Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T21:01:54.092Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

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

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 May 2003

Get access

Extract

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).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2003 The Zoological Society of London

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)