skip to main |
skip to sidebar
When clearing ground for an equestrian facility site in a wooded area, or when horses are allowed to graze in a wooded area, care must be taken to eliminate poisonous plants that are harmful to the residing horses. While horses tend to avoid toxic plants because of their taste, they can still be affected by foraging, particularly if in sparse areas or in times of drought.
Cornell University lists the following species of plants that are of particular concern to horse owners:
Red Maple, Fiddleneck, Locoweed, Yellow Star Thistle, Crown Vetch, Jimsonweed, Horsetail, Buckwheat, St. John's Wort, Mountain Laurel, Sensitive Fern, Black Cherry, Bitter Cherry, Choke Cherry, Pin Cherry, Bracken, Fern Oaks, Rhubarb, Rhododendron, Castor Bean, Black Locust, Grounsels, Common Nightshade, Black Nightshade, Horse Nettle, Buffalo Bur, Potato Sorghum or Milo, Sudan Grass, Johnson Grass and Yew, as well as molds of various kinds in various feeds.
In the case of Yews and Hemlocks, whether the entire plant or just a few clippings, a small amount can kill a horse within hours as a result of heart failure. The list above is by no means all inclusive and there are a number of other toxic plants that can be researched on the internet.
Equestrian landscape architecture and site planning must take this factor into account to assure that landscapers eliminate dangerous plants during installation. The Landscape Architect should walk the planned site together with the landscape installer and check for dangerous plants and mark them for elimination.
In specifying proposed planting locations for the equestrian site, the landscape architect must assure that toxic plants are not placed in a position where horses can come into contact with them.
Landscape Architects are required to be licensed by the State in which they practice and are usually members of the American Society of Landscape Architects, ASLA. Landscape architecture encompasses the analysis, planning, design, management and stewardship of the natural and built environments. The national professional association is the American Society of Landscape Architects, based in Washington. ASLA full members have graduated from an accredited landscape architecture program, have obtained 7 years of education and/or professional experience and are state licensed. In Michigan, as well as all other States, a three (3) day LARE examination administered by the Council of Landscape Architectural Registration Boards is required to be passed for state licensure.
Landscape designers do not have these professional credentials. Many state and local governments require designs to be stamped with a state registered Landscape Architect's seal.
As a registered landscape architect in the State of Michigan and principle architect with Sexton Ennett Design, LC, a landscape architectural firm in southeast Michigan, I am particularly aware of poisonous plants. See: http://www.sexton-ennett.com
I am also a breeder of champion Oldenburg warm blood sport horses and am sensitive to the issues of poisonous plants related to equestrian facilities. See:
http://www.markimfarms.com
Enjoy your equestrian activities while assuring protection of the health of your horses. One ounce of prevention is all it takes. ###
Author: Kimberley Ennett, MLA, ASLA
more »
The scenario:
A newlywed couple moves into their new home. After a couple of months, they realize that they have many more garbage bags than they need. However, they have not bought any garbage bags since they got married. Where did all of the garbage bags come from?
Your mission:
See how fast you can arrive at the correct solution by using the following clues: 1) The garbage bags were not a wedding gift 2) The couple did not bring any garbage bags with them when they moved 3) The bags were not in the couple's new home when they arrived 4) The fact that the two people are newlyweds is irrelevant 5) The type of home that the couple moved into is irrelevant 6) The bags were made of plastic 7) People gave the bags to the couple, but 8) The bags were not any type of gift 9) The bags are not "traditional" garbage bags 10) The bags came in many colors.
The solution:
Have you figured out the solution yet? The garbage bags are actually plastic bags from grocery and other types of stores! The couple only has small garbage cans in their home, and the plastic bags fit perfectly inside of them. Plus, the handles make them very extremely easy to tie shut when they become full. The trash cans need to be emptied more often than larger cans would, but that small inconvenience is worth the savings. Yearly garbage bag expenses: $0.00!
In addition to the monetary reasons, reusing grocery bags is a simple way to recycle and eliminate the waste created by throwing away the plastic bags inside of another garbage bag. Once you have a good supply of plastic bags, consider taking an empty canvas bag or backpack with you to the grocery store. Check the bag with a store employee when you enter so that no one thinks that you are shoplifting. Then, when you are done shopping, skip getting a new bag and load your purchases into your own reusable bag instead.
A few other super-easy ways to save money and recycle:
Save scrap paper. Save any papers that have nothing on the back or large blank spaces. Advertising flyers, old work papers and school papers all work well. You can cut the pages into smaller pieces if they would be more convenient for you. Put the paper in a stack or a box with a pen nearby, and you'll never have to scramble when you need to jot down something. Spots near the base of your house phone or beside the computer are both great locations.
Save sturdy boxes from food, electronics, mailers, etc. Cover them with the Sunday comics or some previously-used wrapping paper. Label each box with a marker and use as stackable storage for recipes, comic books or just about anything else.
Save large, empty plastic soda and juice bottles. Fill them with water, and store in your freezer. Having less open space in your freezer will help it run more efficiently. And when you need more room in the freezer, simply take out one of the bottles of ice!
Save torn and worn out clothing. Tear or cut them into pieces and use as rags for cleaning and dusting.
Steve is a writer for the GrandMatrix website. Visit and grab hundreds of free game downloads, including classics, puzzles and strategy to the latest action, driving and RPG games.
Author: Steve Hall
more »
Polar Bears, the Rulers of the Arctic North
The polar bears (Thalarctos maritimus) live in the Arctic regions of the north near open water where they can find their main source of food which are seals. These bears are huge with adults at 7 to 8 ½ feet tall and up to 1,600 pounds. Polar bears are white to creamy white all year round which gives them excellent camouflage against the Arctic snow when hunting. Along with the Arctic fox, the polar bear is the most northerly located land mammal on earth.
Unlike other species of bears, polar bears have longer necks and smaller heads making them appear more streamlined. Despite their large sizes, they are incredibly fast being able to run up to 25 miles per hour. At speeds like this, a polar bear can outrun a reindeer. They are also excellent swimmers being able to swim at about 3 miles per hour but for considerable distances.
During winters, they spend most of their time on the ice floes hunting seals. Polar bears have rough, leathery pads on the bottoms of their feet to maintain footholds on slippery ice surfaces. Their adaptation to the cold Arctic waters is even more impressive. Their thick coats of fur traps a deep layer of insulating air around their bodies. An inner layer of fur is so compact that it is almost impossible to wet it. An outer layer of long guard hairs mat together in the water which forms another layer over the inner layer. After a polar bear leaves the water, it simply shakes its body which results in most of the water being thrown right off leaving the bear almost dry. These protective layers of fur ensure that the polar bear’s skin is kept dry most of the time, even while in the Arctic waters.
Polar bears hunt seals by waiting for seals to come through holes in the ice to breathe. They also stalk their prey utilizing their white camouflage abilities against the mounds of ice. Sometimes polar bears have been known to crawl on their bellies until they are close enough to rush their prey, particularly if no cover is available. Besides seals, polar bears will eat Arctic foxes, birds, baby walruses and even man if they are extremely hungry.
Males and females stay apart for most of the year except during the summer mating season. Females tend to breed only every other year and when they do, usually 1 to 4 cubs are born during March to April. The polar bear cubs stay with their mothers for 1 to 2 years. The life span of polar bears can be up to 34 years.
The Inuit hunt polar bears for their fat, tendons and fur. Scientists say that climate changes have been reducing the ice floes in the Arctic which has disrupted the polar bear’s feeding grounds and migration patterns. There are estimates of about 22,000 to 25,000 polar bears left in the world with 60 percent of them in the Canadian Arctic region. Their populations are thought to be stable for now but some speculate that the species is at risk. Some think that if climate changes continue at its present rate and if worldwide hunting is not adequately
controlled, polar bears could face extinction in about 100 years. There is presently much debate on adjusting annual hunting quotas of polar bears, even for Inuit hunters, to further help protect these great bears.
Polar bears have become the most popular symbol of the Arctic north with representations used in everything from soft drink commercials to corporate logos of northern based companies including Canadian North airlines. Nunavut even has their license plates cut in the shape of a polar bear. Tourists can see polar bears in the wild through unique tours on specially designed tundra buggies in Churchill, Manitoba Canada. It’s also not surprising that polar bears are some of the most sought after Inuit art sculptures. Polar bears are definitely the rulers of the Arctic north.
Clint Leung is owner of Free Spirit Gallery (http://www.FreeSpiritGallery.ca) , an online gallery specializing in Inuit Eskimo and Northwest Native American art including carvings, sculpture and prints. Free Spirit Gallery has numerous information resource articles with photos of authentic Inuit and Native Indian art as well as free eCards.
Author: Clint Leung
more »
Bottled water just looks so refreshing on the supermarket shelves, and huge quantities are sold. But, are we deluding ourselves to think that it is better than tap-water, and what are the health and environmental consequences?
I am sure that when most of us pick up a bottle of water in the supermarket we think that we are buying a purer and healthier product than we would be getting if we drank from the tap. But, is that really true, or are we all falling for the perception of superior health and purity which the bottled spring-water marketers would like us to believe?
A group of experts in the UK thinks that EU tap-water is best. They have gone on record to point out that tap-water in European Union, where the drinking water supplied by our water utility companies is all regulated under the same very high standards set by EU Directives, is better monitored and regulated than bottled water, and is likely to be better for you.
While it is true that EU Regulations do now also set quality standards for all bottled water, there are still no rigorous labelling requirements. Bottled water labelling is insufficent to enable people to judge for themselves from a standardised set of information, whether the bottle they drink is either purer or less so than tap water, or indeed how it compares with other similar products.
Also, when it comes to considering purity it should be noted that the purest water is distilled water, but nobody suggests that distilled water is the healthiest. When compiling the EU Drinking Water standards this was recognised, and as a result water sources which do not, are improved. For example, for healthier living the water we drink should contain a certain amount of calcium, so very “soft” waters are improved during the treatment stage by the addition of recognised healthy minimum quantities of calcium, from natural sources.
Not only is potable water from the tap subject to stringent quality controls, anyone with internet access can very quickly and simply view information of the current quality their supply, including actual test data. They can see, for example, bacteriological and chemical content, and all this is available completely free of charge at the UK Drinking Water Inspectorate website (www.dwi.gov.uk).
Bottled water is also incredibly expensive. It is on average 500 times more expensive than drinking water. Nevertheless, we are buying it in huge amounts, and it is quite expensive to produce when you consider that the most highly promoted and most popular brands in the UK are French imports, entailing all the transport costs that this implies.
To quote the UK's Executive Director of the Chartered Institute of Water and Environmental Management (CIWM):-
“Branding and bottling of water where there already exists a wholesome* and safe supply of mains drinking water cannot be seen as a sustainable use of natural resources, and adds to the over-all levels of waste and pollution to be managed in modern society”.
Finally, to demonstrate the cost of bottled water, we have it from a good source that in 2004 the House of Commons spent over £11,000 (GBP) or $19,000 (US Dollars), on an amount which, if tap water, would have cost just £25 (GBP) or $44 (US Dollars).
Author: Steve Last
more »
More than 80% civil engineers are now not only convinced that Climate Change is taking place: They also claim to be worried about it , according to a poll of 519 Chartered UK Civil Engineers.
The poll was carried out by the New Civil Engineer, the official weekly magazine of the profession, which is sent out to all members of the Institution of Civil Engineers. It was published in the 19 January 2006 edition.
What is more striking is that 56% said that they were prepared to change their lifestyles to help cut Britain’s energy consumption, and 51% of those that expressed an opinion say that they would be prepared to alter their lifestyles to reduce the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions, but would only do so - probably quite pragmatically and reasonably - if pushed to so do by taxation or legislation to take these steps. Also, in the response to these questions a surprisingly large percentage actually said they would be prepared to change their lifestyle “a lot”.
Subsequent editions have not raised any comment from the members in the letter page or the editorial. So we can assume that acceptance of anthropomorphic Climate Change in the profession is mainstream and uncontested.
The poll was actually carried out to gauge the opinions of the profession on the nuclear debate currently underway; a debate which has been given additional momentum by Dr Lovelock’s view that global warming effects are so severe, and so inevitable now, that unless the rate of carbon emissions are reduced in less time than is available for normal political and economic action, there will be no means by which the inevitable drift toward catastrophe of Climate Change can be halted.
Furthermore, Porfessor Lovelock (originator of the Gaia Theory of natural systems) says that the UK has no choice but to go-nuclear again in a big way, especially since most of the 21% of our power which is at present generated by nuclear power stations is soon to be lost when they are closed, due to ageing.
In fact, unless these stations are refurbished soon to extend their lives, only 7% of our power will be generated from nuclear by 2013, and we will have to build new nuclear plants just to avoid a significant demand for alternative forms of generation, which can only be fully satisfied from non-renewable (fossil fuel) sources, and thereby raising our national carbon dioxide emissions.
Nuclear power is relatively carbon neutral, but all new nuclear installations have been halted for the past 15 years or so in the UK, due to:
* public hostility to the acceptance of the risk of nuclear incidents, * the inability of the UK government to solve the problem of nuclear waste disposal,
* and concerns about nuclear proliferation should the UK be shown to be encouraging the use of nuclear at home when maintaining a policy that the developing nations should not themselves “Go nuclear”.
Therefore, Dr Lovelock has proposed that dangerous or not, the UK should build more nuclear power plants, and this has encouraged government and professionals alike to reopen the nuclear debate. This debate has now started, and early indications are that the civil engineers involved in much of the energy strategy work and opinion-forming within government will be so concerned about carbon dioxide emissions that all other concerns about nuclear power will be pushed aside. Such risks may be seen as “risks to be managed”
and risk taking of this magnitude, as being a reasonable strategy, when faced by the alternative threat of global catastrophe.
However, whatever one’s view may be on the nuclear power debate, the groundswell of opinion is changing at least among this group of professionals. Although one poll can never be considered conclusive it shows that these professionals at least, comprise a constituency of opinion which, if in time this was repeated across the community, would begin to sway the government toward measures which might bring real change in the future.
Author: Steve Last
more »
According to the Guardian (Monday March 27, 2006) the overwhelming majority of leaders at last week's European Union summit, including Tony Blair, strongly backed a revival of nuclear power as the answer to Europe's growing dependence on overseas supplies and to combat climate change. Nuclear power plants currently provide about 17 percent of the world's electricity, yet how much of the world’s current and future environmental problems does Nuclear Power contribute to? Nuclear power has both powerful enemies and friends but does the bottom line come down to costs? The December 2005 World Nuclear Association report The New Economics of Nuclear Power states that “Nuclear power is cost competitive with other forms of electricity generation, except where there is direct access to low-cost fossil fuels”. The need for cheap energy can not be argued when every week price increases are announced from all the gas and electricity suppliers in the UK. The Ukraine recently had their gas supply stopped by Russia, how long is it before this happens to the UK? Do we not need to be self-sufficient when it comes to the generation of power? Can renewable energy not begin to take a larger role in this supply? See GuideMeGreen’s green directory for renewable energy companies and recycled products in the UK.
The report goes on to say that fuel costs for nuclear plants are a minor proportion of total generating costs, though capital costs are greater than those for coal-fired plants. At the NIA 2006 launch of the Commission’s position paper on the role of nuclear it confirmed “that nuclear is a low carbon technology with an impressive safety record in the UK” and “Nuclear could generate large quantities of electricity, contribute to stabilising CO2 emissions and add to the diversity of the UK’s energy supply.” While we have an impressive record of safety in the UK, Chernobyl has proved that a nuclear accident thousands of miles away can effect the UK for decades to come. The Tsunami also caused problems at Nuclear Power plants around Asia as the plants are built near the sea due to the large amount of water needed to cool the rectors.
Author: David Oglaza
more »
Methane is a gas found on most planets with atmospheres. In limited amounts, it isn’t a particularly problematic gas. In larger amounts, however, it can become a regulator of atmosphere temperatures.
Methane and Potential Impacts on Global Warming
Methane is fairly common gas found in nature. It is produced from both natural elements of the biomass cycle and artificial industrial sources. Methane is classified as a greenhouse gas and is believed to contribute to global warming.
Methane (CH4) is a problematic greenhouse gas for a variety of reasons. First, it has a long life once it is in the atmosphere, to wit, it will remain suspended in the upper atmosphere anywhere from nine to 15 years depending on climatic conditions. Second, methane is much more lethal when it comes to trapping heat in the atmosphere, being as much as 20 times better at doing the job than the much discussed carbon dioxide.
The unique chemical makeup of Methane is what makes it a problem. Once it gets situated in the upper atmosphere, it acts as a sponge for infrared radiation being reflected from the planet towards space. By doing so, it acts as a gas coat around the planet, heating us up as time passes. Since we can count on it sitting in the atmosphere for roughly 10 years, massive accumulations of methane can have a devastating impact over time.
There is nothing we can do to stop natural methane sources. On the industrial side, however, there are a lot of areas that can be addressed. The production of methane through our actions is primarily through natural gas, petroleum, agricultural, coal mining, waste water reclaiming and landfill systems. All produce methane to a certain degree, some on a very large scale.
Modifying our behavior on methane production is actually a win-win situation. Unlike carbon dioxide, methane can be used as an energy source in and of itself. The technology is complex and the gas can be unstable, but we have certainly accomplished far more difficult tasks. The bigger point is that we don’t have to stop any activity that produces methane, just modify such activities to make use of the methane.
Global warming is a controversial topic. There is little doubt it is occurring. The real question is what it will mean as temperatures increase. Nobody really seems to know. What is clear is our current climatic situation is fairly calm. If you agree, why risk moving to a more chaotic one?
Author: Solar Rick
more »
For most of us, housework is a necessary evil. Not something we enjoy doing very much, rather a thing that brings pleasant results. But what if housework was something that we needed to do in order to maintain our health? For people who suffer from allergies, housework is just that, and so the right vacuum cleaner can be the difference between maintaining health and losing it.
In our modern world, we are exposed to an increasing number of allergens, substances that can cause enormous irritation to those predisposed to sensitivity to them. While allergies might easily be included in the list on non-life threatening conditions, anyone who has endured an allergic reaction for any period of time can testify to the fact that nothing can rob you of your enthusiasm for life than what might, in the grand scheme of things, be inconsequential reactions. And, in fact, allergies can sometimes traverse boundaries, becoming potentially lethal, particularly to the elderly and infirm, or the very young. So any device that can help allergy sufferers fight the good fight is not to be taken lightly.
The right vacuum cleaner can make the world of difference in the fight against allergens in your home. Whether it is pet hair or dust mites that generates an allergic reaction in you or one of your family members, choosing a vacuum cleaner with this in mind can help you gain control over your environment and ease the symptoms of the sufferer a great deal.
The most effective allergy control vacuum cleaners employ a technology known as HEPA, or high efficiency particulate arresting. Developed by the government in the 1950s to help protect those in the services against radioactive particles, the proponents of this technology claim that it can remove 99.7 percent of particles from the air when used in air purifiers. Translated into the vacuum cleaner, this technology helps remove all of the allergy causing substances that find rest on your carpets and upholstery, creating a home environment that is safer for the allergy sufferer in your home.
For those who suffer from upsetting allergies, an allergy fighting vacuum cleaner is just what the doctor ordered. So do some prescription housework – your family’s health will thank you for it. Dave is the owner of http://vacuum-cups.info a website providing information on vacuum cleaners.
Author: ted belfour
more »
The world is a very noisy place with loud, intermittent sounds and constant, droning noises – noise reduction headphones can help you get a little peace amongst the distractions of everyday life. Headphones can block out the myriad of sounds that occur in a variety of setting and are helpful to many different people.
Sleeping – If you have trouble sleeping, noise reduction headphones may aid you in getting some rest. Barking dogs, traffic, and awake family members can contribute to sleepless nights, and for those who are sensitive to noise when they're trying to sleep, noise reduction headphones create a sound-free environment so they can rest.
Playing Music – Musicians often use noise reduction headphones to help them block out sounds that may interfere with them hearing their instrument. Once the background noise is blocked, they are free to concentrate purely on the sounds they are making rather than the sounds around them. This creates an environment of total immersion into their music and allows them to perfect their work without being in a studio.
Autistic Students – Noise reduction headphones can also be used in the classroom to help autistic children. Often classroom environments can be distracting to children with autism. Headphones for the children help teachers instruct each student individually so others aren’t confused or distracted by the instructions for the other students.
Studying – Noise reduction headphones are very useful in situations where you need peace and quiet but can't always control the environment. Students who are studying may find noise reduction headphones helpful in blocking out the distracting sounds around them. Headphones create a peaceful world in which they can focus on their work, rather than environmental noises or the sounds of others.
Working – If you work in a cubical or an open-plan office but find yourself regularly distracted by people walking by, phones ringing, others talking, and the general chaos that can be office life, noise reduction headphones can make a difference. They can help you focus on the task at hand rather than everything going on around you which can boost your productivity and the quality of your work.
Noisy Neighbors – Living in an apartment building, condo or townhouse may include noisy neighbors. Depending on the thickness of your walls and ceiling, you may hear your neighbors walking around above, or hear their music or talking. Noise reduction headphones can block these sounds so you can enjoy being at home, even if the neighbors are loud.
These are only a few examples of the sorts of noise disturbances you may come across in daily life. Where once you had no choice but to be distracted, noise reduction headphones put you in control. Never again do you have to experience a sleepless night or a ruined project. Noise reduction headphones can be used to block out the noises around you: voices, car engines, train noises, barking dogs, loud offices, airplane engine noise, city sounds, loud neighbors, etc. Lee Blue is a musician and home studio recording artist; he uses Extreme Isolation headphones in his recording studio and his office to block out environmental distractions. Learn more about noise reduction headphones. Web: http://www.quietheadphones.com/
Author: Paul Smith
more »
There are always huge debates as to whether the culling of elephant is ethical or not. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and in my opinion and many others, it MUST be done. If we don’t cull we will still lose many 1000’s of elephants as well as many other different species of game along with them in the future. The Kruger National Park is a massive 20 000 square kilometres surrounded by a fence and because of this fence it is not a 100% natural environment which as a result requires grooming such as culling, stocking up of rare animal species from other reserves and controlled fires to keep it as natural as possible.
The Problem
150 years ago there were no fences dividing countries which prevent the natural movement of game forced by the change in seasons. Many animals migrating in search of food and or water died, especially old, weak and injured individuals, possibly as a result of not reaching their destinations on time. This would help control the numbers of many game species, leaving only the strong and healthy to survive. With the development of conservation areas such as the Kruger National Park, with all its man-made dams and abundance of thick vegetation, there is very rarely a shortage of food or water for game resulting in the massive increase in the elephant population. It’s hard to believe that the Kruger national Parks’ elephant population was almost totally wiped out just 100 years ago due to excessive hunting and poaching and today it sits on about 12 000, which is 4 500 above the natural carrying capacity with the population increasing close to 3% every year! If populations get too high, the impact on vegetation will be devastating as elephants require huge amounts of food to sustain their large bodies along with their weak digestive systems. Large bulls will eat as much as 250 kg of vegetation and drink up to 180 litres of water every day!
Of all the African herbivores the elephant has the most varied diet in terms of different plant species, eating almost every plant if finds and who knows, with too many elephant how many plant species may be lost forever. The elephants’ favourite food is grass. If an area is over-populated, in time the ground will be totally stripped of all grass which may result in serous erosion as the root systems of the grasses would normally hold the soil together. Areas that have been severely over-grazed and eroded may take many years to recover back to a suitable state and in some cases never recover. Grazing animals such as wildebeest, zebra, white rhino and hippopotamus will eventually die off if there is no grass to eat or nowhere else to find more. When all the grass has been eaten, the elephant then concentrate more on feeding off trees and shrubs. It’s not just the leaves they eat but also the roots and bark of certain trees. They uproot trees, strip off bark and before we know it there are 1000’s of dead trees as far as the eye can see. So what use to be lush thick vegetation with allsorts of beautiful trees and shrubs now looks like a desert with lots of sand, heavily eroded areas, tree stumps and the bones of all the animals that have now died of starvation, all of this as a result of nothing been done to properly solve the over-population of elephant.
Solutions?
Relocation of elephants to other game reserves:
Sounds good but it only helps temporarily as eventually space in these reserves runs out and the cost of moving them becomes more expensive as they have to be moved even further away to new areas. With over 300 elephant born into the Kruger National Park every year you can imagine the cost of moving 300 every year just to keep the population constant at 12 000. Helicopters, pilots, vets, sedative drugs, transportation trucks, fuel, legal papers, all of this costs a lot when moving elephants to other game reserves or countries.
Female Contraception:
The female elephants are given a contraceptive injection which is highly effective but needs to be administered roughly every 6 months to keep working. Not all females are given the contraceptive which still allows the births of a few calves into the herds. This exercise is extremely expensive especially with large populations where 1000’s of females are given the injection every 6 months. The population growth slows down but still doesn’t solve the over-population problem.
Cropping:
Cropping is the process where small amounts of game are shot over a long period of time. An example of this would be taking out say 5 or 10 animals per week over a period of a couple months. Cropping works but has the down side that the visibility may be poor in the summer and early winter months, making it very difficult when shooting on the ground or from helicopters.
Culling is the process whereby a fairly large amount of animals are shot within a short period of time, for example; shooting say 200 elephants in the space of 3 weeks. This may come across a very cruel, but to date has been the only real long term effective method used. Culling operations are done in the shortest possible time to lessen the stress on the animals been shot. Before culling was put to an end in 1997 the Kruger had a very healthy population of elephant. The tusks of culled animals were stored in safe warehouses or often burnt and much of the meat was processed for tin food which was given to poor communities and used by staff members of the park. Hyenas, jackals, vultures and many other scavenging animals made sure to clean up the rest of any carcasses left behind.
For now the game reserves that can afford it are using female contraception and relocating elephants. There are ongoing talks about bringing back culling but still no change. One day in the future ‘they’ will realise that culling is the answer but by that time it will be too late. If only ‘they’ would fully understand.
I am an ex-game ranger from South Africa. I have an awesome blog packed with information on all sorts of wildlife in Africa. Visit my Blog to find out more: www.southafrican-wildlife.blogspot.com
Author: David Meisel
more »
When clearing ground for an equestrian facility site in a wooded area, or when horses are allowed to graze in a wooded area, care must be taken to eliminate poisonous plants that are harmful to the residing horses. While horses tend to avoid toxic plants because of their taste, they can still be affected by foraging, particularly if in sparse areas or in times of drought.
Posts
