 |
surveys / radiocollaring
| Surveys |
|
|
Radio Collaring
INTRUDING ON WILD LIVES
In their pursuit of knowledge about animal behaviour, movement and life cycles, wildlife researchers radio-collar wolves and deer, band songbirds, tag salmon and much more. Their monitoring equipment is becoming ever more sophisticated and intrusive. Does their work threaten the animals' health? Does a radio collar eventually become a noose? What about the value of this research in conservation efforts?
In the November/December issue of Canadian Geographic, writer Michael Clugston explores these questions and others in a growing debate about where the limits lie in wildlife studies.
Readers of the magazine will be familiar with the issue. Over the years we have published many photos of radio-collared animals and stories about wildlife research. Now, we want to hear from you. Is the research becoming too intrusive? Is enough care being taken to ensure the animals aren't harmed? Your comments may be as long or as short as you wish.
| NAME |
COMMENTS |
Steve Patterson
Submitted:
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
|
All monitoring devices are intrusive in some way.
I like to think that, generally, those who conduct
animal research in the field are an ethical bunch.
When developing field methodology, a researcher
should confirm beyond doubt that there is a real
need for the use of monitoring devices, that there
are no alternative processes available before
monitoring devices are deployed, and that a
properly developed Animal Care Protocol is strictly
adhered to. If a researcher has even moderate
doubts as to the safe application of monitoring
equipment on a given species, the efficacy of the
devices' use should NEVER hold sway at the
expense of the animal.
Extra care must be taken when dealing with species
at risk.
Some animals are simply harder to study than
others, for a plethora of reasons. Unique
circumstances require unique solutions. In order to
(better) understand a given animals' natural
behaviours, scientists must be able to continue to
take advantage of current monitoring technologies.
Continued miniaturization of all electronic
monitoring devices is a given, therefore, it is hoped
that "intrusiveness" with regard to these items will
become less of an issue in the future. |
|
Marci Johnson
Submitted:
Wednesday, February 20, 2002
|
I have been a field biologist on twenty-five
wildlife studies, many involving collared animals,
and this was the first article I have seen
regarding public opinion. In many cases the
studies can be well justified by conservation
biologists and poorly denounced by the public who
is moving homes and industry further into
important habitat, but I believe biologists should
be subject to public sentiment and accountability
in order to establish ethical bounds within the
profession. Not all wildlife studies are alike;
some are noble efforts by well trained and
experienced biologists who have strived for the
best care of their study animals. Some are not. |
|
Charlene Daley
Submitted:
Tuesday, February 19, 2002
|
I think collaring wild animals for study is
cruel and invasive. It restricts them to a
degree. The collars can get caught in bushes,
plants or fences. One of the cruelest collaring
I have ever read about is the geese and ducks
where ice becomes built up on their collar and
eventually causes death. |
|
|
Marilynn Hagedorn
Submitted:
Friday, February 15, 2002
|
Inventory work and the collection of information
regarding wildlife movements and habits is
important for the preservation of species.
However, too much work is being done that does
not show the proper regard for impacts on
animals. Having the proper guidelines in place
that regulate research activities is only the
first step in ensuring the welfare of animals.
Environmental ethics need to be taught to every
individual that will be working with any species
of fish, mammal, bird, plant and invertebrate.
Our research should not be harming them when the
long-term goal is protection. |
|
Janice Price
Submitted:
Friday, January 18, 2002
|
Biologists should have a code of ethics
established and enforced with a governing body of
biologists. Any studies performed by biologist
on wildlife should not be used for harvesting. I believe it has had a positive effect, certainly
in the case of the Algonquin wolf. Hunters and trappers and poachers have taken
advantage of tracking the collared wildlife as we
have seen on video with bears being hunted down
by arrows and dogs. That is a Ministry of
Natural Resources and a Ranger's problem. If the
fine were a percentage of one's net worth, I'm
sure we would not have the problem. As a wildlife rehabilitation volunteer with the
Toronto Wildlife Centre, I am a strong defender
of wildlife and believe the Theberges have done a
remarkable job through the use of such collars
and their book and as a result, the increased
public awareness of the plight of the Algonquin
wolf. World Wildlife, Wolves Ontario and Ontario
Federation of Naturalists together with Wildlands
League have all been instrumental in backing the
Theberges to protect this wolf. What I am against is biologists working for any
organization for the purpose of harvesting. In
the wrong hands, this information could easily
wipe out an entire species. Why don't you follow-up with the ethicals of who
ends up with the research. Also, there was an incredible wolverine film by
the biologist John Krebs[sp?] last year on
Discovery in January. He had great footage. Why
don't you do a story on that????
|
|
Blue...............
Submitted:
Thursday, January 17, 2002
|
My name is
Blueberry-Sun-Over-The-Mountains-when
-Winter-Comes-Before-The-King-of-Fur-Wake
ns-In
-Spring. You can call me Blue for Human. I
have
been wearing a collar for several months now
and I
would like to let you know how it has affected
my
kin and me. When I first received the collar it was a bit of a
status symbol. Everyone lined up to sniff it.
After a while no one wanted to hear about my
abduction and some of them even started to
suggest
that I had concocted the whole event. Mating time was even more stressful. When I
sniffed at my mate she snarled that she was
not
sure she wanted to make puppies with a he
who had
a growth on his neck. Explanations met with a
turn of the head and a flick of the tail in a most
putting-off way. I would like you to hurry and get this thing off
my neck. There are a lot of fleas under it and
no
amount of scratching can dislodge them. It
often
pinches when I sleep and wakes me up. I
have
caught it several times on branches and once
spent
quite some time struggling to get free. But worst of all, my mate has started to look at
younger males who don't have weird things on
their
necks. What was it I did that offended you so
much
to make you wish to punish me so? Humbly yours in wildness and hope,
Your running mate and hopeful friend,
Blueberry-Sun-Over-The-Mountains-when
-Winter-Comes-Before-The-King-of-Fur-Wake
ns-In
-Spring
|
|
Page: 1
2
3
4
Add your comments |
|
|
|
