9 research outputs found
An Evaluation of Sex Offender Residency Restrictions in Michigan and Missouri
In Michigan, sex offenders are prohibited from living within 1,000 feet of school property and 500 feet from any licensed daycare center. Missouri prohibits sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of a public or private school up to the 12th grade or childcare facility which existed at the time the offender established his/her residency. In addition, sex offenders are prohibited from working or loitering within 500 feet of a school, childcare facility, or public park with playground equipment or a public swimming pool. Residency restriction policies in both States are universally applied to all registered sex offenders. The current study had three primary goals. First, document the residency locations of sex offenders and non-sex offenders before and after the implementation of the residency restriction laws. Second, examine the change in recidivism patterns before and after the implementation of residency restrictions. Third, describe the collateral consequences of residency restrictions. The study found a decline in the number of registered sex offenders living in restricted areas, including near schools or daycare centers, but the differences were not statistically significant. The study also determined that sex offenders, especially child molesters, moved more often relative to comparable non-sex offenders after the implementation of residency restrictions; those living at addresses within the boundary zones surrounding schools and daycare centers tended to live in more disadvantaged areas. Regarding the impact of residency restrictions on recidivism, the relationship was small. The study recommends reconsidering the universal application of sex offender residency restrictions, an increase in housing services for sex offenders, and the development of reentry programming specific to sex offender populations. 22 tables and 139 reference
Recommended from our members
PZP Immunocontraception in Coyotes: A Multi-Year Study with Three Vaccine Formulations
The use of poisons for coyote control is controversial because of public opposition to lethal control of pest animals and the perceived environmental risks of pesticide use. The development of immunocontraception for population control of coyotes could result in a more acceptable alternative to poisons. Immunocontraception using porcine zona pellucida (PZP) would allow normal estrus in the female and therefore normal male-female pair-bonding. Coyotes are mon-estrus, therefore PZP contraception during the breeding season of February and March could provide year-round protection. This paper reviews 9 years of research on PZP immunocontraception, starting from a multi-shot PZP vaccine using Freundās adjuvant, to the development and testing of two single-shot preparations combined with a newly developed adjuvant (AdjuVacā¢). We provide insights into the false assumption that one contraceptive vaccine fits all species and situations
Recommended from our members
PZP Immunocontraception in Coyotes: A Multi-Year Study with Three Vaccine Formulations
The use of poisons for coyote control is controversial because of public opposition to lethal control of pest animals and the perceived environmental risks of pesticide use. The development of immunocontraception for population control of coyotes could result in a more acceptable alternative to poisons. Immunocontraception using porcine zona pellucida (PZP) would allow normal estrus in the female and therefore normal male-female pair-bonding. Coyotes are mon-estrus, therefore PZP contraception during the breeding season of February and March could provide year-round protection. This paper reviews 9 years of research on PZP immunocontraception, starting from a multi-shot PZP vaccine using Freundās adjuvant, to the development and testing of two single-shot preparations combined with a newly developed adjuvant (AdjuVacā¢). We provide insights into the false assumption that one contraceptive vaccine fits all species and situations
20,25-Diazacholesterol as an oral contraceptive for black-tailed prairie dog population management
Black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys ludovicionus) colonies can become overcrowded, and the colonies, landscape, and people affected by them may benefit from controlled populations. Contraception is a method that may be useful, particularly where lethal control is inappropriate or illegal. We investigated if oral administration of 20,25-diazacholesterol (DiazaConĀ®)n, inhibitor of cholesterol and reproductive steroid hormone production, could reduce reproductive success of treated black-tailed prairie dogs in a field trial. Ten treatments of approximately 45-mg DiazaCon per black-tailed prairie dog yielded a 47% reduction of young:adult ratios compared to control sites. Over a 3-month period, desmosterol, a cholesterol precursor used as an indicator of DiazaCon effects, was not detectable in any black-tailed prairie dogs trapped at control sites, whereas elevated levels were detectable in 33 of 35 blood samples from black-tailed prairie dogs trapped at treated sites. Average cholesterol levels were lower in treated animals than in control animals. DiazaCon administration may be a useful tool to control populations of black-tailed prairie dogs, especially in light of the desire for conservation while still managing populations
Recommended from our members
GnRH Single-Injection Immunocontraception of Black-Tailed Deer
High deer densities increase vehicle collisions, damage agricultural crops, and amplify the spread of zoonotic and animal diseases, intensifying human-deer conflict. In addition, deer impact on forest vegetation can influence the distribution and abundance of other wildlife species. Greater demand for non-lethal means of animal damage control has led to an interest in contraception as a wildlife management tool. The development of a single-injection Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone (GnRH) contraceptive vaccine by NWRC reduces logistical limitations and cost of using immunocontraception as compared to a vaccine that requires two injections. This study assessed the efficacy of two different GnRH-KLH (keyhole limpet hemocyanin) vaccine designs in a single-injection study, to determine if Mycobacterium avium bacterium in the adjuvant is necessary for the success of a single-injection contraceptive vaccine. Forty-two captive female black-tailed deer were divided into 3 groups. Control deer were injected with saline solution, one treatment group received GonaConā¢ (a GnRH-KLH vaccine paired with AdjuVacā¢ adjuvant that contains a small quantity of killed M. avium bacterium), and the second treatment group received GnRH-KLH vaccine with DEAE-Dextran/oil as the adjuvant. Contraceptive success was evaluated by monitoring progesterone, pregnancy specific protein, antibodies to GnRH-KLH conjugate and to Johneās bacterium (M. avium), and actual pregnancy rates. Pregnancy rates were significantly different based on treatment (XĀ² = 9.389; df = 2; P = 0.009). Pregnancy rates in deer treated with GonaConā¢ were significantly reduced as compared to saline controls (P = 0.006), but there was no significant difference between GnRH-DD compared to saline (P = 0.297). Significant difference was found between GonaConā¢ and GnRH-DD (P = 0.055). Results suggest that M. avium in the AdjuVacā¢ adjuvant is essential for the success of the single-injection GnRH vaccine GonaConā¢. The development of a single-injection vaccine will increase the practicality and lower the cost of using immunocontraception as a tool to control deer populations
Recommended from our members
GnRH Single-Injection Immunocontraception of Black-Tailed Deer
High deer densities increase vehicle collisions, damage agricultural crops, and amplify the spread of zoonotic and animal diseases, intensifying human-deer conflict. In addition, deer impact on forest vegetation can influence the distribution and abundance of other wildlife species. Greater demand for non-lethal means of animal damage control has led to an interest in contraception as a wildlife management tool. The development of a single-injection Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone (GnRH) contraceptive vaccine by NWRC reduces logistical limitations and cost of using immunocontraception as compared to a vaccine that requires two injections. This study assessed the efficacy of two different GnRH-KLH (keyhole limpet hemocyanin) vaccine designs in a single-injection study, to determine if Mycobacterium avium bacterium in the adjuvant is necessary for the success of a single-injection contraceptive vaccine. Forty-two captive female black-tailed deer were divided into 3 groups. Control deer were injected with saline solution, one treatment group received GonaConā¢ (a GnRH-KLH vaccine paired with AdjuVacā¢ adjuvant that contains a small quantity of killed M. avium bacterium), and the second treatment group received GnRH-KLH vaccine with DEAE-Dextran/oil as the adjuvant. Contraceptive success was evaluated by monitoring progesterone, pregnancy specific protein, antibodies to GnRH-KLH conjugate and to Johneās bacterium (M. avium), and actual pregnancy rates. Pregnancy rates were significantly different based on treatment (XĀ² = 9.389; df = 2; P = 0.009). Pregnancy rates in deer treated with GonaConā¢ were significantly reduced as compared to saline controls (P = 0.006), but there was no significant difference between GnRH-DD compared to saline (P = 0.297). Significant difference was found between GonaConā¢ and GnRH-DD (P = 0.055). Results suggest that M. avium in the AdjuVacā¢ adjuvant is essential for the success of the single-injection GnRH vaccine GonaConā¢. The development of a single-injection vaccine will increase the practicality and lower the cost of using immunocontraception as a tool to control deer populations
Recommended from our members
When, Where and for What Wildlife Species Will Contraception Be a Useful Management Approach?
Despite the fact that many wildlife species have become overabundant both in North America and other parts of the world, the public is increasingly unwilling to manage wildlife populations with traditional techniques such as trapping or lethal methods. A growing segment of the public is urging the use of contraceptives to reduce populations of overabundant free-ranging wildlife. In spite of public pressure, the development and use of wildlife fertility control techniques has been slow to occur, partially because of the difficulty in developing efficient, cost-effective methods, and partially because of misconceptions about these potential techniques. The regulatory authority for contraceptives has recently been moved from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); the extensive EPA registration process is both rigorous and costly. Only one wildlife contraceptive is currently registered and available: the National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) worked to develop a product for reducing the hatchability of Canada goose eggs in cooperation with Innolytics, LLC, who holds the registration for OvoControlĀ® G. Development is continuing for additional experimental products. Another product developed by the NWRC, the single-shot GonaConā¢ Immunocontraceptive Vaccine is poised to begin the registration process. A third product, DiazaConā¢, will be soon tested for field efficacy and should begin the registration process within the year. No single wildlife contraceptive technique would be applicable for use in all wildlife species and for all management situations for a particular species. Differences in animal physiology and behavior, as well as differences in the ecology of the damage, affect which contraceptives will be most effective. Therefore, contraceptives with different modes of action will need to be developed for different species and uses. Wildlife contraceptives will not replace other management tools and will probably have a limited use, primarily in urban/suburban areas. In most species, wildlife contraceptives will not rapidly reduce populations. Populations of short-lived species such as rodents could be rapidly reduced with contraceptives; however, in long-lived species such as deer and horses, it would take years to reduce populations with fertility control alone, and damage caused by those species will continue to occur. This manuscript will discuss what contraceptive techniques are being developed by the USDA Wildlife Services NWRC, and when, where, and for what species they may be applicable
Recommended from our members
When, Where and for What Wildlife Species Will Contraception Be a Useful Management Approach?
Despite the fact that many wildlife species have become overabundant both in North America and other parts of the world, the public is increasingly unwilling to manage wildlife populations with traditional techniques such as trapping or lethal methods. A growing segment of the public is urging the use of contraceptives to reduce populations of overabundant free-ranging wildlife. In spite of public pressure, the development and use of wildlife fertility control techniques has been slow to occur, partially because of the difficulty in developing efficient, cost-effective methods, and partially because of misconceptions about these potential techniques. The regulatory authority for contraceptives has recently been moved from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); the extensive EPA registration process is both rigorous and costly. Only one wildlife contraceptive is currently registered and available: the National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) worked to develop a product for reducing the hatchability of Canada goose eggs in cooperation with Innolytics, LLC, who holds the registration for OvoControlĀ® G. Development is continuing for additional experimental products. Another product developed by the NWRC, the single-shot GonaConā¢ Immunocontraceptive Vaccine is poised to begin the registration process. A third product, DiazaConā¢, will be soon tested for field efficacy and should begin the registration process within the year. No single wildlife contraceptive technique would be applicable for use in all wildlife species and for all management situations for a particular species. Differences in animal physiology and behavior, as well as differences in the ecology of the damage, affect which contraceptives will be most effective. Therefore, contraceptives with different modes of action will need to be developed for different species and uses. Wildlife contraceptives will not replace other management tools and will probably have a limited use, primarily in urban/suburban areas. In most species, wildlife contraceptives will not rapidly reduce populations. Populations of short-lived species such as rodents could be rapidly reduced with contraceptives; however, in long-lived species such as deer and horses, it would take years to reduce populations with fertility control alone, and damage caused by those species will continue to occur. This manuscript will discuss what contraceptive techniques are being developed by the USDA Wildlife Services NWRC, and when, where, and for what species they may be applicable
Cultivating Skills for 21st Century Professionals: Development and Assessment of Process Skills in Ecology and Conservation Biology Students
Background/Question/Methods: Understanding and conserving the biosphere increasingly requires proficiency in skills including critical thinking, data analysis, oral communication, broad synthesis of information and teamwork across diverse groups. However, a real concern exists that US undergraduate science students do not currently develop these important process skills needed as professionals. First, our work asks āhow can we best āoperationalizeā teaching of process skills?ā Second, we must also discover how to evaluate development of specific process skills in our students. Such assessment allows us to determine if we have succeeded in teaching these skills with a gain or loss in content understanding. Here, we present the design and preliminary results of a recently launched experimental study aimed at these two tasks. The study brings together faculty from diverse institutions and professional conservation biologists to create and validate a set of instructional materials for process skills development. Following development, selected faculty will pilot teaching and assessment materials in diverse classroom settings.
Project participants, led by investigators from the American Museum of Natural Historyās Center for Biodiversity and Conservation, designed a multi-year research experiment in two stages: (1) development of instructional materials and associated assessment tools for three skills (i.e., critical thinking, oral communication, and data analysis), and (2) application of these materials in the classroom under two different instruction modalities, individual reflection versus intensive classroom discussion of the skill. These two modalities investigate student development of the targeted process skill and how intensity of a teaching intervention influences student success.
Results/Conclusions: For each selected skill, faculty participants and consultants developed two exercises that focused on ecology and conservation biology topics, either new or based on the modules produced by the Network of Conservation Educators and Practitioners (NCEP; http://ncep.amnh.org). Participants also created the following assessment tools: student self-assessment questionnaires focusing on their confidence for each skill, content gains assessments, and rubrics for assessing skill performance. These will be applied pre and post application of the instructional materials.
Our plans include validation and finalization of materials over summer 2011 and pilots in the classrooms occurring in at least 14 US institutions (including Puerto Rico) beginning in fall 2011. While the study focuses on these skills in the context of ecology and conservation biology, our approach and results should be of direct use for other related, integrative fields such as natural resource management, sustainable development studies, and public health. We welcome faculty input and interest in the project