Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorScofield, P.en
dc.contributor.authorCullen, Rossen
dc.date.accessioned2017-08-25T00:03:18Z
dc.date.available2012-05-28en
dc.date.issued2012en
dc.identifier.citationScolfield, R. P. & Cullen, R. (2012). Fenced sanctuaries need critical evaluation: A reply to Innes et al. (2012). New Zealand Journal of Ecology, 36(2), 239-242.en
dc.identifier.issn0110-6465en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10182/8453
dc.description.abstractWe welcome a reply by Innes et al. (2012) to our article (Scofield et al. 2011) questioning the contribution of ‘predator-proof’ fences. We note that Innes et al. do not question the fundamental points of our thesis: (1) fence costs have not been properly assessed and evaluated; (2) that fenced sanctuaries enhance conservation of species has not been properly evaluated; (3) cheaper methods exist to achieve significant improvements in species’ threat status at national levels. We also wish to acknowledge the widespread debate that has accompanied the publication of this paper (see Brookes 2011; Forest & Bird website 2011). We agree with Innes et al. (2012) that many local restoration projects pursue a range of goals and have little doubt they attain some of them. We agree that careful, systematic, comprehensive monitoring and timely evaluation of these projects is needed to be able to reach strong conclusions about their contributions. We expect that trial and error across restoration sites will help identify what works, what can be achieved, and what is sustainable (socially and financially). We believe that it is crucial that the results of such experimentation are rigorously determined and published to enable knowledge sharing not just within local project communities but also among the interested public and professional communities.en
dc.format.extent239-242en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherNew Zealand Ecological Societyen
dc.relationThe original publication is available from - New Zealand Ecological Society - http://newzealandecology.org/nzje/3036en
dc.rights©New Zealand Ecological Societyen
dc.subjectpredator-proof fencesen
dc.subjectconservationen
dc.subjectrestorationen
dc.subjectthreatened speciesen
dc.subjectfenced sanctuariesen
dc.subjectEcologyen
dc.titleFenced sanctuaries need critical evaluation: a reply to Innes et al. (2012)en
dc.typeJournal Article
lu.contributor.unitLincoln Universityen
lu.contributor.unitFaculty of Agriculture and Life Sciencesen
lu.contributor.unitFaculty of Agribusiness and Commerceen
lu.contributor.unitDepartment of Financial and Business Systemsen
dc.subject.anzsrc050202 Conservation and Biodiversityen
dc.subject.anzsrc0602 Ecologyen
dc.relation.isPartOfNew Zealand Journal of Ecologyen
pubs.issue2en
pubs.organisational-group/LU
pubs.organisational-group/LU/Agriculture and Life Sciences
pubs.organisational-group/LU/Faculty of Agribusiness and Commerce
pubs.organisational-group/LU/Faculty of Agribusiness and Commerce/FABS
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden
pubs.publisher-urlhttp://newzealandecology.org/nzje/3036en
pubs.volume36en


Files in this item

Default Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record