Testing of text-pages

We believe that many local communities around the world are fundamentally and inextricably embedded within the ecosystems of their area. For larger towns and cities, there is a greater degree of separation between natural ecosystems, wildlife, and humans. It is easy to sit in a city, well-removed from the realities of rural subsistence communities, and pundit for animal rights over the survival needs of communities around the world. But when it comes to smaller local towns, villages, homesteads, or individual subsistence farmers or fishers, the separation between human and nature decreases drastically. Many communities around the world rely directly on local ecosystems and the fauna and flora they provide in order to survive.

When it comes to protecting and improving local ecosystems, their biodiversity, and their populations, the humans who interact with those ecosystems cannot be excluded. If local communities, who may have relied on their local ecosystems for many generations, are excluded from accessing those resources, this could work against conservation efforts. It could lead to damaged communal livelihoods, population migration, or it could increase the likelihood of poaching for subsistence.

At all of our conservation bases around the world, whether they be terrestrial, coastal, or marine conservation bases, we always involve the local communities in the conservation work. We do so by providing educational workshops that aim to improve understanding of local species and ecosystems, and manners of sustainable interaction and consumption.

Our aim is to improve local passion and commitment towards their own ecosystems, and give them ways to better manage their own natural resources. We do this collaboratively with local community members, so that future generations can continue to interact and consume from their local ecosystems and maintain their traditional way of life.

We don’t condone or offer participants the opportunity to engage in medical veterinary procedures due to our “first, do no harm policy.” Read more here.

A: They should not.

Reason: Firstly, it can be dangerous to get close to wild animals. Both for the human and for the animal. The wild animal could injure the person and both animal and human could contact diseases spread through the water, air or by touch. In addition, disturbing the animal can interrupt its natural behaviour. If enough visitors are allowed to do this it can put the animal under threat. For example, whales and sea turtles might be disturbed by divers coming to close to them, stopping them from eating, nesting, or mating, and forcing them to look for new living grounds. Finally, if visitors are conducting conservation research, getting too close to the animal; can skew research data as the animal will be behaving as it would if it is disturbed by a natural threat.

A: The organisation should.

Reason: Many visitors to protected areas do not realise how some of their habits might harm the beautiful environment they have come to see. Organisations that promote the protection of these areas should provide visitors with a series of guidelines before they enter the reserve. This might involve information about the impact of littering and plastic pollution, touching and removing certain plant and animal species, and keeping one’s distance from local wildlife species.

A: They should.

Reason: Long-term, sustainable conservation efforts can only be effective if the initiatives for projecting local wildlife and the environment is locally led. Any organisation that has conservation as one of its main goals should be focusing on how to engage the local community with these efforts. This does not only involve creating awareness around why it is important to preserve environments and species and how to achieve this, but should also focus on other sustainable development efforts like childhood education and adult vocational training, to support local economic growth.