Talk:Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Zoo, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to zoos, aquaria, and aviaries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ZooWikipedia:WikiProject ZooTemplate:WikiProject ZooZoo articles

Jersey Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jersey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jersey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JerseyWikipedia:WikiProject JerseyTemplate:WikiProject JerseyJersey articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Conservation set-backs" section

This section of the Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust page is potentially libelous, and based on only one of several possible interpretations of a genetic analysis of various strains of Chytrid.

Whilst it is acknowledged that Durrell may have accidentally introduced the pathogen, it occurred in a time-period previous to awareness of Chytridiomycosis as the significant threat that was to subsequently develop. It is still erroneous to state that 'the principle driver of the mass extinction crisis in amphibians', as the article states. Habitat loss remains the greatest extinction pressure on amphibians as a taxon.

Further to this, semantically, the opening statement; "The Trust has endangered the Mallorcan midwife toad" is misleading. The species was endangered before the onset of Chytridiomycosis, due to predation by the invasive, non-native viperene snake, competition with Perez's frog and the increasing methods of water resource management by humans (damming, canals etc). This necessitated the reintroduction effort in the first place, whereas the opening statement could be misinterpreted to imply that Alytes muletensis is endangered because of Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust. See IUCN red list entry for reference.

I'd like to suggest that this section be removed, at least temporarily, until someone unaffiliated either way can reword it to reflect the above concerns. Badongo Gorillini (talk) 12:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is the citation for that information... Invasive pathogens threaten species recovery programs

But, we can only read the summary there.

One of the authors works for Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, Department of Anthropology, Marlowe Building, University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent CT2 7NR, UK.

I have no idea, if it is accurate or not, but it isn't libelous because libel only applies to living people, not organisations. Danrok (talk) 17:04, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]