Should Wildlife Stay Or Go? - Science Or Opinions ..
ACRES 
Nov 23, 2020 
ACRES, NGOs 
0 comments
| Tweet |  |
SHOULD WILDLIFE STAY OR GO? – SCIENCE OR OPINIONS ALONE MATTER?
A lot of you are concerned about the ongoing discussions on whether wildlife should stay or go. While we are heartened to see that public opinion is being sought, we are deeply concerned on the following based on the questions asked:
1. Should wildlife be managed based on public opinion only?
As Minister Desmond Lee rightly shared during a human-wildlife conflict conference in 2019, “Homes fringe many of our nature areas, and Singaporeans live right next to our urban or nature parks, and even our nature reserves. Living this close to nature also means that we have to expect the frequency of human-wildlife interaction and conflict to be much higher.” He also rightly put that “a science-based approach seeks to underscore our animal management strategies. This helps us design more targeted, effective interventions to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts.”
2. When we ask residents, if they are okay with “regulating the numbers” what does that mean? Has scientific studies proved that we have an over population of roosters and wild pigs?
Where do they fit in our plans for Singapore to turn into a biophilic city?
3. When we ask residents if they are okay with “remove/relocate all the individuals”, what happens to removed animals? Where will they be relocated in a small island like ours?
Every month, ACRES’s wildlife management and rescue team handles over 1,200 calls from concerned members of public on wildlife in distress, and over 100 cases of human wildlife interactions, needing education, rescue or mitigation measures. Most often, it is proven that removal is not a solution as we enhance habitats more, green the spaces and fragment habitats through development.
4. Is there a wild pig problem in Pasir Ris and why? What can be done long-term?
Yes, different developments have fragmented their habitats and feeding of wild pigs in Pasir Ris and Lor Halus have been constantly featured on social media for many years, which have made these pigs associate humans with food.
We need stronger enforcement on feeding ban. At the end of the day, only the animals pay the price being labelled as ‘aggressive’, removed and culled.
Removal or reduction of population (through humane measures first) should only be considered if there are studies to prove that we have an over population and analyses to show what is the carrying capacity to which the population needs to be managed to.
Clearing forests inevitably displaces animals. Site-specific measures alone are insufficient – as a small island, we have to look at the bigger picture, at connectivity around the site. This requires planning at an early level (master planning) and inter-agency collaborations to prioritize these issues compared to placing focus only on people’s needs. (housing, transport and amenities).
As a result, over the years – agencies doing wildlife management, handling public feedback and groups like us spend more resources managing conflicts at these sites, and animals also pay the price through removal, abuse from fear (snakes) and roadkills.
As ACRES and other nature groups are being progressively engaged by agencies on nature-themed developments, we also have to ask ourselves – are we, as a community truly ready to embrace all wildlife as biodiversity? Are we truly empowered with knowledge on wildlife etiquette when we sight wild animals? Or are we only excited about flowers, birds and butterflies?
Let us not forget that every animal and plant has a role to play.
Source: https://www.facebook.com/ACRESasia/photos/a.223077136522/101..
| Tweet |
|
Facebook Comments