In Kenya, the Sera Conservancy partnered with local community members and government representatives to successfully reintroduce the Black rhino after a 20-year absence. “What’s exciting about this study is that it resoundingly validates their efforts through the first global, quantitative review. “A lot of people in conservation organizations have gone the extra mile to engage communities in local wildlife restoration efforts for a long time,” said ESPM professor Arthur Middleton, the study’s senior author. To do so, the authors analyzed over 300 wildlife restoration attempts conducted in 80 countries from the 1960s to the present day. They found that proactively engaging local partners and including economic, educational, cultural, and other objectives during the planning process made positive outcomes 10 percent more likely. “Our work shows that the long-term success of restoration attempts relies on public support and local buy-in.”Įxamining successful and unsuccessful wildlife restoration projects can give us a better understanding of what factors contribute to success, Serota said, which is paramount to preventing future loss of biodiversity. “Efforts to restore wild populations and ‘rewild’ ecosystems increasingly capture public attention but can be socially and politically divisive,” said lead author Mitchell Serota, a PhD candidate in the Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management (ESPM). The first-of-its-kind analysis, published today in Nature Communications, found that partnering with local communities and setting goals relating to the social, cultural, political, or economic aspects of wildlife restoration efforts made each attempt significantly more successful. But for every successful attempt, many restoration efforts fail to overcome the very same human conflicts that led to their population decline.Ī new study from a team of UC Berkeley researchers may offer conservationists clues on how to improve the outcomes of future wildlife restorations. Wildlife restoration efforts, which include the reintroduction of individual animals and the recovery of key habitats, have supported the return of wolves to the American West, Andean condors to Patagonia, and Chinese alligators to the Yangtze River. Is a gathering of tech-side developers & brand creativity professionals.Active restoration of wildlife is critical in halting the global biodiversity crisis. Register Now for Creativity and Technology (CaT), June 3rd, NYC. ![]() > mailbox=INBOX&sort=&where=right_main.php&what=0&startMessage=61&show_more=0&override_type0=text&override_type1=html&ent_id=2 > The common element is that the attachment is really text. > I've seen it with 'application/octet-stream' too. > It definitely happens with 'text/html' attachments. > Does this happen on all messages and all attachments? What does the > the message so you could see the "view" link for the attachment. > UID FETCH is a command used all over the place, including getting to ![]() > Server responded: Command unrecognized: UID FETCH > The description of the bug: I get this error: > This bug occurs when I click on the 'view' link for an attachment.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |