[ad_1]
- Field stations offer many overlooked benefits and a significant return on investment for conservation, according to a new study authored by 173 conservation researchers.
- Particularly in Africa, areas near field stations experience about 18% less forest loss than similar locations without stations. The station is also home to more than 1,200 species of endangered species.
- The study found that field stations have a median conservation impact of about $637/km2 ($1,640/sq m), far below the average budget for protected areas worldwide.
- Field stations are said to be underfunded and undervalued, and although much of the information and research used to inform global environmental policy and goals comes from field stations, there is little clarity on this. Very few mention it.
The term “field station” has a mystical air to it, conjuring images of tropical or icy outposts where scientists go to “do science.” And while it’s true that scientific research is the backbone of field stations, 173 This is revealed by a new study authored by conservation researchers.
“Field research stations are not just places where esoteric research is done, as they are commonly perceived, but are cost-effective, multifaceted tools for addressing global conservation challenges.” , said Russ Mittermeyer, chief conservation officer at Re:wild and lead author of the paper.Papers published this week save letter.
The study surveyed managers of 157 field stations in 56 primate countries (Africa, Asia, Central and South America). Field station managers reported improved habitat quality, reduced hunting, and increased law enforcement compared to areas without stations.
“If you’re closer to the field station, the ecosystem is much healthier and less degraded,” Timothy Epley, lead author of the paper and chief conservation officer of Madagascar’s Wildlife Authority, told Mongabay. “There is virtually no hunting in and around most field stations.”
The study found that areas near field stations experienced about 18% less forest loss than similar locations without stations, particularly in Africa. To measure forest loss, scientists studied 20 years of satellite imagery and mapped areas within field stations with initial forest cover, conservation status, climate, population density, and road density ranging from 5 to 50 kilometers (3 ~31 miles) compared to similar areas. Away.
According to the study, the field stations surveyed are home to more than 1,200 endangered animal species. Based on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, researchers identified mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles considered to be endangered or missing data within a five-kilometre radius of each field station. They arrived at this figure by counting the number of mammals, birds, amphibians, and reptiles living in the ocean.
The median cost of these conservation benefits is about $637 per square kilometer, or about $1,650 per square mile, far below the average budget for protected areas worldwide, according to the study.
This analysis is based on the well-documented assumption that field stations protect an area equivalent to a 5 km radius around them and the median annual budget of approximately $50,000 reported by the stations surveyed. (More than half of the stations surveyed were operating at less than that level.)
Research shows that beyond direct conservation, field stations can also have benefits for local communities. Nearly all of the 157 field stations surveyed employed local staff, with many employing dozens of people. The stations also trained local students, apprentices, and volunteers, and more than a third of the stations hosted tourists, bringing in thousands of visitors a year and boosting the local economy.
However, many field stations have a colonial history, especially in the tropics.
“There’s a history there that we really need to be mindful of in what we do,” said Rhonda Straminger, president of the Organization of Biological Field Stations and co-director of the CICHAZ field station in Mexico, about the study. is not involved, but says: said Mongabay. “[Field stations] They must provide economic benefits and resources to the communities in which they are located…the most successful field stations understand this. ”
“We appreciate the conservation return-on-investment approach taken by this study and the authors’ call for further funding for field stations,” said Straminger. Given their conservation and benefits to local communities, field stations are “undervalued and underfunded,” she added.
Field stations have always faced financial challenges, and the COVID-19 pandemic had a dramatic impact on funding, the study found. At the time of the survey, from March to June 2022, about half of the field stations surveyed had to partially close, and about a quarter remained partially or fully closed. .
“It’s not easy to get funding to operate a field station,” Epley said. Most field stations are funded by visiting researchers, tourists, and sometimes partner universities and grants.
In the U.S., the National Science Foundation provides grants to build capacity at field stations and oceanographic institutes, Straminger said. She urges more countries to establish programs to support field station activities.
“These bases are in many ways on the front lines of the climate crisis,” Straminger said. “They monitor the environment and collect long-term data while sharing their scientific efforts with the public.”
The 157 stations surveyed in this study are estimated to collectively support more than 300 scientific publications and host between 700 and 3,000 researchers annually. In most cases, valuable long-term ecological data is also collected.
However, this study covers only a small portion of the field stations. According to some estimates, there are over 1,400 field stations around the world.
Epley said much of the information and research used to inform global environmental policy and targets (such as the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework) comes from field stations, but they are not clearly defined. He said there were very few mentioned.
“This is strange because field stations underpin our ability to accurately monitor progress toward them.” [global environmental] The goals and the information they generate will help us achieve and monitor those goals,” Epley said. Not including field stations in the biodiversity framework “represents a huge missed opportunity,” he added.
“A lot of people don’t even know field stations exist,” Straminger said. “However, field stations play an important role in deepening our understanding of the natural world and protecting its biodiversity.”
banner image Tropical Royal Flycatcher (Onychorhynchus coronatus occidentalis) photographed in the Jama Koak Reserve.Photo by Ewan Ferguson/Third Millennium Alliance
Liz Kimbrough She is a staff writer at Mongabay and holds a Ph.D. He received his PhD in ecology and evolutionary biology from Tulane University, where he studied the microbiome of trees.See more of her reports here.
Related audio From Mongabay’s Podcast: A discussion on this topic with Andrew Whitworth, director of a major research station in Costa Rica. Listen here.
Biological field stations: essential but “invisible”
Quote:
Eppley, T. M., Reuter, K. E., Sefczek, T. M., Tinsman, J., Santini, L., Hoeks, S., … Mittermeier, R. A. (2024). Tropical field stations provide high conservation return on investment. save letter. doi:10.1111/conl.13007
[ad_2]
Source link
