tsetse flies should remain in protected areas in kwazulu-natal

Clicks: 218
ID: 203121
2017
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #70 of 120 articles by views in current pharmaceutical design

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
The proposal to eradicate tsetse flies from South Africa, including its protected areas, via the sequential aerosol technique combined with the sterile insect technique to reduce trypanosomiasis in cattle did not present an appropriate analysis of the impacts that implementation of the proposal would have on biodiversity. Not only would the implementation of the proposal be contrary to South African laws protecting and conserving biodiversity, but it would also have negative consequences for the conservation of biodiversity. Some of the negative consequences are reviewed, including extirpations and negative impacts on ecological and ecosystem processes and services. Alternative strategies to control trypanosomiasis in cattle effectively in a more environment-friendly manner are presently available and others will almost certainly become available in the not-too-distant future. Conservation implications: Environmental protection, promotion of conservation and sustainable use of the environment are all deeply seated in South Africa’s law. Rural livestock husbandry considerations and biodiversity conservation are not mutually exclusive and the importance of one cannot supersede the other. The eradication proposal is seen to be environmentally damaging and therefore it is concluded that the purpose of this proposed eradication exercise is unconstitutional, contrary to various multilateral agreements South Africa has entered into and contrary to good environmental governance.
Reference Key
armstrong2017koedoe:tsetse Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Adrian J. Armstrong;Andy Blackmore
Journal current pharmaceutical design
Year 2017
DOI
10.4102/koedoe.v59i1.1432
URL
https://koedoe.co.za/index.php/koedoe/article/view/1432
Keywords
protected areas geographical distribution including nature conservation ecosystem healthgeneral

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.