DOCSLIB.ORG

Conservation Report 2018

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Conservation Report 2018 CONSERVATION REPORT 2018 Conservation Report 2018 1 CONSERVATION REPORT 2018 OUR MISSION is to conserve threatened species and ecosystems worldwide, choosing solutions that are sustainable, based on sound science, and which take into account human needs. 2 Kizilkaya. Zafer Raja Ampat, Indonesia. Credit: reef, and coral Turtle CONSERVATION REPORT 2018 Contents Highlights of 2018 4 Our Mission & Aims 6 How we work 7 Assessing the impact of our work 9 Aim 1: To conserve threatened habitats 10 and species Aim 2: To shape decisions within society to 16 benefit biodiversity Aim 3: To empower individuals and organisations 24 to lead innovative conservation action Aim 4: To invest in FFI’s own effectiveness 30 Research and dissemination 32 Lessons learned and looking forward 33 Annex 1. FFI’s priority species 2018 38 Annex 2. Quotes from project reports 40 Turtle and coral reef, Raja Ampat, Indonesia. Credit: Zafer Kizilkaya. Zafer Raja Ampat, Indonesia. Credit: reef, and coral Turtle Kizilkaya Zafer Island, Raja Ampat, Indonesia. Credit: island chain including Wayag limestone of View Cover: Stock. Front Tyakht/Adobe Victor Saiga. Credit: 3 CONSERVATION REPORT 2018 Highlights of 2018 8,645,173 ha 40 projects We conserved over 8.6 million helped to address the hectares of crucial wildlife habitat illegal trade in wildlife (that’s larger than Austria) We worked with priority 82 species We saw conservation gains for priority and at least 140 further species 105 sites 69species demonstrably benefited from our work We protected habitat at Landscapes worked in include 216 sites in 49 countries LIMESTONE DESERTS & WILDFLOWER FORESTS FRESHWATER MARINE MOUNTAINS GRASSLANDS AGRICULTURAL CAVES DRYLANDS MEADOWS LANDSCAPES 4 CONSERVATION REPORT 2018 4,800 222 The number of people whose Organisations whose skills, knowledge conservation capacity we built and resources we helped develop TWENTY-TWO The number of laws, regulations and strategic government plans we helped develop 399 The number of organisations INES UNIT YMAK We US S MM IE LIC ER we partnered with, including B O S O S C P * Local NGOs engaged % Governments 55 99 60 ROJECTS OF ROJECTS ROJECTS Universities with Businesses * Relevant field-based projects 5 CONSERVATION REPORT 2018 Our Mission & Aims Every year, Fauna & Flora International (FFI) collects detailed annual reports from our project managers to help us assess progress towards our mission to conserve threatened species and ecosystems worldwide, choosing solutions that are sustainable, are based on sound science and take into account human needs. To achieve this mission, FFI has four broad aims: This report shows how effective FFI has been To conserve threatened habitats and species through locally in progressing towards each of these four led conservation of threatened habitats, securing threatened species, aims over the last year, based on information 1. and extending protection for marine and coastal ecosystems. collected across all of our 132 projects1 that were active during 2018. To shape decisions within society to benefit biodiversity by embedding biodiversity into private-sector decision making, We have presented the main findings from 2. enabling governments to make decisions that conserve biodiversity, annual project reports, outlining key activities and encouraging individuals and communities to make decisions that and impacts, and providing insights into our maintain biodiversity. work during the year. The information here is just a snapshot of our To empower individuals and organisations to lead innovative conservation action by harnessing technology for work in 2018; we have parallel processes to 3. conservation, supporting the development of conservation leaders, and track our change over time within and across supporting access to funding and capacity for local-level conservation. projects. Of the 132 projects represented in this report, To invest in FFI’s own effectiveness by strengthening our 89 are field based, while the remaining 43 are systems and processes, fostering a culture of learning and knowledge 4. sharing, attracting and retaining high-calibre staff, and securing cross-cutting or thematic initiatives. diverse and resilient income streams. 1 A project is defined as a set of activities leading towards a meaningful conservation outcome. A project may encompass multiple sites and/or species and employ multiple conservation approaches. 6 CONSERVATION REPORT 2018 How we work With over 130 projects in 49 countries, FFI’s work is diverse and multifaceted; however, the same basic principles underlie everything we do: We work in partnership We take a people-centric approach We are science-based We work with and through partner FFI respects human rights and cultural values, FFI recognises the need to root organisations, from local community and puts people at the heart of conservation. We conservation practice in sound science. organisations and NGOs to small and large see conservation as a social process and work We seek to apply the best possible information, including up-to-date research, businesses and government agencies. broadly to engage local communities (including to our practice and also to assess, capture indigenous peoples) to find practical solutions to Conservation impact at scale can only be and use lessons from FFI and our partners conservation problems. delivered through collaboration. We support our to improve practice and help steer future research agendas. partner organisations in building locally owned We believe that conservation success depends on and sustainable conservation programmes. engaging and empowering those who live closest In our projects we aim to underpin to threatened species and habitats, and we are 2 conservation decision making with the In 2018, we collaborated with close to 620 committed to respecting and promoting human best available information, be it generated organisations. We jointly ran projects with, or rights within our conservation programmes, as well by ourselves or others. provided significant assistance to, 399 of these. as supporting governance systems that benefit both In 2018, over 360 surveys, monitoring people and biodiversity. programmes or other studies were carried By assisting locally based communities to develop out across 96 different projects. NATIONAL NGOS AND CBOS (155) sustainable livelihoods and appropriate governance Kat Phillips/FFI GOVERNMENT mechanisms alongside biodiversity outcomes, we OUR AGENCIES (110) help to ensure that this work is locally supported and PRIMARY ACADEMIC owned and thus more likely to succeed and persist. 3 INSTITUTIONS (28) PARTNERS BUSINESSES (36) In 2018, 99% of projects that could engage with IN 2018 INTERNATIONAL communities did so, building community governance NGOS (27) or contributing to sustainable livelihoods. OTHER (43) 2 These are organisations we worked alongside to achieve a mutual goal, but did not run projects jointly with, or provide significant assistance to 3 Our ‘primary partners’ are those we jointly run projects with or provide significant assistance to. 7 CONSERVATION REPORT 2018 Cricket in the Cardamom Mountains, Cambodia. Credit: Jeremy Holden/FFI Jeremy Mountains, Cambodia. Credit: in the Cardamom Cricket 8 CONSERVATION REPORT 2018 Predator tracks, Namibia. Credit: Nicky Jenner Namibia. Credit: tracks, Predator Assessing the impact of our work We recognise that it can take many years to achieve a significant conservation impact, such as species recovery or habitat improvement. Success is defined at a project by project level and can be determined by a number of factors including, life history traits of critical species or the ability of key habitats to recover, as well as the types of threats faced by biodiversity in a particular context. We use ‘impact chains’ to track progress towards these long-term goals. An impact chain describes the path of change that you would expect to see a project progress through on the way to achieving ultimate conservation impacts. There is good evidence that achievement of early steps in the chain predicts future conservation impact. At portfolio level our approach is to use evidence of project outcomes to give an annual snapshot4 of where our current projects are on their journey towards their ultimate conservation goals5. In the impact chains presented throughout this report, the sites, species or projects represented are only counted once and assigned the highest level of outcome or impact reported by the end of 2018. Underpinning this approach, each FFI project aims to have a well-developed design logic that articulates how activities are intended to drive change in its own particular circumstances. Work is ongoing at an organisational level to ensure these models of change are as robust as they can be and are used to support each project’s work to monitor its progress towards its ultimate impact. We have a broad and varied portfolio of projects, which in turn means that the rates at which we expect to see change occurring – and the definition of project success – can differ significantly from project to project. Quotes from our project annual reports are used to illustrate how we work across our diverse portfolio to deliver change. For further information on how FFI works to understand the impact of our work please refer to the document Understanding Conservation Success, available on our website. Read on to find out how we did in 2018... 4 We are designing ways to enable better year-to-year comparison of data in 5 We have complementary processes
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plant Section Introduction
    Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 RE-INTRODUCTION PRACTITIONERS DIRECTORY 1998 Compiled and Edited by Pritpal S. Soorae and Philip J. Seddon Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 © National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development, 1998 Printing and Publication details Legal Deposit no. 2218/9 ISBN: 9960-614-08-5 Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 Copies of this directory are available from: The Secretary General National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development Post Box 61681, Riyadh 11575 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Phone: +966-1-441-8700 Fax: +966-1-441-0797 Bibliographic Citation: Soorae, P. S. and Seddon, P. J. (Eds). 1998. Re-introduction Practitioners Directory. Published jointly by the IUCN Species Survival Commission’s Re-introduction Specialist Group, Nairobi, Kenya, and the National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 97pp. Cover Photo: Arabian Oryx Oryx leucoryx (NWRC Photo Library) Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 CONTENTS FOREWORD Professor Abdulaziz Abuzinadai PREFACE INTRODUCTION Dr Mark Stanley Price USING THE DIRECTORY ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PART A. ANIMALS I MOLLUSCS 1. GASTROPODS 1.1 Cittarium pica Top Shell 1.2 Placostylus ambagiosus Flax Snail 1.3 Placostylus ambagiosus Land Snail 1.4 Partula suturalis 1.5 Partula taeniata 1.6 Partula tahieana 1.7 Partula tohiveana 2. BIVALVES 2.1 Freshwater Mussels 2.2 Tridacna gigas Giant Clam II ARTHROPODS 3. ORTHOPTERA 3.1 Deinacrida sp. Weta 3.2 Deinacrida rugosa/parva Cook’s Strait Giant Weta Re-introduction Practitioners Directory - 1998 3.3 Gryllus campestris Field Cricket 4. LEPIDOPTERA 4.1 Carterocephalus palaemon Chequered Skipper 4.2 Lycaena dispar batavus Large Copper 4.3 Lycaena helle 4.4 Lycaeides melissa 4.5 Papilio aristodemus ponoceanus Schaus Swallowtail 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Council Letter
    GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT FACILITY INVESTING IN OUR PLANET Naoko Ishii CEO and Chairperson April 25, 2018 Dear Council Member: UNEP as the Implementing Agency for the project entitled: Regional (Antigua And Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, Grenada, St. Kitts And Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and Grenadines): Preventing COSTS of Invasive Alien Species (/AS) in Barbados and the OECS Countries,. has submitted the attached proposed project document for CEO endorsement prior to final approval of the project document in accordance with UNEP procedures. The Secretariat has reviewed the project document. It is consistent with the proposal approved by Council in June 2016 and the proposed project remains consistent with the Instrument and GEF policies and procedures. The attached explanation prepared by UNEP satisfactorily details how Council's comments and those of the STAP have been addressed. I am, therefore, endorsing the project document. We have today posted the proposed project document on the GEF website at www.TheGEF.org. If you do not have access to the Web, you may request the local field office of UNDP or the World Bank to download the document for you. Alternatively, you may request a copy of the document from the Secretariat. If you make such a request, please confirm for us your current mailing address. Sincerely, ~4 frl'Naoko Ishii Chief Executive Officer and Chairperson Attachment: GEFSEC Project Review Document Copy to: Country Operational Focal Point, GEF Agencies, ST AP, Trustee 18 I 8 H Street, NW • Washington, DC 20433 • USA Tel:+ I (202) 473 3202 - Fax:+ 1 (202) 522 3240 E-mail: [email protected] \ll\11\11 thPoPf nro GEF-6 REQUEST FOR PROJECT ENDORSEMENT/APPROVAL PROJECT TYPE: Full-sized Project TYPE OF TRUST FUND: GEF TRUST FUND For more information about GEF, visit TheGEF.org PART I: PROJECT INFORMATION Project Title: Preventing COSTS of Invasive Alien Species (IAS) in Barbados and the OECS Countries Country(ies): Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, St.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint Lucia National Invasive Species Strategy
    Box SAINT LUCIA NATIONAL INVASIVE SPECIES STRATEGY 2012 - 2021 Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Forestry and Fisheries SAINT LUCIA NATIONAL INVASIVE SPECIES STRATEGY 2012-2021 PREPARED BY Vasantha Chase Marie-Louise Felix Guy Mathurin Lyndon John Gaspard Michael Andrew David Lewis Ulrike Krauss October 2011 Carried out under the Project Mitigating the Threats of Invasive Alien Species in the Insular Caribbean Project No. GFL / 2328 – 2713-4A86, GF-1030-09-03 Lionfish throughout the Caribbean region. The destructive FORE FOREWORD biological, social and economic impact of IAS has prompted Invasive alien species (IAS) are species whose introduction many nations to develop and implement National Invasive and/or spread outside their natural habitats threaten Species Strategies (NISS), because in dealing with IAS the biological diversity (CBD 2009). IAS are recognised as one best defense is a good offense. Once an IAS becomes of the leading threats to biodiversity, considered only second established, the cost of eradication is financially prohibitive to habitat loss in terms of negative impact. They are and a strain on a small island fragile economy like Saint imposing enormous costs on agriculture, forestry, fisheries, Lucia which is heavily dependent on the health of its natural and other enterprises, on human and animal health as well resources. Therefore efforts at prohibiting entry in the first as ecosystem services. Rapidly accelerating human trade, instance are a prudent and cost effective approach to IAS tourism, transport, and travel – the infamous “four Ts” - management. over the past century have dramatically enhanced the spread of IAS, allowing them to surmount natural geographic The Government of Saint Lucia, through its Ministry of barriers.
    [Show full text]
  • Standard Common and Current Scientific Names for North American Amphibians, Turtles, Reptiles & Crocodilians
    STANDARD COMMON AND CURRENT SCIENTIFIC NAMES FOR NORTH AMERICAN AMPHIBIANS, TURTLES, REPTILES & CROCODILIANS Sixth Edition Joseph T. Collins TraVis W. TAGGart The Center for North American Herpetology THE CEN T ER FOR NOR T H AMERI ca N HERPE T OLOGY www.cnah.org Joseph T. Collins, Director The Center for North American Herpetology 1502 Medinah Circle Lawrence, Kansas 66047 (785) 393-4757 Single copies of this publication are available gratis from The Center for North American Herpetology, 1502 Medinah Circle, Lawrence, Kansas 66047 USA; within the United States and Canada, please send a self-addressed 7x10-inch manila envelope with sufficient U.S. first class postage affixed for four ounces. Individuals outside the United States and Canada should contact CNAH via email before requesting a copy. A list of previous editions of this title is printed on the inside back cover. THE CEN T ER FOR NOR T H AMERI ca N HERPE T OLOGY BO A RD OF DIRE ct ORS Joseph T. Collins Suzanne L. Collins Kansas Biological Survey The Center for The University of Kansas North American Herpetology 2021 Constant Avenue 1502 Medinah Circle Lawrence, Kansas 66047 Lawrence, Kansas 66047 Kelly J. Irwin James L. Knight Arkansas Game & Fish South Carolina Commission State Museum 915 East Sevier Street P. O. Box 100107 Benton, Arkansas 72015 Columbia, South Carolina 29202 Walter E. Meshaka, Jr. Robert Powell Section of Zoology Department of Biology State Museum of Pennsylvania Avila University 300 North Street 11901 Wornall Road Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 Kansas City, Missouri 64145 Travis W. Taggart Sternberg Museum of Natural History Fort Hays State University 3000 Sternberg Drive Hays, Kansas 67601 Front cover images of an Eastern Collared Lizard (Crotaphytus collaris) and Cajun Chorus Frog (Pseudacris fouquettei) by Suzanne L.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Authority Over the Use of Native Amphibians and Reptiles in the United States State of the Union
    STATE OF THE UNION: Legal Authority Over the Use of Native Amphibians and Reptiles in the United States STATE OF THE UNION: Legal Authority Over the Use of Native Amphibians and Reptiles in the United States Coordinating Editors Priya Nanjappa1 and Paulette M. Conrad2 Editorial Assistants Randi Logsdon3, Cara Allen3, Brian Todd4, and Betsy Bolster3 1Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies Washington, DC 2Nevada Department of Wildlife Las Vegas, NV 3California Department of Fish and Game Sacramento, CA 4University of California-Davis Davis, CA ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WE THANK THE FOLLOWING PARTNERS FOR FUNDING AND IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS RELATED TO THE DEVELOPMENT, EDITING, AND PRODUCTION OF THIS DOCUMENT: US Fish & Wildlife Service Competitive State Wildlife Grant Program funding for “Amphibian & Reptile Conservation Need” proposal, with its five primary partner states: l Missouri Department of Conservation l Nevada Department of Wildlife l California Department of Fish and Game l Georgia Department of Natural Resources l Michigan Department of Natural Resources Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies Missouri Conservation Heritage Foundation Arizona Game and Fish Department US Fish & Wildlife Service, International Affairs, International Wildlife Trade Program DJ Case & Associates Special thanks to Victor Young for his skill and assistance in graphic design for this document. 2009 Amphibian & Reptile Regulatory Summit Planning Team: Polly Conrad (Nevada Department of Wildlife), Gene Elms (Arizona Game and Fish Department), Mike Harris (Georgia Department of Natural Resources), Captain Linda Harrison (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission), Priya Nanjappa (Association of Fish & Wildlife Agencies), Matt Wagner (Texas Parks and Wildlife Department), and Captain John West (since retired, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission) Nanjappa, P.
    [Show full text]
  • A Causeway for Concern By: Sarah N
    A Causeway for Concern By: Sarah N. George I feel that I must voice my opinion on the recently unveiled Phase II proposals for the DSH Pearl of the Caribbean development. I am a St Lucian marine biologist by training, and a fisheries and marine management specialist by expertise. I can bring to the debate over 30 years’ experience working in the interest of national development as a member of the Fisheries Department and also with the OPAAL project through which the Government of Saint Lucia established the Point Sable Environmental Protection Area (PSEPA) under the Physical Planning and Development Act. This valuable site extends from Moule-a-Chique in the south to Pointe de Caille (just north of Savannes Bay), and includes Maria Islands, and the Savannes Bay and Mankoté Mangroves as well as the reef around Maria Islands as legally-declared Marine Reserves (with the area being designated as a RAMSAR site of international importance). Given the valuable resources and ecological roles of the PSEPA and the way these support both existing and potential economic sectors and livelihoods, it is important that all Saint Lucians appreciate what will be some of the likely short and long term effects of building a causeway from the shoreline out to Maria Islands. Smothering of critical marine habitats and endangering livelihoods First, let’s consider the effects of a causeway on marine resources and essential ecosystem services along our southeast coast. Here we have Saint Lucia’s largest remaining area supporting three critical tropical marine habitats: mangroves, seagrass beds and coral reefs; all functioning together in an interdependent way.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint Lucia Forests and Land Resources Department Strategy 2015
    Saint Lucia Forests and Lands Resources Department: Strategy 2015–2025 Saint Lucia Forests and Lands Resources Department Strategy 2015–2025 Saint Lucia Forests and Lands Resources Department: Strategy 2015–2025 Cover photographs by Jenny Daltry (signboard, Lansan tree tapper), Duncan Gregor (Latille Waterfall), Alfred Prosper (tree nursery near Millet) and Adams Toussaint (White‐breasted Thrasher). Recommended Citation: Saint Lucia Forests and Lands Resources Department (2015) Strategy 2015–2025. Saint Lucia Forests and Lands Resources Department, Union, Saint Lucia. Acknowledgements The 2015–2025 Strategy was developed through a participatory process that entailed extensive consultation and review by employees of the Forests and Lands Resources Department, the Ministry of Sustainable Development, Environment Science and Technology, and representatives from a wide range of collaborating government agencies and non‐governmental organisations, other experts and the public. This process began in mid‐2014 and the final draft of the Strategy was completed in December 2015. This document was compiled by Michael Appleton (Forest Management Planning Adviser to Fauna & Flora International, FFI), Adams Toussaint (Chief Forest Officer) and Alfred Prosper (Deputy Forest Officer), who jointly designed and facilitated the planning process. On behalf of the Forests and Lands Resources Department and FFI, the authors thank all of the many individuals and organisations that contributed their valuable time and expertise. Supported by Halcyon Land and Sea Saint Lucia Forests and Lands Resources Department: Strategy 2015–2025 Summary This document presents a new strategy for the Saint Lucia Forests and Lands Resources Department (commonly known as the Forestry Department) to address the changing responsibilities of the Department and the demands on its resources over the next 10 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Invasive Alien Species (IAS) Status and Management, Saint Lucia, 2010
    Critical Situation Analysis (CSA) of Invasive Alien Species (IAS) Status and Management, Saint Lucia, 2010 carried out under the project Mitigating the Threats of Invasive Alien Species in the Insular Caribbean Project No. GFL / 2328 – 2713-4A86, GF-1030-09-03 Ulrike Krauss IAS Coordinator Forestry Department Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Forestry and Fisheries (MALFF) Union, September 2010 Critical Situation Analysis (CSA) of Invasive Alien Species (IAS) Status and Management, Saint Lucia, 2010 Table of Content Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 2 Context, Scope and Objectives ............................................................................................... 4 Historic Overview ..................................................................................................................... 7 Saint Lucia’s Environmental Profile ..................................................................................... 11 Protected Areas and Other Areas of High Conservation Value ............................................. 12 Biodiversity Baseline Assessments ....................................................................................... 16 Terrestrial Ecosystems...................................................................................................... 17 Aquatic Ecosystems .......................................................................................................... 18 IAS Inventories ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Iguana 12.2 B&W Text
    VOLUME 12, NUMBER 2 JUNE 2005 ONSERVATION AUANATURAL ISTORY AND USBANDRY OF EPTILES IC G, N H , H R International Reptile Conservation Foundation www.IRCF.org GLENN MITCHELL Anegada or Stout Iguana (Cyclura pinguis) (see article on p. 78). JOHN BINNS RICHARD SAJDAK A subadult Stout Iguana (Cyclura pinguis) awaiting release at the head- Timber Rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus) reach the northernmost extent starting facility on Anegada (see article on p. 78). of their range on the bluff prairies in Wisconsin (see article on p. 90). This cross-stitch was created by Anne Fraser of Calgary, Alberta from a photograph of Carley, a Blue Iguana (Cyclura lewisi) at the Captive Breeding Facility on Grand Cayman. The piece, which measures 6.8 x 4.2 inches, uses 6,100 stitches in 52 colors and took 180 hours to complete. It will be auctioned by the IRCF at the Daytona International Reptile Breeder’s Expo on 20 August 2005. Profits from the auction will benefit conser- vation projects for West Indian Rock Iguanas in the genus Cyclura. ROBERT POWELL ROBERT POWELL Red-bellied or Black Racers (Alsophis rufiventris) remain abundant on Spiny-tailed Iguanas (Ctenosaura similis) are abundant in archaeologi- mongoose-free Saba and St. Eustatius, but have been extirpated on St. cal zones on the Yucatán Peninsula. This individual is on the wall Christopher and Nevis (see article on p. 62). around the Mayan city of Tulúm (see article on p. 112). TABLE OF CONTENTS IGUANA • VOLUME 12, NUMBER 2 • JUNE 2005 61 IRCFInternational Reptile Conservation Foundation TABLE OF CONTENTS RESEARCH ARTICLES Conservation Status of Lesser Antillean Reptiles .
    [Show full text]
  • Pointe Sable Environmental Protection Area
    POINTE SABLE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN 2009-2014 Ministry of Physical Development, Environment, and Housing Government of Saint Lucia March 13, 2009 The preparation of this management plan was commissioned by the Environment and Sustainable Development Unit (ESDU) of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) under OECS Contract No. OECS/223/08, and is an output of the OECS Protected Areas and Associated Livelihoods (OPAAL) Project. This activity is funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF), through the World Bank, the Fonds Français pour l’Environnement Mondial (FFEM), and the Organization of American States (OAS). The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the donor agencies supporting the activity or of the OECS Secretariat. Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States The World Bank For bibliographical purposes, this document should be cited as: Gardner, Lloyd. 2009. Management Plan for the Pointe Sable Environmental Protection Area, 2009-2014. Government of Saint Lucia. PSEPA Management Plan – March 13, 2009 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………….. 3 List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………….. 3 List of Acronyms ………………………………………………………………….. 4 1. Introduction ………………………………………………………………….. 5 2. Natural and Historical Resources ………………………………………….. 11 3. Socio-economic Context ………………………………………………….. 15 4. Priority Issues to be Addressed ………………………………………….. 23 5. Management Framework ………………………………………………….. 31 6. Administrative Arrangements ………………………………………….. 44 7. Evaluation of Performance ………………………………………………….. 52 8. Financial Resources ………………………………………………………….. 53 References ………………………………………………………………………….. 55 Appendix 1: Gazette Notice Declaring the PSEPA ………………………………….. 57 Appendix 2: Summary of Consultation Process used in Plan Preparation ………….. 58 Appendix 3: Definition of Natural Beauty and Natural Interest ………………….. 61 Appendix 4: Resource Uses within the PSEPA ………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • United Nations Environment Programme
    United Nations Environment Programme Terminal Evaluation of the Project “MITIGATING THE THREAT OF INVASIVE ALIEN SPECIES IN THE INSULAR CARIBBEAN” UNEP IMIS #: GFL/-2328-2740-4995 // GEF ID #: 3183 Hugo Arnal UNEP Evaluation Office September 2014 Front Cover Photographs: Close up of two emblematic reptile species from the Caribbean. In the lower left, the Saint Lucia Whiptail (Cnemidophorus vanzoi), pictured in Maria Major Island, Saint Lucia, and on the upper right the Jamaican Iguana (Cyclura collie), at the Hope Zoo, Kingston. The Whiptail was originally from the main Saint Lucia Island from where it was extirpated, very small populations remain in adjacent Maria Major (10.1 ha) and Maria Minor (1.6 ha) and Rat and Preslin islands. The Jamaican Iguana was presumed already extinct in 1948 and a remaining population was discovered in the Hellshire Hills of Jamaica in 1990. In both cases, their near extinction is due in great part to the impact of invasive alien predators, particularly Indian Mongoose in the Iguana’s case. Both species are good examples of the threat that ‘Invasive Alien Species (IAS)’ represent to the survival of the Caribbean biodiversity and natural heritage. (Photographs © Hugo Arnal). Disclaimer: The perspectives and opinions expressed in this report do not represent official positions of the United Nations Environment Programme, its staff or The Global Environment Facility (GEF). Unless otherwise explicitly indicated, opinions and perspectives herein contained belong to the evaluator. Citation: Arnal, Hugo. 2014. Terminal Evaluation Report: “Mitigating the Threat of Invasive Alien Species in the Insular Caribbean” (UNEP IMIS #: GFL/-2328-2740-4995; GEF ID #: 3183).
    [Show full text]
  • Herpetological Review
    Herpetological Review Volume 39, Number 2 — June 2008 SSAR Officers (2008) HERPETOLOGICAL REVIEW President The Quarterly News-Journal of the Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles ROY MCDIARMID USGS Patuxent Wildlife Research Center Editor National Museum of Natural History ROBERT W. HANSEN Washington, DC 20560, USA 16333 Deer Path Lane Clovis, California 93619-9735, USA President-elect [email protected] BRIAN CROTHER Department of Biological Sciences Southeastern Louisiana University Associate Editors Hammond, Louisiana 70402, USA ROBERT E. ESPINOZA CHRISTOPHER A. PHILLIPS DEANNA H. OLSON California State University, Northridge Illinois Natural History Survey USDA Forestry Science Lab Secretary MARION R. PREEST ROBERT N. REED MICHAEL S. GRACE R. BRENT THOMAS Joint Science Department USGS Fort Collins Science Center Florida Institute of Technology Emporia State University The Claremont Colleges Claremont, California 91711, USA EMILY N. TAYLOR GUNTHER KÖHLER MEREDITH J. MAHONEY California Polytechnic State University Forschungsinstitut und Illinois State Museum Naturmuseum Senckenberg Treasurer KIRSTEN E. NICHOLSON Section Editors Department of Biology, Brooks 217 Central Michigan University Book Reviews Current Research Current Research Mt. Pleasant, Michigan 48859, USA AARON M. BAUER JOSHUA M. HALE BEN LOWE e-mail: [email protected] Department of Biology Department of Sciences Department of Biology Villanova University MuseumVictoria, GPO Box 666 San Diego State University Publications Secretary Villanova, Pennsylvania 19085, USA Melbourne, Victoria 3001, Australia San Diego, California 92182, USA BRECK BARTHOLOMEW [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] P.O. Box 58517 Geographic Distribution Geographic Distribution Geographic Distribution Salt Lake City, Utah 84158, USA ALAN M. RICHMOND INDRANEIL DAS JERRY D.
    [Show full text]