachusetts Bay throughout the year suggests this region may need to be managed to reduce the probability of collisions with ships and entanglement in fishing gear.     

Inadvertent advocacy

Policy advocacy is an issue regularly debated among conservation scientists. These debates have focused on intentional policy advocacy by scientists, but advocacy can also be unintentional. I define inadvertent policy advocacy as the act of unintentionally expressing personal policy preferences or ethical judgments in a way that is nearly indistinguishable from scientific judgments. A scientist may be well intentioned and intellectually honest but still inadvertently engage in policy advocacy. There are two ways to inadvertently engage in policy advocacy. First, a scientist expresses an opinion that she or he believes is a scientific judgment but it is actually an ethical judgment or personal policy preference. Second, a scientist expresses an opinion that he or she knows is an ethical judgment or personal policy preference but inadvertently fails to effectively communicate the nature of the opinion to policy makers or the public. I illustrate inadvertent advocacy with three examples: recovery criteria in recovery plans for species listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act, a scientific peer review of a recovery plan for the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), and the International Union for Conservation of Nature's definition of threatened. In each example, scientists expressed ethical judgments or policy preferences, but their value judgments were not identified as such, and, hence, their value judgments were opaque to policy makers and the public. Circumstances suggest their advocacy was inadvertent. I believe conservation scientists must become acutely aware of the line between science and policy and avoid inadvertent policy advocacy because it is professional negligence, erodes trust in scientists and science, and perpetuates an ethical vacuum that undermines the rational political discourse necessary for the evolution of society's values. The principal remedy for inadvertent advocacy is education of conservation scientists in an effort to help them understand how science and values interact to fulfill the mission of conservation science.     

球形陶粒滤池对城市尾水净化效果研究

为明确以陶粒为填料生物滤池对尾水中主要营养物处理效果,选择球形陶粒滤池对城市尾水进行净化效果研究。试验在室温条件下采用水力停留时间约2 h,曝气量为0.4 L.min-1的陶粒曝气生物滤池装置对洛阳市某污水处理厂的尾水进行深度处理。研究结果表明：球形陶粒生物滤池对尾水中NH3-N去除效果良好,去除率达76%以上;同时该装置对TN,TP和COD具有同时去除作用。进一步研究陶粒对NH3-N吸附去除特征表明,其等温线吸附符合Freundlich Model,表明陶粒对NH3-N的吸附为多层吸附,且对NH3-N的吸附在5 h基本达到饱和吸附。     

不同硝/铵比值对小麦幼苗根系释放氢氧根的影响

为研发酸化土壤的生物修复技术,采用水培试验和自动电位滴定装置研究酸性条件下氮素形态对小麦幼苗根系释放氢氧根及培养液pH变化的影响。结果表明,小麦幼苗在初始pH值为4.0,n(NO3-)∶n(NH4+)比值(以下简称硝/铵比)分别为15∶1、3∶1和1∶1的营养液中培养6 d后营养液pH升高,且增幅随硝/铵比的增加而增大,小麦对硝态氮的吸收量和氢氧根释放量呈相同的变化趋势,说明小麦对硝态氮的吸收偏好导致根系释放氢氧根,进而使得培养液pH升高。小麦幼苗在硝/铵比为3∶1,初始pH值分别为4.0、4.5和5.0的营养液中培养6d后,培养液pH和氢氧根释放量的增幅随初始pH的升高而降低,说明低pH条件有利于小麦幼苗对硝态氮的吸收,可促进小麦根系释放更多的氢氧根。10 h的恒定pH试验结果表明,恒定pH条件下小麦根系释放的氢氧根数量大于非恒定pH条件,且硝态氮比例越大,差值越大。因此,可以根据小麦在酸性条件下对硝态氮的吸收偏好建立酸化土壤的生物修复方法,即调节硝态氮含量以加大小麦根系的氢氧根释放量,进而提高土壤pH。