In October 2014, I attended a symposium: Reclaiming a River: Conservation and Community. The symposium was focused on urban river restoration and how communities can aid in restoration efforts. This was during the time I was in the CSC course. The timing of this symposium could not have been more perfect for myself.

     Symposium attendees came from across the country to the Bronx to learn how the community efforts that occurred on the Bronx River have become the envy of communities around the nation (Calvelli, 2014). Pulling myself out of my comfort zone, I spoke with several people at the symposium, which is a challenge for me as I am very shy. One attendee I spoke with was Jerry Willis. He was working with the National Park Service at the time of the symposium, but previously worked on the restoration of the Bronx River decades ago. Mr. Willis shared with me “what happened here was special”, that he had “never seen the same happen anywhere else” referring to how engaged and involved the community was in the river’s restoration” (personal communication, October 23, 2014).

     Alexie Torres, Founder of Youth Ministries for Peace and Justice, recalled how the community “did not begin the restoration for the love of a river, but for the love of our children, families and community” (personal communication, October 23, 2014). She later shared four lessons learned during restoration efforts: (1) the community wanted to be directly involved in the work, “we live here, we’re experts too!”; (2) the importance of learning to be a good partner; (3) the investment in the river is a human investment, and goes beyond the river, what it means as an economic corridor; and to (4) continue to focus on what it means to leave a lasting legacy (personal communication, October 23, 2014). Community advocates realized that since social and ecological problems were linked, then the solutions should be linked as well, were pioneers in connecting environmental issues to economic solutions such as job creation and training (Tullis, 2007).

     The experience of attending the symposium, and more importantly being in a room full of many incredibly passionate, positive, productive and effective people, was both refreshing and invigorating. I learned that people traveled from across the country to learn about what was happening in the Bronx. Hearing about the community’s history and current efforts, made me feel a sense of pride to be a Bronxite, proud of what the community had achieved.

     My CSC CEL projects organically grew from this initial experience. I mapped restoration projects along the Bronx River which became a Prezi presentation:Bronx River Restoration Projects (I used this as my CSC CEL Participatory mapping project).  I also used a tablet to map locations of Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica) along the Bronx River, on zoo grounds. I wrote about my experience and about invasive Japanese knotweed  in a newsletter format for my second CEL assignment.

     I began to brainstorm about using these projects in the future as an opportunity to engage zookeepers in local conservation. This symposium became my impetus in using the river as a component and element for my school projects and Master Plan.

     From the results of my later IAP, my guess is that many zookeepers at the Bronx Zoo are not aware of the story of the Bronx River, and the efforts it took to restore it. I not only wanted to share the history of the river with the zookeepers, but more importantly have them be a part of the story as well.

References

Calvelli, J. (October 22, 2014). Bronx River Provides Blueprint for Urban Waterway Restoration. Retrieved from: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-f-calvelli/bronx-river-provides-blue_b_6030642.html

Tullis, T. (2007, August). A Bronx tale. The Nation, 8,24

     While attending the Bronx River symposium in 2014, I learned about invasive Japanese knotweed and the efforts to remove it from along the Bronx River.

     Japanese knotweed is one of the most prolific invasive species of vegetation which has overrun many riparian corridors in eastern and northwest North America (Gerber, et al., 2008; Urgenson, Reichard, & Halpern,2009; USDA, 2016). Japanese knotweed grows in large dense stands, like bamboo, with rhizomes which can extend 2 meters into the ground, and its biomass can surpass 200 tons/hectare (Urgenson et al., 2009; USDA, 2016). Researchers have found that the plant diminishes invertebrate and aquatic communities (Gerber, et al., 2008) and hypothesize that it could over time negatively affect amphibians, reptiles, mammals and birds (Gerber, et al., 2008; Maerz, Blossey, & Nuzzo, 2005). I took an interest in the plant and how it affects wildlife along the corridor of the river.

     For my first IAP, in 2016, I devised a simple project to explore the effects of Japanese knotweed on wildlife. I located two similar sites along a section of the Bronx River located near my daily workplace. The two sites were similar, except that one was adjacent to a large stand of Japanese knotweed while the other was free of Japanese knotweed. I set up two identical camera traps, one at each site, which I simultaneously deployed for 42 days.

     My prediction was that if Japanese knotweed negatively affected wildlife abundance, there would be fewer images of wildlife recorded at the site with the invasive vegetation. I did not know if my project would work, and I was unsure that my camera traps would detect anything. So, I was pleasantly surprised, to say the least, when mammals and birds were quickly detected at both sites daily.

     I had set the cameras to capture eight images for each movement detected. While this was a high number of images, I believe that if I had set it to capture fewer images, e.g. three per event, I would have missed several individuals. There were many times when small, quick animals, such as chipmunks or birds, triggered a camera, but only appeared in one image. However, this made for a lot of data to analyze. In just 42 days, my cameras captured 10,528 images! There were several events that were triggered vegetation moved by wind within the range of the camera, but most events were triggered by an animal.

     I read about many camera trap studies employing citizen scientists to assist in photo analysis, and I researched the validity of such visual data collection for my synthesis paper before this project (I will revisit this later). I don’t think I truly appreciated the effort involved until faced with over 10,500 images to analyze. While the experience felt overwhelming at times, this project remains my favorite. I was excited to check my cameras on a weekly basis, and search through them quickly hoping to find an exciting animal and share the image(s) with my co-workers. I expected plenty of squirrels and chipmunks, and they were there. Unbeknownst to me at the time a family of raccoons lived near one of my cameras Figures 1 & 2). It was fun to see them on their nightly travels, as well as skunks, opossums and families of wood ducks (Figure 3). I was especially excited one day to share images of a Cooper’s hawk (Figure 4).

Figure 1. Raccoons were curious of my trap, they noticed it immediately, but it did not appear to hinder their movement.

 Figure 2. Raccoons at "native" site flooded after heavy rain.

Figure 3. Wood ducks swim into "native" site after heavy rains.

Figure 4. Cooper's hawk on ground at "invasive" site.  

     This project combined my love of photography and nature, which is why I think I did not mind the amount of time and effort required to analyze all the data. Not only was this project the most fun for me, it was also the project I was most proud of. So, you may ask: what were my results?

     Remember that cute family of raccoons? Well, because they lived near one of my cameras, I believe they skewed my abundance data for mammals. But I had more data to compare. I calculated the Shannon’s diversity index (H) and Simpson’s diversity index (D) for mammals and birds at the two sites. While both diversity indices for mammals and birds declined at the site of Japanese knotweed (Figures 5 & 6), the decline of bird diversity was more pronounced, decreasing from 1.75 H-native and 4.28 D-native, to 1.25 D-invasive and 1.61 H-invasive respectively (Figure 6). I also captured a decrease in bird species richness (the number of species represented) at the site with Japanese knotweed (Figure 6).

Figure 5. Diversity of mammals at both sites. Site#1 (orange)-Native vegetation Site#2 (blue)-Japanese knotweed present.

Figure 6. Diversity of bird species at both sites. Site#1 (orange)-Native vegetation Site#2 (blue)-Japanese knotweed present.   

     While Japanese knotweed did not appear to affect most mammals in a negative manner when reviewing encounter data, using the diversity indices showed there was a decline in biodiversity in both mammals and birds. My findings supported my hypothesis, and agreed with what researchers hypothesized as well- Japanese knotweed does negatively affect wildlife diversity. My results further demonstrated the importance of the removal efforts of invasive vegetation such as Japanese knotweed to preserving biodiversity. This would later evolve into several activities I organized to help remove some of the vegetation from the site of my camera trap study.

     I was proud to share a short summary of my project, findings and one of the camera trap images of the Cooper’s hawk as a post, “Wildlife vs. plant invaders” to the blog, WildView: An Eye on Wildlife, which was published by the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS).

References

Gerber, E., Krebs, C., Murrell, C., Moretti, M., Rocklin, R., & Schaffner, U. (2008). Exotic invasive knotweeds (Fallopia spp.) negatively affect native plant and invertebrate assemblages in European riparian habitats. Biological Conservation, 141, 646-654.

Maerz, J.C., Blossey, B., & Nuzzo, V. (2005). Green frogs show reduced foraging success in habitats invaded by Japanese knotweed. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14, 2901-2911.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)-Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team. (2016). Japanese knotweed biological control. [Fact sheet]. Retrieved from http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/pdfs/FS_jaknotweed.pdf

Urgenson, L.S., Reichard, S.H., & Halpern, C.B. (2009). Community and ecosystem consequences of giant knotweed (Polygonum sachalinense) invasion into riparian forests of western Washington, USA. Biological Conservation, 142, 1536-1541.

     One of my real passions is photography, yet strangely I have never taken a real photography course. Like many people interested in wildlife conservation, I spent much of my childhood watching nature documentaries. I especially find it intriguing and exciting to view images and videos captured by camera traps. They have been used for fifty years to record wildlife activity (Swann, Hass, Dalton, & Wolf, 2004). Whether it's an elusive snow leopard in the Himalayas, Pallas cats in Mongolia, or urban wildlife in our backyard, camera traps offer us a sneak peek into the private lives of wild animals. They are now commercially available and relatively inexpensive.

     To learn more about camera traps, I chose this as the subject of my Technical Profile Report (TPR) for the Biology in the Age of Technology (BAT) course. I composed a Prezi presentation, “Camera trap use in wildlife conservation”, for my TPR assignment. I found BAT to be my favorite course during the program. I love learning about new technology, and especially how they can be adapted to serve for wildlife conservation. I have never been afraid to try new things. During this course I learned about new technologies, as well as new (at the time) online platforms for presentations, such as Prezi and PowToon, which I utilized during that course and others that followed.

     At the Bronx River symposium in 2014, I learned about a camera trap project along the Bronx River, north of the Bronx Zoo. Researchers were documenting coyotes, and other wildlife e.g. white-tail deer, American mink, beaver, along the river. That winter there had been several sightings of coyotes on zoo grounds, which were most likely using the frozen river to travel into the zoo.

     I later met with Dr. Mark Weckel, of the American Museum of Natural History. He is a co-founder of Gotham Coyote, a project studying urban coyotes in the New York City area. After learning about his project, and reading papers on camera trap studies, I was inspired to purchase my first camera trap.

      It was this camera trap which motivated me to design my first IAP, previously discussed. I continue to deploy cameras along the Bronx River, and my backyard,  to share images directly with my fellow keepers and supervisors, or with friends on Facebook and via my website with a page of camera trap images I think are fun. I developed the website as a collection of my Project Dragonfly projects, and include images from my Earth Expeditions. I plan to not only continue to share my images, but have keepers involved with checking my cameras, as it appears my coworkers find them as much fun as I do.

On February 18, 2018, we were treated to a red fox.  

     During my last two Earth Expeditions (EE) I was fortunate enough to get to "play" with camera traps. My EE in 2017, was to Mongolia. I was able help, Gantulga “Ganna” Jamsran, check camera traps set up as part of the Pallas cat research project. I went out with several groups over two days in an effort to get a glimpse of one of the elusive cats. The researchers knew where a female with kittens was located and had two camera traps set-up in hopes of capturing images of them. I helped Ganna check his traps, checking the SD cards in my personal DSLR camera. There were images of kittens and mom captured by the cameras, so we knew they were there. But unfortunately, this was the only way I saw the Pallas cats in Mongolia.

Figure 6. Camera trap deployed for Pallas Cat research project in Mongolia.

Figure 7. Pallas cat researcher, Gantulga Jamsran, searching for kittens while we check camera traps.

      During my last EE, in 2018 to Kenya, I brought along one of my camera traps, just for fun. One of the community rangers at Amboseli helped me find a spot where to set-up my camera overnight, where hyaenas visit near our campsite. I was disappointed when I did not capture any wildlife that evening. Later, during the trip we worked with Guy Western who deployed camera traps as part of his Rebuilding the Pride project, studying Maasai and lion coexistence.

     During our stay in Olkiramatian, at Lale'enok Research Center, Guy set-up my personal camera trap, near a river which runs through the group ranch, knowing that wildlife visits the river as a source of drinking water. I was fortunate that my camera captured images of vervet monkeys, olive baboons, zebra, and I was thrilled to find an African crested porcupine among the images.

Figure 9. African crested porcupine (Hystrix cristata), the largest species of porcupine in the world (Bradford, 2016). 

     I was also surprised to find two Maasai men captured by my camera. Guy’s cameras captured lions and leopards, not far from where my camera was placed. This was a visual reminder of the main topic of that EE course, humans and wildlife sharing a landscape and coexisting.

Figure 10. Two Maasai men seen carrying bows and a short “sword”, their only defense from large predators.

References

Bradford, A. (2016, September, 30). Facts about porcupines. Retrieved from: https://www.livescience.com/56326-porcupine-facts.html

Swann, D.E., Hass, C.C., Dalton, D.C., & Wolf, S.A. (2004). Infrared-triggered cameras for detecting wildlife: an evaluation and review. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 32(2). 357-365.

     The utilization of citizen scientists has been invaluable to wildlife studies which use camera traps. With the use of camera traps and digital imaging for wildlife studies growing exponentially over the last twenty years, immense amounts of photographic data have been collected. Large-scale projects can easily accumulate millions of photographs and accompanying data, which translates to terabytes of digital data. Much of this data can take months, or even years, for researchers to process. I received a taste of this dilemma during my first IAP, when I was faced with processing over 10,500 images. As a result, some researchers are utilizing web-based databases to collect the data, and then process it using the power of citizen scientists.

     For my first synthesis paper topic, I chose to research whether the visual data collected and processed by citizen scientists are scientifically valid for research purposes.

     Snapshot Serengeti is a very popular and successful citizen science web-based project, in which volunteers processed 1.2 million sets of camera trap images collected over years (Swanson et al., 2015). The use of citizen scientists to process photographic images can be successful because many find the activity to be rewarding (McShea, Forrester, Costello, He, & Kays, 2016) and share in the excitement of discovery (Sheil, Mugerwa & Fegraus, 2013). The very reasons I enjoyed my own camera trap project.

     Legions of citizen scientist volunteers are increasingly utilized for deploying camera trap arrays for large-scale studies. These volunteers are trained to manage and maintain camera traps, collect images and upload them to databases (Erb, McShea, & Guralnick, 2012).

     For my project, I researched different camera trap projects, as well as other photographic databases, and their use of citizen scientists. Many researchers did not trust the validity of citizen scientists to process photographic data, including identifying species, counting individuals, and classifying behavior. Many researchers choose to process their own collected data.

     In one study of raptors in Appalachia, one sole researcher was responsible for processing 2.5 million images, and afterwards acknowledged that their protocol was time consuming (Jachowski, Katzner, Rodrigue, & Ford, 2015). eMammal is a database developed to assist large studies using citizen scientists, but researchers still use an “expert review tool” to confirm data for quality control (McShea, et al., 2016). For one project using eMammal, Kays et al. (2015) used the review tool to process 2.6 million images over a two-year period, further demonstrating that protocols were hindering the time to process data. These examples were probably unwise, since researchers have reported ‘experts’ to be 96.6% accurate (Swanson, et al., 2015).

     Meanwhile Snapshot Serengeti not only processed 18 months of data with one million species identifications, within the first three days of the website’s launch. The participants which are not even trained, achieved a 97.9% rate of accuracy (Swanson, et al., 2016). Snapshot Serengeti employs algorithms, and aggregates the images so images are circulated through several times, until a consensus criterion is achieved and then that image is deemed complete and removed. Snapshot Serengeti is a great example of web-based platforms which are powered by citizen scientists and result in valid contributions to biodiversity research. I found more examples that exist, to prove that yes, citizen scientists’ contributions are indeed valid for scientific research. During the time of researching this topic, I also played on the Snapshot Serengeti site, as well as other similar projects hosted on the Zooniverse.org website, which hosts many citizen scientist visual database projects in diverse fields of study. I only now remembered this, and look forward to having more free time to participate in these projects, and encourage friends to do the same.

     For the Professional Media Workshop course, I used my first IAP as the basis to write an article, for the general public. The article, “Plant invaders vs. birds: What can recreational camera traps tell us (a citizen scientist’s inquiry)”, not only tells my story of designing my project to study biodiversity, but also encourages camera trap hobbyists to be citizen scientists. To inspire them to think of different ways to use recreational camera traps to devise simple projects of their own, and to answer questions they may have about nature using the Project Dragonfly QUEST model (Myers, et al., n.d.). I felt that if I can design a camera trap study, then anyone can! While this impression may be derived from my low self-confidence, I still think my IAP project was very simple and easily replicable. I want to empower citizen scientists to believe that they can contribute to wildlife research with their recreational camera traps.

References

Erb, P., McShea, W., & Guralnick, R. (2012). Anthropogenic influences on macro-level mammal occupancy in the Appalachian trail corridor. Plos One, 7(8)

Jachowski, D. S., Katzner, T., Rodrigue, J. L., & Ford, W. M. (2015). Monitoring landscape-level distribution and migration phenology of raptors using a volunteer camera-trap network. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 39(3), 553-563. doi:10.1002/wsb.571

Kays, R., Costello, R., Forrester, T., Baker, M., Parsons, A.W., Kalies, E.L., Hess, G., Millspaugh, J. & McShea, W. (2015). Cats are rare where coyotes roam. Journal of Mammalogy, 96(5), 981-987. doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyv100

McShea, W. J., Forrester, T., Costello, R., He, Z., & Kays, R. (2016). Volunteer-run cameras as distributed sensors for macrosystem mammal research. Landscape Ecology, 31(1), 55-66. 

Myers, C., Smart, T., Haynes, C., Bercaw, J., Cummins, H., Myers, L.B., & Wolfe, C. (n.d.) Dragonfly QUEST Leader’s Guide. Dragonfly

Sheil, D., Mugerwa, B., & Fegraus, E. (2013). African golden cats, citizen science, and serendipity: tapping the camera trap revolution. South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 43(1), 74-78.

Swanson, A., Kosmala, M., Lintott, C., Simpson, R., Smith, A., & Packer, C. (2015). Snapshot Serengeti, high-frequency annotated camera trap images of 40 mammalian species in an African savanna. Scientific Data, 2, 150026. http://doi.org.proxy.lib.miamioh.edu/10.1038/sdata.2015.26

Swanson, A., Kosmala, M., Lintott, C., & Packer, C. (2016). A generalized approach for producing, quantifying, and validating citizen science data from wildlife images. Conservation Biology, 30(3), 520-531.

     At the 2006 National American Association of Zoo Keepers Conference, the keynote address included the common issue of low morale among keepers (Steenberg, 2006). Though zookeepers can derive a sense of importance of their work via the philosophy that their occupation assists in the conservation of wildlife and global biodiversity (Bunderson & Thompson, 2009), it is still common to find keepers suffering from negativism, criticism, skepticism, and Steenberg’s take on PMS, “Piss and Moan Syndrome” (2006). As a zookeeper for over 20 years at the Bronx Zoo, I have personally come across a few such negative, cynical, and toxic employees, who not only affect, but worse, infect, the morale of staff.

     Employee morale can involve feelings, emotions, attitudes and perceptions towards not only the job itself, but also the work environment (Ali, 2017). Characteristics of positive morale include employees that are confident (Ali, 2017) and exhibit a willingness to participate. Low morale can manifest itself as insufficient community engagement, participation, and attachment, as well as lack of ‘sense of place’ or belonging. Low morale is associated with low social capital, which has reportedly declined continually in the United States since the 1960s (Putnam, 1995).

     Steenberg (2006) suggests one method to assist in overcoming issues of low morale is to become involved, but it can be a challenge to engage zookeepers; feeling like an uphill battle. Low morale can affect the attempt to empower zookeepers to become involved and provide the solutions to their problems, therefore becoming a ‘negative feedback loop’.

     In the summer of 2016, NYCAAZK helped BxRA with a river clean-up and trash assessment along the river on zoo grounds. Many keepers participated in this event, which demonstrated to me the potential for participation and engagement for more similar events. It was at this event that I met the Director of Environmental Stewardship of the BxRA, Michelle Luebke. I reached out to her several months later to explore the idea of engaging zookeepers in environmental stewardship as a method to improve morale and foster a “sense of place”. This thought later evolved into the basis for my second IAP.

References

Ali, V. (2017). The high cost of low morale - and what to do about it. [Blog post] Retrieved from http://www.barrettrose.com/the-high-cost-of-low-morale-and-what-to-do-about-it/

Bunderson, J.S., & Thompson, J.A., (2009). Zookeepers, callings, and the dual edges of deeply meaningful work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(1), 32-57.

Putnam, R.D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78.

Steenberg, J. (2006). Zoo keeping- the hardest job I’ve ever loved. Keynote address presented at Proceedings of the 33rd National Conference of the American Association of Zoo Keepers, Inc., Chicago, Illinois. Retrieved from https://www.aazk.org/wp-content/uploads/keeper_information.pdf

     For my next IAP in 2017, I elected to explore the perceptions and attitudes that Bronx Zoo keepers possess of the Bronx and the Bronx River. Specifically, whether they would change after participating in an environmental stewardship activity, such as a clean-up. I set out to answer whether engagement in ecological activities and environmental stewardship in our “backyard”, using the river, could foster a sense of community among keepers and perhaps improve morale over the long-term. Can these activities improve the perception of urban natural areas, and if so, could this foster a “sense of place” among keepers?

     Two environmental stewardship activities occurred during the fall semester 2017. The first activity was a clean-up at Orchard Beach (Figure 11), in the Bronx. This clean-up was organized by an AIP student in my department. I organized a second activity (which occurred on multiple days) involved the removal of invasive Japanese knotweed along the Bronx River (Figure 12). It was hard work, but this is not new to the keepers I work with daily, and many welcomed it. Participants were surveyed before and after each activity. They learned about the projects I had been working on, and I shared what I learned about the river.

Figure 11. Zookeepers fan out along the shore of Orchard Beach, Bronx, New York during clean-up.

Figure 12. Bronx Zoo mammal department keepers participate in removal of invasive vegetation from bank of Bronx River.

     A similar survey was conducted of Bronx Zoo Mammal Department zookeepers, independent of participation in the stewardship activities. The objective of this survey was to explore keepers’ perceptions of the Bronx and the Bronx River, as well as assessing interest in participating in future local environmental stewardship activities. I also asked whether the respondent believed if environmental stewardship activities could help improve morale.

     I utilized questionnaires with a combination of statements with a Likert-scale to measure if they agreed with the statement. I concluded each survey with an open-ended question soliciting three to five words describing the area of the activity. These place descriptors were then categorized into themes (Spartz & Shaw, 2011).

     My results from the Likert-scale statements portion of the survey did not support a change in perception after an environmental stewardship activity. However, I did find that those zookeepers that participated in an activity, during this project or elsewhere, were more likely to use positive words when describing natural areas in the Bronx (Figures 13 & 14). I constructed word clouds to visually represent the change in connotation of the place descriptors used by participants before and after an activity.

 
Figure 13. Place descriptors offered by zookeepers before (left) and after (right) a clean-up of a local beach. Red words denote negative connotation, blue denotes positive connotation, and green denotes neutral connotation. 


Figure 14. Place descriptors offered by zookeepers that never participated in any stewardship activity (Left) and those that have participated in an activity in the Bronx. Red words denote negative connotation, blue denotes positive connotation, and green denotes neutral connotation. 

      Of those that responded to my department-wide survey, 91% of the respondents, declared interest in participating in future local environmental stewardship activities, and on average agreed with the statement, “a Bronx River clean up activity would have a positive impact on morale”.

     I found this project to be the most difficult for me, and it forced me again out of my comfort zone. I am shy and do not enjoy speaking to people and especially soliciting help. I was pleasantly surprised by having zookeepers participate in the activities, and continuing to do so. An unexpected challenge I faced earlier during this project was having to gain permission to remove Japanese knotweed on zoo grounds, along the river. I spoke with managers, and ultimately my general curator, who granted me permission.

References

Spartz, J.T. & Shaw, B.R. (2011). Place meanings surrounding an urban natural area: A qualitative inquiry. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31, 344-352.

     One of the conservation themes I explored several times throughout my period as a Project Dragonfly student was human-predator relationships, conflict and coexistence. I learned lessons on a local and global scale about conflict, coexistence and tolerance.

     My interest was piqued when in 2015, there was an explosion of coyote sightings reported in New York City (Foderaro, 2015; Kirby, 2015). There were also several sightings of coyotes within zoo grounds. I chose to explore the issue of coyotes in urban environments for my review paper assignment for the Issues in Biodiversity course.

     One of my takeaways from that research was about how we choose to frame relationships and interactions, and the importance of the words we choose to use to describe them. During my research process I used the keyword search ‘human-wildlife conflict’. This term is often used in publications, but some argue (Peterson, Birkhead, Leong, Peterson, & Peterson, 2010) that the phrase ‘human-wildlife conflict’ used to describe wildlife research is detrimental to the coexistence of humans and wildlife. Some researchers have chosen to use the term human-wildlife interaction, (Weckel, Mack, Nagy, & Christie, 2010) or relationships. The words we chose can frame public perceptions in a negative or positive manner. It is also easier to educate the public and promote coexistence before a wildlife encounter, than after a negative incident. This philosophy was employed in New York City, in an article in the New York Times. The author chose to remind the public that if you catch a glimpse of a coyote you should consider yourself lucky because it’s special (Foderaro, 2015). Personally I think New Yorkers are different, and we tend to have a respect for anyone (animals included) trying to eke out a living on their own. These perceptions are not valued in suburban and rural areas throughout the United States (Vaske & Needham, 2007).

     My other take away from researching coyotes and their relationships with humans in urban areas was: how can the collective we of conservationists promote the message of coexistence in other regions of the world, if we fail at a local level?

     While learning about my local environment, there are lessons to be transferred to and from global issues as well. I visited Kenya for my last EE. For my synthesis topic, I chose human-lion coexistence, conflict and conservancies. This became more than just the topic of my synthesis paper, it became the theme of my in-country experiences in the South Rift of Kenya, where I witnessed humans and wildlife sharing a landscape together. I was glad I chose this topic, as I was able to meet Maasai that coexist with lions daily, and learned more about the subject from those that directly deal with this issue. I met community rangers at Amboseli that deal with wildlife conflict, and learned of the importance of a quick response time, their protocol was a maximum of 30 minutes to reach an incident. Having a short response decreases the likelihood of crowds forming, therefore minimizing the threat of retaliation.

     At the Olkiramatian and Shampole community ranches in the South Rift, I was able to observe a model for coexistence. When reflecting on my experiences and the research I read, I realized that tolerance is what is required, as well as learning to how to share habitat. If people can choose to tolerate and live with large predators, such as lions, then humans in urban areas should be able to tolerate coyotes. Whether it is lions in Southern Kenya needing refuge and space in conservancies around protected areas, or urban wildlife that need green space to retreat; both need corridors to move about. I wrote about this topic for my Kenya EE field reflection assignment-"Coexistence, tolerance, and choice". 

     While I was in Kenya, I reflected on my experiences of my prior EE, in Mongolia. During both courses we studied pastoralists, nomadic peoples moving with their livestock across large landscapes. I visited a boma in Kenya, and a ger in Mongolia. Their cultures are similar in this regard. The difference I observed was in Mongolia there was a lack of large predators, except for wolves.

     Another similarity between the two experiences were the children. Some of my most memorable experiences involved interacting with children. In Mongolia, it was sitting on a high ridge and sharing my binoculars with young “urban” kids from Ulaanbaatar, who had never seen wild takhi or Przewalski’s horse (Equus ferus przewalskii), and helping to spot takhi for them to see. While we did not share the same language, we did share in our enthusiasm.

     In Kenya, we met school children from the surrounding area. My group sat and spoke with three young women, and we were able to have a discussion, which was eye-opening for me. I later reflected on how privileged I have been, to live in a society where everyone can receive an education, and the only expectation put upon me by my family was to be happy with whatever I chose to do.

     I am appreciative of the experiences I had in all my EEs, the spirit of all the people I met, instructors and co-students included, and the places I got to explore. The EE that surprised me the most was Kenya, as after returning home I felt that I left a part of my heart behind, and the experiences stirred something deep within that I didn't know existed inside of me. I will miss the positivity and support from being in the Project Dragonfly program, but now it is my turn to provide that to others.

References

Foderaro, L.W. (2015, March 6). That Howling? Just New York’s Neighborhood Coyotes. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/08/nyregion/that-howling-just-new-yorks-neighborhood-coyotes.html

Kirby, J. (2015, May 20). Urban Fauna: Why Coyotes Are Flourishing in New York City. Intelligencer. Retrieved from http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2015/05/coyotes-new-york-city.html

Peterson, M.N., Birckhead, J.L., Leong, K., Peterson, M.J, & Peterson, T.R. (2010). Rearticulating the myth of human-wildlife conflicts. Conservation Letters, 3, 74-82.

Vaske, J.J., & Needham, M.D. (2007). Segmenting public beliefs about conflict with coyotes in an urban recreational setting. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 25(4), 79-98.

Weckel, M.E., Mack, D., Nagy, C., & Christie, R. (2010). Using citizen science to map human-coyote interaction in suburban New York, USA. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 74(5), 1163-1171.