Risk assessment for animals: should the routine assessment of negative effects of intervention in wild animals be built into research projects?

From naked mole rats to elephants, research in wildlife biology increasingly entails interference with individual animals, and there are innumerable reasons to justify this interference for the proper management of populations. As Boyd (2002) has emphasized, however, there is a central question abou...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of zoology (1987) 2003-06, Vol.260 (2), p.117-118
1. Verfasser: Clutton-Brock, Juliet
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:From naked mole rats to elephants, research in wildlife biology increasingly entails interference with individual animals, and there are innumerable reasons to justify this interference for the proper management of populations. As Boyd (2002) has emphasized, however, there is a central question about the extent to which it is reasonable to intervene in a population when the species is endangered. This comment arose as part of a debate published last year in this journal on the possible harmful effects of immobilizing black rhinos and fitting them with radio-collars. Alibhai, Jewell & Towindo (2001) had prompted the debate with a discussion on the possible reduction of fertility in black rhinos caused by immobilization followed by an account of the wounding of a rhino by an ill-fitting radio-collar (Alibhai & Jewell, 2001).
ISSN:0952-8369
1469-7998
DOI:10.1017/S095283690321356X