scholarly journals Adaptation of an artificial bait to an automated aerial delivery system for landscape-scale brown treesnake suppression

Author(s):  
Rafael A. Garcia ◽  
Thomas W. McAuliffe ◽  
Lorelie P. Bumanlag ◽  
Shane R. Siers ◽  
Bruce A. Kimball
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thea A. J. Wingfield ◽  
Neil Macdonald ◽  
Kimberley Peters ◽  
Jack Spees

Abstract. Natural Flood Management (NFM) is the name given to Nature Based Solutions (NBS) for Flood Management in the UK. It is a holistic flood management technique that employs natural hydrological processes, through the instillation of interventions, to slow the flow of water, creating a landscape scale flood management system. Despite widespread interest and supporting policy from governments and non-profit organisations NFM, as yet, has not been widely adopted as a mainstream flood management technique. A small number of academic studies examining perceived barriers to NFM adoption have identified a variety of individual factors as being responsible. It is commonly accepted that flood risk management broadly, and NFM specifically, are complex, challenges of interacting physical and human parameters and that academic, institutional and policy divisions are rarely sympathetic to embracing these complexities. A transdisciplinary problem framing study in conjunction with professionals experienced in the delivery of NFM projects in the UK aimed to capture these multifaceted parameters of flood management and strategic delivery at a landscape scale using Group Concept Mapping, a systems approach to identify conceptual convergence. This policy-delivery impasse was further explored by quantifying the relative importance of individual barriers and conceptual groupings from the perspective of two different practitioner groups (flood risk managers and conservation practitioners). The results demonstrate that the NFM delivery system can be grouped into seven interacting elements: policy and regulation, politics, public perception, cross-cutting issues, funding, technical knowledge and evidence, of which each have a varying number of barriers that limit NFM uptake. Opinions differs as to the importance of these individual barriers, however when considering the system broadly we identify that the institutional and social barriers are perceived as the most important, whilst technical knowledge and evidence are the areas of least concern. This paper aims to promote NBS flood management delivery in the UK and globally by generating, structuring and representing the multifaceted and multilevel NFM delivery system at a local level to evidence adaptive decision making at a regional, national and global level. Through problem structuring and an increased understanding and awareness of the structure and network of linking elements and perceived differences of practitioner groups that influence the system of delivery, steps can be taken towards solutions that are socially, scientifically and practically robust.


2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (12) ◽  
pp. 6239-6259
Author(s):  
Thea Wingfield ◽  
Neil Macdonald ◽  
Kimberley Peters ◽  
Jack Spees

Abstract. Natural flood management (NFM) is the name given to nature-based solutions (NBS) for flood management in the UK. It is a holistic flood management technique that employs natural hydrological processes, through the installation of interventions, to slow the flow of water, creating a landscape-scale flood management system. Despite widespread interest and supporting policy from governments and non-profit organisations, NFM, as yet, has not been widely adopted as a mainstream flood management technique. A small number of academic studies examining perceived barriers to NFM adoption have identified a variety of individual factors as being responsible. It is commonly accepted that flood risk management broadly, and NFM specifically, are complex, challenges of interacting physical and human parameters, and that academic, institutional and policy divisions are rarely sympathetic to embracing these complexities. A transdisciplinary problem-framing study in conjunction with professionals experienced in the delivery of NFM projects in the UK aimed to capture these multifaceted parameters of flood management and strategic delivery at a landscape scale using group concept mapping, a systems approach to identify conceptual convergence. This policy-delivery impasse was further explored by quantifying the relative importance of individual barriers and conceptual groupings from the perspective of two different practitioner groups (flood risk managers and conservation practitioners). The results demonstrate that the NFM delivery system can be grouped into seven interacting elements, policy and regulation, politics, public perception, cross-cutting issues, funding, technical knowledge and evidence, of which each has a varying number of barriers that limit NFM uptake. Opinions differ as to the importance of these individual barriers; however, when considering the system broadly we identify that the institutional and social barriers are perceived as the most important, whilst technical knowledge and evidence are the areas of least concern. This paper aims to promote NBS flood management delivery in the UK and globally by generating, structuring and representing the multifaceted and multilevel NFM delivery system at a local level to evidence adaptive decision making at regional, national and global levels. Through problem structuring and an increased understanding and awareness of the structure and network of linking elements and perceived differences of practitioner groups that influence the system of delivery, steps can be taken towards solutions that are socially, scientifically and practically robust.


2006 ◽  
Vol 175 (4S) ◽  
pp. 323-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Dall'era ◽  
Sweaty Koul ◽  
Jesse Mills ◽  
Jeremy Myers ◽  
Randall B. Meacham ◽  
...  

VASA ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 452-461 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klaus Amendt ◽  
Ulrich Beschorner ◽  
Matthias Waliszewski ◽  
Martin Sigl ◽  
Ralf Langhoff ◽  
...  

Abstract. Background: The purpose of this observational study is to report the six-month clinical outcomes with a new multiple stent delivery system in patients with femoro-popliteal lesions. Patients and methods: The LOCOMOTIVE study is an observational multicentre study with a primary endpoint target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate at six months. Femoro-popliteal lesions were prepared with uncoated and/or paclitaxel-coated peripheral balloon catheters. When flow limiting dissections, elastic recoil or recoil due to calcification required stenting, up to six short stents per delivery device, each 13 mm in length, were implanted. Sonographic follow-ups and clinical assessments were scheduled at six months. Results: For this first analysis, a total of 75 patients 72.9 ± 9.2 years of age were enrolled. The majority of the 176 individually treated lesions were in the superficial femoral artery (76.2 %, 134/176) whereas the rate of TASC C/D amounted to 51.1 % (90/176). The total lesion length was 14.5 ± 9.0 cm with reference vessel diameters of 5.6 ± 0.7 mm. Overall 47 ± 18 % of lesion lengths could be saved from stenting. At six months, the patency was 90.7 % (68/75) and all-cause TLR rates were 5.3 % (4/75) in the overall cohort. Conclusions: The first clinical experience at six months suggests that the MSDS strategy was safe and effective to treat femoro-popliteal lesions of considerable length (14.5 ± 9.0 cm). Almost half of the lesion length could be saved from stenting while patency was high and TLR rates were acceptably low.


1993 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 270-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff Bingaman ◽  
Robert G. Frank ◽  
Carrie L. Billy

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document