Suchergebnisse

The global Blue Swallow Hirundo atrocaerulea was classified as Vulnerable in 2010 on account of its small and rapidly declining population estimated at less than 1 500 pairs. We undertook this study to gain a better understanding of the current status and threats facing this migratory species. Three previously unknown areas that might be part of the species' non-breeding range were identified in Kenya and northern Tanzania. Within its breeding range we identified three previously unknown areas of potentially suitable habitat, one in Tanzania and two in Malawi, which require further exploration. Population viability assessment predicted that the Blue Swallow population will decline by 8% in 10 years. The overall probability of extinction of the species in the wild is 3%. Minimum viable population size analysis suggests that a goal for the long-term conservation of the Blue Swallow should be to mitigate current threats that are driving declines such that the population increases to a minimum of 3 600 individuals. This should consist of at least 900 individuals in each of the four clusters identified, along with a minimum of 500 individuals in at least one of the meta-populations per cluster. The four clusters are located in (1) the southeasten Democratic Republic of the Congo, (2) highlands of southern Tanzania and northern Malawi, (3) eastern highlands of Zimbabwe and (4) South Africa and Swaziland. The current proportions of the Blue Swallow population in strictly protected and unprotected areas on their breeding grounds are 53% and 47%, respectively, whereas on their non-breeding grounds the corresponding percentages are 25% and 75%, respectively. Our reassessment of the Blue Swallow's risk of extinction indicates that it continues to qualify as Vulnerable according to the IUCN/SSC criteria C2a(i)

The global Blue Swallow Hirundo atrocaerulea was classified as Vulnerable in 2010 on account of its small and rapidly declining population estimated at less than 1 500 pairs. We undertook this study to gain a better understanding of the current status and threats facing this migratory species. Three previously unknown areas that might be part of the species' non-breeding range were identified in Kenya and northern Tanzania. Within its breeding range we identified three previously unknown areas of potentially suitable habitat, one in Tanzania and two in Malawi, which require further exploration. Population viability assessment predicted that the Blue Swallow population will decline by 8% in 10 years. The overall probability of extinction of the species in the wild is 3%. Minimum viable population size analysis suggests that a goal for the long-term conservation of the Blue Swallow should be to mitigate current threats that are driving declines such that the population increases to a minimum of 3 600 individuals. This should consist of at least 900 individuals in each of the four clusters identified, along with a minimum of 500 individuals in at least one of the meta-populations per cluster. The four clusters are located in (1) the southeasten Democratic Republic of the Congo, (2) highlands of southern Tanzania and northern Malawi, (3) eastern highlands of Zimbabwe and (4) South Africa and Swaziland. The current proportions of the Blue Swallow population in strictly protected and unprotected areas on their breeding grounds are 53% and 47%, respectively, whereas on their non-breeding grounds the corresponding percentages are 25% and 75%, respectively. Our reassessment of the Blue Swallow's risk of extinction indicates that it continues to qualify as Vulnerable according to the IUCN/SSC criteria C2a(i)

Preventing the over-exploitation of natural resources is vital to ensure that biodiversity is protected and conserved. Legislation and regulations are therefore necessary to manage resource utilisation, but overly stringent legislation and regulations can have unintended negative consequences. For example, biodiversity research, much of which is state funded, is now subject to excessive red tape to the extent that overregulation is impeding progress. Researchers must navigate a myriad of laws, rules, permit requirements, ethics clearances and approvals, many of which require annual renewal, progress reporting, and submission of amendment applications for ongoing projects. Excessive red tape particularly hinders field-based research, and in our experience, has a negative impact on research productivity in South Africa. If current levels of bureaucracy and managerialism persist, we believe that the impact on biodiversity research in the country will be debilitating. Former South African Minister of Finance, Tito Mboweni, has acknowledged the negative impact of red tape on small business enterprise and economic growth in South Africa, and there are now attempts to reduce it. So too, excessive red tape and overregulation of research should be rationalised to enhance knowledge generation and application. ; http://www.sajs.co.za ; hj2021 ; Centre for Veterinary Wildlife Studies ; Mammal Research Institute ; Paraclinical Sciences ; Zoology and Entomology