SMaRT: A Science-based Tiered Framework for Common Ravens

Large-scale increases and expansion of common raven (Corvus corax; raven) populations are occurring across much of North America, leading to increased negative consequences for livestock and agriculture, human health and safety, and sensitive species conservation. We describe a science-based adaptive management framework that incorporates recent quantitative analyses and mapping products for addressing areas with elevated raven numbers and minimizing potential adverse impacts to sensitive species, agricultural damage, and human safety. The framework comprises 5 steps: (1) desktop analysis; (2) field assessments; (3) comparison of raven density estimates to an ecological threshold (in terms of either density or density plus distance to nearest active or previous nest); (4) prescribing management options using a 3-tiered process (i.e., habitat improvements, subsidy reductions, and direct actions using StallPOPd.V4 software); and (5) post-management monitoring. The framework is integrated within the Science-based Management of Ravens Tool (SMaRT), a web-based application outfitted with a user-friendly interface that guides managers through each step to develop a fully customized adaptive plan for raven management. In the SMaRT interface, users can: (1) interact with pre-loaded maps of raven occurrence and density and define their own areas of interest within the Great Basin to delineate proposed survey or treatment sites; (2) enter site-level density estimates from distance sampling methods or perform estimation of raven densities using the rapid assessment protocol that we provide; (3) compare site-level density estimates to an identified ecological threshold; and (4) produce a list of potential management options for their consideration. The SMaRT supports decision-making by operationalizing scientific products for raven management and facilitates realization of diverse management goals including sensitive species conservation, protection of livestock and agriculture, safeguarding human health, and addressing raven overabundance and expansion. We illustrate the use of the framework through SMaRT using an example of greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) conservation efforts within the Great Basin, USA

Universal Design to Limit Food Cross-Contamination: Incased Set of Kitchen Utensils with Five Color-Coded Food Chopping Boards and Knifes

This-study is focused on a-conceptual-design of a-kitchen-appliances/utensils-set, comprising of five-color-coded food-chopping-boards and five-matching-color-coded-knifes, to-reduce cross-contamination at private-homes, as-well-as at food-establishments. Selected-relevant-Patents, as-well-as products, available locally and internationally, were analyzed. The-Joseph-Joseph Index™ Color-Coded Chopping-Boards set (of four), was chosen as a-point of reference for the-current-design; its-seven-identified-limitations have-directed the-scope of the-current-design. Target-specifications/objectives, of the-set, were formulated from the-document-analysis, while Pair-wise-Comparison-Charts were-used, to-rank the-importance of the-objectives, in the-different-levels. The-best-ranked-design (out of the-four-alternatives made) was chosen, via standard Engineering-Design Weighted-Decision-Matrix (EDWDM) and ‘Drop and Re-vote’ (D&R) method. 2D-drawings, of the-best-design-alternative, were created via computer-aided-design (CAD) AutoCAD-software 2018, while 3D-modeling, of the-set and all-its-components, was produced by Autodesk-Inventor-Version: 2016 (Build 200138000, 138). Designed-labels (positioned on each-board and each-knife, as-well-as on the-set itself, as an-inclined-panel) were introduced, to-cater for the-people with color-blindness (according to-the-fundamental-principles of the-Universal-design), and also to-avoid-confusion (as a-reminder which board is which) for all-users. The-study adopted ‘analysis’ method of materials-selection. The-main objectives, of the-intended-set, was used as a-guide, in-preliminary-materials-selection. This-concise-study has focused on conceptual-design only; and, hence, it-is further-recommends to: (i) carry-out a-detailed-design; (ii) select a-specific-material (out of the-group, identified by this-study); (iii) choose a-mode of fabrication of the-set; (iv) examine the-possibility of incorporating of anti-microbial-agent(s) and/or coating(s); (v) fabricate the-prototype(s); (vi) conduct explorative-use-ability-trials; and (vii) analyze the-marketing-aspect of the-final-set. This-work is potentially-beneficial-to engineering-product-design students and faculty, as-well-as to-households and food-establishments (subject-to successful-implementation). Keywords: Color blindness; Materials selection; Food safety; Joseph Joseph Index™ Color Coded Chopping Boards set. DOI: 10.7176/ISDE/10-5-05 Publication date:June 30th 201

Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem: Restoration Recommendations of an Expert Working Group

The Deepwater Horizon (DWH) well blowout released more petroleum hydrocarbons into the marine environment than any previous U.S. oil spill (4.9 million barrels), fouling marine life, damaging deep sea and shoreline habitats and causing closures of economically valuable fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico. A suite of pollutants—liquid and gaseous petroleum compounds plus chemical dispersants—poured into ecosystems that had already been stressed by overfishing, development and global climate change. Beyond the direct effects that were captured in dramatic photographs of oiled birds in the media, it is likely that there are subtle, delayed, indirect and potentially synergistic impacts of these widely dispersed, highly bioavailable and toxic hydrocarbons and chemical dispersants on marine life from pelicans to salt marsh grasses and to deep-sea animals. As tragic as the DWH blowout was, it has stimulated public interest in protecting this economically, socially and environmentally critical region. The 2010 Mabus Report, commissioned by President Barack Obama and written by the secretary of the Navy, provides a blueprint for restoring the Gulf that is bold, visionary and strategic. It is clear that we need not only to repair the damage left behind by the oil but also to go well beyond that to restore the anthropogenically stressed and declining Gulf ecosystems to prosperity-sustaining levels of historic productivity. For this report, we assembled a team of leading scientists with expertise in coastal and marine ecosystems and with experience in their restoration to identify strategies and specific actions that will revitalize and sustain the Gulf coastal economy. Because the DWH spill intervened in ecosystems that are intimately interconnected and already under stress, and will remain stressed from global climate change, we argue that restoration of the Gulf must go beyond the traditional "in-place, in-kind" restoration approach that targets specific damaged habitats or species. A sustainable restoration of the Gulf of Mexico after DWH must: 1. Recognize that ecosystem resilience has been compromised by multiple human interventions predating the DWH spill; 2. Acknowledge that significant future environmental change is inevitable and must be factored into restoration plans and actions for them to be durable; 3. Treat the Gulf as a complex and interconnected network of ecosystems from shoreline to deep sea; and 4. Recognize that human and ecosystem productivity in the Gulf are interdependent, and that human needs from and effects on the Gulf must be integral to restoration planning. With these principles in mind, the authors provide the scientific basis for a sustainable restoration program along three themes: 1. Assess and repair damage from DWH and other stresses on the Gulf; 2. Protect existing habitats and populations; and 3. Integrate sustainable human use with ecological processes in the Gulf of Mexico. Under these themes, 15 historically informed, adaptive, ecosystem-based restoration actions are presented to recover Gulf resources and rebuild the resilience of its ecosystem. The vision that guides our recommendations fundamentally imbeds the restoration actions within the context of the changing environment so as to achieve resilience of resources, human communities and the economy into the indefinite future

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem: Restoration Recommendations of an Expert Working Group

The Deepwater Horizon (DWH) well blowout released more petroleum hydrocarbons into the marine environment than any previous U.S. oil spill (4.9 million barrels), fouling marine life, damaging deep sea and shoreline habitats and causing closures of economically valuable fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico. A suite of pollutants — liquid and gaseous petroleum compounds plus chemical dispersants — poured into ecosystems that had already been stressed by overfishing, development and global climate change. Beyond the direct effects that were captured in dramatic photographs of oiled birds in the media, it is likely that there are subtle, delayed, indirect and potentially synergistic impacts of these widely dispersed, highly bioavailable and toxic hydrocarbons and chemical dispersants on marine life from pelicans to salt marsh grasses and to deep-sea animals. As tragic as the DWH blowout was, it has stimulated public interest in protecting this economically, socially and environmentally critical region. The 2010 Mabus Report, commissioned by President Barack Obama and written by the secretary of the Navy, provides a blueprint for restoring the Gulf that is bold, visionary and strategic. It is clear that we need not only to repair the damage left behind by the oil but also to go well beyond that to restore the anthropogenically stressed and declining Gulf ecosystems to prosperity-sustaining levels of historic productivity. For this report, we assembled a team of leading scientists with expertise in coastal and marine ecosystems and with experience in their restoration to identify strategies and specific actions that will revitalize and sustain the Gulf coastal economy. Because the DWH spill intervened in ecosystems that are intimately interconnected and already under stress, and will remain stressed from global climate change, we argue that restoration of the Gulf must go beyond the traditional “in-place, in-kind” restoration approach that targets specific damaged habitats or species. A sustainable restoration of the Gulf of Mexico after DWH must: 1. Recognize that ecosystem resilience has been compromised by multiple human interventions predating the DWH spill; 2. Acknowledge that significant future environmental change is inevitable and must be factored into restoration plans and actions for them to be durable; 3. Treat the Gulf as a complex and interconnected network of ecosystems from shoreline to deep sea; and 4. Recognize that human and ecosystem productivity in the Gulf are interdependent, and that human needs from and effects on the Gulf must be integral to restoration planning. With these principles in mind, we provide the scientific basis for a sustainable restoration program along three themes: 1. Assess and repair damage from DWH and other stresses on the Gulf; 2. Protect existing habitats and populations; and 3. Integrate sustainable human use with ecological processes in the Gulf of Mexico. Under these themes, 15 historically informed, adaptive, ecosystem-based restoration actions are presented to recover Gulf resources and rebuild the resilience of its ecosystem. The vision that guides our recommendations fundamentally imbeds the restoration actions within the context of the changing environment so as to achieve resilience of resources, human communities and the economy into the indefinite future

To improve the future profit expectations of the Nissan stamping plant

The process of thought applied to establish a thesis topic has been one of non-acceptance of the situations on face value. As such the future profitability of the Nissan Stamping Plant has been considered. A mental model has been established in the authors mind that a definite problem exists within this area. This has led to the formulation of a framework that can be used to handle the problem of low profits that will eventually lead to the closure of the operation. Status-Quo has remained within the operations for almost 25 years, but now changes in Government Legislation pose threats. This leads to the question of how can the profits be improved. The framework was built around a philosophy of continual search for the truth. The scientific method has been applied to understand the theories of a single or double loop response whilst proceeding through the Plan, Do, Check, and Action cycle

Assessing Environmental Risk of Oil Spills with ERA Acute

This open access book introduces readers to a new methodology for assessing the risks to the marine environment following accidental oil spills. The methodology will soon be implemented on the Norwegian Continental Shelf and will be complemented by guidelines for its use in a regulatory framework. The brief book is intended to provide international readers with a basic grasp of what the ERA Acute methodology consists of, what its applications are, and the underlying impact and restoration models used in its development. The content is divided into three main parts: an introduction and overview of risk management applications for generalists at the management level, a model overview for generalist scientists, and a more detailed final section for risk assessment professionals, which presents the results of the validation and sensitivity testing

The role of social interactions in conservation conflict: goose management across Scotland

Increasing anthropogenic influence has left no corner of the natural world untouched. As the negative impacts of people on the natural world have become more prominent, pro-conservation actions have been incentivised across scales, from individual to societal to intergovernmental. Clashes over conservation objectives, when there is a perception that one party is asserting its interests at the expense of the other, is termed Conservation Conflict, and causes negative outcomes for biodiversity and people. Conservation conflicts are complex problems, the successful management of which can rarely be undertaken unilaterally, for both practical and ethical reasons. Finding the best ways for encouraging social interactions and cooperative behaviours are therefore vital in managing conservation conflict. I take a conservation conflict surrounding the damaging of crops by hyper-abundant flocks of wild geese across Scotland as a case study to explore the roles of social interactions in conservation conflict. In Chapter 2 I start at the network scale by modelling the interactions between individuals and organisations involved in the goose conflict at two locations. I test the networks for the prevalence of particular sets of network configurations which represent individuals forming interactions in response to either a coordination problem (where solutions are sought and implemented efficiently to tackle an agreed goal) or to a cooperation problem (where goals are not shared, and for which solutions must be sought through negotiation). I find that interaction networks in both locations were formed in response to, and have the function to tackle, coordination problems. This is useful for dealing with coordination problems such as the practical management of geese. Interaction networks formed in response to, and having the function to tackle, cooperation problems were less prevalent. This presents a problem when collective problem solving requires negotiation, such as for managing conservation conflict. Networks at both locations would benefit from forming certain types of interactions to strengthen the network for future cooperation problems. To effectively manage conservation conflicts in-depth knowledge of the cooperative behaviours of the people involved is required. In Chapter 3 I use stakeholder interviews, to investigate how and why individual members of three important stakeholder groups (farmers & crofters, conservation managers, and shooters) cooperated with one another and what barriers to cooperation they faced. I identify three dimensions of cooperation in the goose conflict: i) that the lack of horizontal interactions (between actors who interact with others at a similar organisational scale, for example farmers communicating with other farmers or conservation project managers communicating with other conservation project managers) and vertical interactions (between actors across different organisational scales, for example farmers communicating with farming union representatives, or conservation project managers communicating with senior management) linking widely distributed actors meant both shared learning and the perception of fairness suffer. Building up horizontal and vertical interactions could bypass these scientific and political barriers; ii) a false belief in uniformity among stakeholder groups can be the source of poor system understanding, which can be prevented by developing wider or alternative stakeholder representation; and iii) for long-term, complex issues, identification and discussion of trade-offs is needed to avoid poor outcomes throughout the process, not just at the planning stages. Laboratory experiments with volunteers show cooperation is less likely in the presence of uncertainty. Much less is known about how stakeholders in real-life conservation conflicts respond to different types of uncertainty. In Chapter 4, I test the effect of different sources of uncertainty on cooperative behaviour using a framed field experiment and interviews with crofters in Scotland. The experiment compared a baseline scenario of perfect certainty with scenarios including either: i) scientific uncertainty about the effectiveness of a conflict-reduction intervention; ii) administrative uncertainty about intervention funding; or iii) political uncertainty about the extent of community support. I find that crofters’ intention to cooperate is high but lessened by uncertainty, especially over the commitment from other stakeholders to cooperate on goose management. I conclude that existing cooperation on goose management may be at risk if uncertainty isn’t reduced outright or if commitments between parties are not strengthened. To avert this issue researchers and government advisers need to: i) determine how uncertainty will impact intention of stakeholders to cooperate; and ii) take steps (such as uncertainty reduction, communication, or acceptance) to reduce the negative impact of uncertainty on cooperation. In Chapter 5 I use the findings from Chapters 2 to 4 in conjunction with a conservation conflict management tool to evaluate goose conflict management in Scotland. I find many existing structures and processes of goose conflict management in Scotland were successful, but in order to build on these successes I propose several practical interventions. Increasing interactions between disparate groups; building data commons for shared learning; identification, acknowledgement, discussion and inclusion of trade-offs as they emerge; and making commitments to balance and fairness across the system. Enacting these recommendations would give goose conflict management in Scotland greater ability to deliver positive outcomes in what is a highly dynamic issue. This thesis uses mixed methods to investigate the role of social interaction in conservation conflict. The work succeeds in both identifying interventions specific for managing the goose conflict in Scotland and developing the theory of social interactions and cooperation in conservation conflict management more widely