Forests provide a nutritional boon to some communities, research shows

first_imgAgriculture, Amazon Agriculture, Amazon Conservation, Amazon Destruction, Amazon Logging, Amazon Palm Oil, Amazon People, Animals, Apes, Biodiversity, Bushmeat, Community Development, Conservation, Deforestation, Ecology, Environment, Environmental Policy, Fish, Fishing, Food, Food Vs Forests Debate, Forest Loss, Forestry, Forests, Governance, Health, Hunting, Indigenous Groups, Indigenous Peoples, Logging, Mammals, Monkeys, Nature And Health, Palm Oil, Plantations, Primates, Rainforest Conservation, Rainforest Deforestation, Rainforest Logging, Rainforest People, Rainforests Popular in the CommunitySponsoredSponsoredOrangutan found tortured and decapitated prompts Indonesia probeEMGIES17 Jan, 2018We will never know the full extent of what this poor Orangutan went through before he died, the same must be done to this evil perpetrator(s) they don’t deserve the air that they breathe this has truly upset me and I wonder for the future for these wonderful creatures. So called ‘Mankind’ has a lot to answer for we are the only ones ruining this world I prefer animals to humans any day of the week.What makes community ecotourism succeed? In Madagascar, location, location, locationScissors1dOther countries should also learn and try to incorporateWhy you should care about the current wave of mass extinctions (commentary)Processor1 DecAfter all, there is no infinite anything in the whole galaxy!Infinite stupidity, right here on earth.The wildlife trade threatens people and animals alike (commentary)Anchor3dUnfortunately I feel The Chinese have no compassion for any living animal. They are a cruel country that as we knowneatbeverything that moves and do not humanily kill these poor animals and insects. They have no health and safety on their markets and they then contract these diseases. Maybe its karma maybe they should look at the way they live and stop using animals for all there so called remedies. DisgustingConservationists welcome China’s wildlife trade banThobolo27 JanChina has consistently been the worlds worst, “ Face of Evil “ in regards our planets flora and fauna survival. In some ways, this is nature trying to fight back. This ban is great, but the rest of the world just cannot allow it to be temporary, because history has demonstrated that once this coronavirus passes, they will in all likelihood, simply revert to been the planets worst Ecco Terrorists. Let’s simply not allow this to happen! How and why they have been able to degrade this planets iconic species, rape the planets rivers, oceans and forests, with apparent impunity, is just mind boggling! Please no more.Probing rural poachers in Africa: Why do they poach?Carrot3dOne day I feel like animals will be more scarce, and I agree with one of my friends, they said that poaching will take over the world, but I also hope notUpset about Amazon fires last year? Focus on deforestation this year (commentary)Bullhorn4dLies and more leisSponsoredSponsoredCoke is again the biggest culprit behind plastic waste in the PhilippinesGrapes7 NovOnce again the article blames companies for the actions of individuals. It is individuals that buy these products, it is individuals that dispose of them improperly. If we want to change it, we have to change, not just create bad guys to blame.Brazilian response to Bolsonaro policies and Amazon fires growsCar4 SepThank you for this excellent report. I feel overwhelmed by the ecocidal intent of the Bolsonaro government in the name of ‘developing’ their ‘God-given’ resources.U.S. allocates first of $30M in grants for forest conservation in SumatraPlanet4dcarrot hella thick ;)Melting Arctic sea ice may be altering winds, weather at equator: studyleftylarry30 JanThe Arctic sea ice seems to be recovering this winter as per the last 10-12 years, good news.Malaysia has the world’s highest deforestation rate, reveals Google forest mapBone27 Sep, 2018Who you’re trying to fool with selective data revelation?You can’t hide the truth if you show historical deforestation for all countries, especially in Europe from 1800s to this day. WorldBank has a good wholesome data on this.Mass tree planting along India’s Cauvery River has scientists worriedSurendra Nekkanti23 JanHi Mongabay. Good effort trying to be objective in this article. I would like to give a constructive feedback which could help in clearing things up.1. It is mentioned that planting trees in village common lands will have negative affects socially and ecologically. There is no need to even have to agree or disagree with it, because, you also mentioned the fact that Cauvery Calling aims to plant trees only in the private lands of the farmers. So, plantation in the common lands doesn’t come into the picture.2.I don’t see that the ecologists are totally against this project, but just they they have some concerns, mainly in terms of what species of trees will be planted. And because there was no direct communication between the ecologists and Isha Foundation, it was not possible for them to address the concerns. As you seem to have spoken with an Isha spokesperson, if you could connect the concerned parties, it would be great, because I see that the ecologists are genuinely interested in making sure things are done the right way.May we all come together and make things happen.Rare Amazon bush dogs caught on camera in BoliviaCarrot1 Feba very good iniciative to be fallowed by the ranchers all overSponsored Article published by John Cannoncenter_img The new study, across 24 countries, shows a wide range in the variability of how communities use forests for food.The nutrients provided by wild fruits, vegetables, game and fish are critical to the nutritional health of some communities and should play a role in decisions about land usage.Land-use decisions should factor in the importance of forest foods to some communities, say the authors. Until recently, scientists hadn’t systematically compared the levels to which different groups of people across the tropics depend on nearby forests for food.New research shows that, though forest usage varies widely between and even within countries, the nutrients provided by wild fruits, vegetables, game and fish are critical to the nutritional health of some communities and should play a role in decisions about land usage.“As far as we’re aware, this is the first of its kind,” said ecologist Dominic Rowland of the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and the University of London in a CIFOR blog post. “We tested the hypothesis that the consumption of forest foods can make important contributions to dietary quality in a wide range of sites across the tropics.”The landscape approach, advocated by study author Dominic Rowland, calls for land use that incorporates several uses for communities, such as the fish farms and multi-crop agriculture pictured here in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Photo by John C. CannonRowland and his colleagues published their research in the journal Environmental Conservation in October 2016.They knew that certain communities – often the poorest, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization – depend on the natural bounty found in forests.“There are all kinds of foods that come from the forest, including anything from land snails to wild fruits and primates,” Rowland says. “We focused on nutritionally important food groups that are often lacking in the average diets in these countries.“For these food groups, primarily it is bushmeat, fish and fruit for which the forest is relied upon, as well as vegetables,” he added.This type of varied diet packs a bevy of important ‘micronutrients’– that is, vitamins, minerals and trace elements such as zinc. Even if people get enough calories from staples such as corn, wheat and rice, they’ll be more susceptible to disease without small amounts of these chemicals found in many forest foods, the authors report. That’s especially the case for children.“Undernutrition in children under 5 years of age is the cause of 3.1 million deaths a year,” they write in the paper.However, not all communities rely on forests to the same degree, they found.A woman in the Democratic Republic of Congo heads to the forest to gather fruits and vegetables. Photo by John C. CannonTake, for example, the researchers’ findings at three different locations in Brazil. They found that people at one of the sites got more than 60 percent of their meat from the wild game and fish from the forest, but very few fruits and vegetables. By contrast, another community got nearly all of its produce from the forest, but almost no meat. A third group of people at a different site didn’t use the forest much at all: Less than 20 percent of their fruit, vegetables, meat and fish came from there.The researchers uncovered the same variability in the investigations of 23 other countries, backing up the conclusions of an earlier CIFOR study in Indonesia on nutrition and forests. That suggests that local context molds humans’ reliance on forests, Rowland said.“You can’t say that forest foods are universally important,” he said in the blog post. “But you also can’t say that forest foods don’t make much difference to diets.”Rowland pointed out that removing those forests could have dire consequences on areas that draw heavily on the bounty of their local environment – especially those that the researchers categorized as “forest food dependent.”“The scale and importance of wild food use must be taken into account when making landscape-scale land-use decisions,” he said. “Our findings suggest that deforestation and land-use change may have unforeseen consequences on the quality of local people’s diets.”When loggers clear an area of trees or companies convert forests to plantations for a single crop such as oil palm, that can leave communities with fewer options to supplement their diet.Revelations about the importance of standing forests to the health of some communities’ diets highlight an important concern for policy makers, he said. He advocates decisions that promote the many uses of forest on which many people depend – what scientists call the “landscape approach.”“[Y]ou need to take into account the impact on local people’s diets because monoculture might not provide people with sources of nourishing food,” he said.CITATIONS:Ickowitz, A., Rowland, D., Powell, B., Salim, M. A., & Sunderland, T. (2016). Forests, trees, and micronutrient-rich food consumption in Indonesia. PLoS ONE, 11(5), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154139Rowland, D., Ickowitz, A., Powell, B., Nasi, R., & Sunderland, T. (2016). Forest foods and healthy diets: quantifying the contributions. Environmental Conservation, (October), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892916000151Banner image of piranha in Peru by Rhett A. ButlerFEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page.last_img read more

Bringing rhinos back to India’s parks

first_imgLaunched in 2005, the Indian Rhino Vision 2020 aimed to boost the population of rhinos in Assam State and expand the species’ range within the state from three protected areas to seven.Manas National Park was the first to receive translocated rhinos. The animals appeared to adapt well to their new home, but poachers repeatedly struck the park.The program then turned to Burachapori Wildlife Sanctuary, but the rhinos moved there grew sick and died.Conservationists still believe the overarching goal of boosting the state’s rhino population to 3,000 by 2020 is achievable. On the evening of Jan. 13, 2013, Deba Kumar Datta was on his way to a remote camp inside Manas National Park, a 500-square-kilometer (193-square-mile) protected area in the northeastern Indian state of Assam.Datta was excited that Sunday. It was the beginning of the Magh Bihu harvest festival in Assam. The day also marked Datta’s fifth anniversary at Manas National Park. As a senior project officer with WWF India, he had spent the last five years tracking the movements of greater one-horned rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis) that had only recently been reintroduced to the park.Many of these rhinos—brought in from different parts of Assam—were thriving in their new residence, and Datta was keen to celebrate his joy with some forest guards. But his happiness was short-lived.Datta had barely driven 100 meters when a villager called him to say that a rhino had been killed a few kilometers away. Datta’s team rushed towards the location of poaching with the forest department staff. There, in front of them, was Iragdao — an adult male rhino, lying dead on his side.“It was a brutal scene,” Datta told Mongabay. “Poachers had removed Iragdao’s horn, some part of his legs and nails. We all lost our appetite that night.”For conservationists, Iragdao’s death was tragic. He was one of the last adult breeding males in the park at the time of his death. He had also been one of the first two Indian rhinos to be reintroduced to Manas as part of a high-profile translocation project.A greater one-horned rhino in Assam State’s Kaziranga National Park. Photo by Udayan Dasgupta for Mongabay.A new vision for rhinosThis ambitious project, called the Indian Rhino Vision 2020 (IRV 2020), was launched in 2005 in response to the declining population of rhinos in Assam.By the late 1990s, poachers had wiped out hundreds of rhinos across the state. More than 90 percent of Assam’s rhinos were now concentrated in just one park — Kaziranga National Park— with small populations in Orang National Park and Pobitora Wildlife Sanctuary. This was worrying.With the distribution of rhinos limited to a handful of protected areas, the species was at heightened risk of being decimated by threats like diseases, natural disasters or poaching.In 2005, when Assam was celebrating 100 years of conservation in Kaziranga National Park, the state government and conservationists came up with an elaborate plan to change the status quo.Kaziranga had nearly 1,855 rhinos then, with an additional 68 in Orang National Park and 81 in Pobitora Wildlife Sanctuary. Experts believed they could increase this number to 3,000 within the next 15 years. This overarching goal led to the birth of IRV 2020 — a collaboration between the Assam Forest Department, the Bodoland Territorial Council, WWF India, the International Rhino Foundation, the US Fish and Wildlife Service and various local conservation groups.The IRV 2020 strategy called for expanding the species’ range from three protected areas within the state to seven. This would involve translocating wild rhinos from Kaziranga and Pobitora to parks that no longer harbored these animals: Manas National Park, Burachapori and Laokhowa Wildlife Sanctuaries and Dibru-Saikhowa National Park.IRV 2020 aimed to establish or strengthen rhino populations in seven protected areas across Assam State. Base map courtesy of Google Maps.To achieve this, IRV 2020 would continue to boost the protection of existing rhino populations in the state and better manage their habitats.After a series of preliminary checks to assess the current state of security and habitat in Assam’s various protected areas, and the support they would need in the future, the state’s newly instituted rhino task force made its decision: Manas National Park would be the first protected area to be restocked with rhinos and Datta’s team would monitor the animals.Manas, located at the Himalayan foothills, had its own thriving population of more than 100 greater one-horned rhinoceros until the beginning of the 1990s. It was even declared a World Heritage site in 1985 by UNESCO. But a spate of poaching incidents during a decade of civil unrest between 1989 and 2001 wiped out every single rhino from the park.The experts believed that by boosting security and prepping the habitat, Manas could be turned into a haven for rhinos again. “Manas had the highest potential then,” said Amit Sharma, WWF India’s senior coordinator for rhino conservation.But reintroducing rhinos to Manas — and keeping them safe — was not going to be easy.last_img read more