Savanna Research Unit
Savanna Research Unit
Mcgeoch M.A.,Cape Research Center |
Dopolo M.,Cape Research Center |
Novellie P.,Conservation Services |
Hendriks H.,Conservation Services |
And 15 more authors.
Koedoe | Year: 2011
Protected areas are under increasing threat from a range of external and internal pressures on biodiversity. With a primary mandate being the conservation of biodiversity, monitoring is an essential component of measuring the performance of protected areas. Here we present a framework for guiding the structure and development of a Biodiversity Monitoring System (BMS) for South African National Parks (SAN Parks). Monitoring activities in the organisation are currently unevenly distributed across parks, taxa and key concerns: they do not address the full array of biodiversity objectives, and have largely evolved in the absence of a coherent, overarching framework. The requirement for biodiversity monitoring in national parks is clearly specified in national legislation and international policy, as well as by SAN Parks' own adaptive management philosophy. Several approaches available for categorising the multitude of monitoring requirements were considered in the development of the BMS, and 10 Biodiversity Monitoring Programmes (BMPs) were selected that provide broad coverage of higher-level biodiversity objectives of parks. A set of principles was adopted to guide the development of BMPs (currently underway), and data management, resource and capacity needs will be considered during their development. It is envisaged that the BMS will provide strategic direction for future investment in this core component of biodiversity conservation and management in SANParks. Conservation implications: Monitoring biodiversity in protected areas is essential to assessing their performance. Here we provide a coordinated framework for biodiversity monitoring in South African National Parks. The proposed biodiversity monitoring system addresses the broad range of park management plan derived biodiversity objectives. © 2011.
Kitshoff A.M.,University of Pretoria |
Kitshoff A.M.,Ghent University |
de Rooster H.,University of Pretoria |
Ferreira S.M.,Savanna Research Unit |
Steenkamp G.,University of Pretoria
Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology | Year: 2013
Objective: To determine patient factors and fracture morphology of dogs presented with mandibular fractures to a small animal referral centre in South Africa. Methods: Patient data on age, sex, breed and aetiology of dogs with mandibular fractures were recorded. The fractures were classified according to the anatomical location, displacement, fracture type, fracture line direction, periodontal pathology, and whether there were teeth in the fracture line or not by evaluation of preoperative radiographs. Clinical observations indicated whether these fractures were open or closed. Results: In total, 109 dogs with 135 mandibular fractures were included in the study.Small breed dogs and dogs less than eight months of age predominated (102/109). Dog fights were the most common aetiology in this study (68/109). The molar region was the most commonly affected region (56/135). Evaluation of the radiographs revealed that transverse (73/135), relatively unstable (116/135), and displaced (112/135) fractures were the most common. The majority of fractures involved teeth in the fracture line (100/135), with the first molar frequently involved (54/135). The majority of fractures were open (104/135). Clinical significance: The results obtained from this study may be used to guide patient and fracture morphology selection in biomechanical studies of mandibular fracture repair techniques. Screening of this patient population may inspire the search for new treatment options for mandibular fracture repair in South Africa. © Schattauer 2013.
Ferreira S.,Savanna Research Unit |
Deacon A.,Savanna Research Unit |
Sithole H.,Savanna Research Unit |
Bezuidenhout H.,Arid Research Unit |
And 2 more authors.
Koedoe | Year: 2011
Diverse political, cultural and biological needs epitomise the contrasting demands impacting on the mandate of the South African National Parks (SANParks) to maintain biological diversity. Systems-based approaches and strategic adaptive management (learn by doing) enable SANParks to accommodate these demands. However, such a management strategy creates new information needs, which require an appropriate analytical approach. We use conceptual links between objectives, indicators, mechanisms and modulators to identify key concerns in the context of and related to management objectives. Although our suggested monitoring designs are based mostly on defined or predicted underlying mechanisms of a concern, SANParks requires inventory monitoring to evaluate its key mandate. We therefore propose a predictive inventory approach based on species assemblages related to habitat preferences. Inventories alone may not always adequately serve unpacking of mechanisms: in some cases population size needs to be estimated to meet the information needs of management strategies, but actual population sizes may indirectly affect how the species impact on other values. In addition, ecosystem objectives require multivariate assessments of key communities, which can be used in trend analysis. SANParks therefore needs to know how to detect and define trends efficiently, which, in turn, requires precision of measures of variables. © 2011.
Gaylard A.,Savanna Research Unit |
Ferreira S.,Savanna Research Unit
Koedoe | Year: 2011
South African National Parks (SAN Parks) makes use of strategic adaptive management (SAM) to achieve its primary mandate of biodiversity conservation. This involves an iterative adaptive planning, management and review cycle to ensure appropriate alignment of stakeholder values with conservation objectives, to address the uncertainty inherent in complex social- economic-ecological systems and to learn explicitly whilst doing so. Adaptive management is recognised as the most logical framework for continuous improvement in natural resource management; nevertheless, several challenges in its implementation remain. This paper outlined these challenges and the various modifications to SAN Parks' adaptive planning and management process that have emerged during its development. We demonstrated how the establishment of a regular Science-Management Forum provides opportunities for social co-learning amongst resource managers and scientists of a particular park, whilst providing other positive spin-offs that mature the SAM process across the organisation. We discussed the use of particular conceptual constructs that clarify the link between monitoring, management requirements and operational endpoints, providing the context within which Thresholds of Potential Concern (TPCs) should be set, prioritised and measured. The evolution of the TPC concept was also discussed in the context of its use by other organisations, whilst recognising its current limitations within SAN Parks. Finally, we discussed remaining implementation challenges and uncertainties, and suggested a way forward for SAM. Conservation implications: This paper outlined practical methods of implementing SAM in conservation areas, beyond what has already been learnt within, and documented for, the Kruger National Park. It also highlighted several implementation challenges that prove useful to other conservation agencies planning to adopt this approach to managing complex ecosystems. © 2011.