Fertility control in wildlife: humans as a model
Barfield JP, Nieschlag E, Cooper TG.
Institute of Reproductive Medicine,
University of Münster,
D-48129 Münster, Germany.
Contraception. 2006 Jan;73(1):6-22.
ABSTRACTIn a time of accelerated extinction rates and biodiversity loss, it may seem illogical to be concerned with methods limiting the reproduction of wild populations; however, there is an urgent need to inhibit the proliferation of a wide variety of species. The range of animals for which fertility control is desired makes the development of a single method impossible. The various reproductive strategies used by individual species, the desired outcome of contraceptive programs (reversible or irreversible; male or female directed) and our ignorance of the reproductive biology of many endangered species necessitate thorough species-specific investigations. As fertility control in humans is a reality and research into methods of fertility control is more advanced, humans serve as a model for developing contraceptive approaches for wild species. Population control by traditional methods (indirect or direct intervention by culling, poisoning, translocation, etc.) is increasingly unacceptable to the public, making human studies even more valuable for finding solutions to overabundant wild populations. This review compares and contrasts the range of contraceptive methods used in both wildlife and humans.Cats
Immunocontraception Reprogramming Predators
Conservation biology: resources
Ethical issues in fertility control of wild non-human animals
Life without Pain
The End of Suffering
Riley Day Syndrome
The Good Drug Guide
Quotations on Suffering
MDMA: Utopian Pharmacology
Conservation Biology: resources
Crabs Suffer and Remember Pain
Happiness and the Hedonic Treadmill
Critique of Huxley's Brave New World
The Abolitionist Project (podcast 15Mb)
Emotional vs physical pain. Which is worse?
The ecological dynamics of a cruelty-free world
Kamunyak, the lioness who adopted baby antelopes