Iconic horned species from Ethiopia may not survive this ‘time of lawlessness'
The species came close to extinction in 1966. Officials established the Simien Mountains National Park to protect the last 200 walia ibexes on Earth, where for decades, their population grew.
Now, recent surveys show their numbers are approaching critical levels again, according to a study published July 21 in the journal Oryx.
'The war opened the door for poaching during this time of lawlessness,' a local resident told researchers.
In 2015, researchers counted 865 walia ibexes in Simien Mountains National Park. In 2024, just 306 were documented, 194 of which were adults, the study said.
One of the criterion for a species to qualify as critically endangered on the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List is a 'mature' population below the threshold of 250 individuals, according to the study.
'Clear evidence of poaching, including snares and animal carcasses,' have been discovered in Simien Mountains National Park, the study said.
Locals identify 'fundamental' drivers of poaching
Researchers interviewed 'park personnel, village elders, farmers, local authority staff and militia' in the communities surrounding the ibex's habitat to investigate possible causes for the uptick in poaching.
According to the study, more than 70% of people 'attributed the drop in walia ibex numbers to poaching, both for food and medicinal purposes,' citing COVID-19 and the 2021–2022 Tigray war just north of the park as 'fundamental' causes.
'COVID-19 has obstructed tourist flows, decreased revenues and halted patrolling activities and awareness,' an interviewee told researchers.
Ibexes have historically been a major tourist attraction in Ethiopia, providing income for the region in addition to their ecological importance, the study said. Any instances of poaching, which have been rare over the last several decades, were reported to park rangers.
Researchers theorize that as the number of annual visitors dropped from 32,000 to 4,300 between 2019 and 2023, the 'decrease in income from tourism may have eroded the previously positive relationship between communities and Park authorities, leading to an increase in poaching,' according to the study.
Experts are creating an action plan to save the species, which involves mobilizing 'community ambassadors' with the goal of trust-building and improved communication, annual population censuses including the use of camera traps, and recategorizing the walia ibex as critically endangered on the IUCN Red List, according to the study.
The Simien Mountains are in the northwestern corner of Ethiopia near the border with Eritrea and Sudan.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
A New COVID Variant Is Here, And It's More Transmissible — Here Are The Signs And Symptoms
A new COVID variant known as NB.1.8.1 has made landfall in the United States. As of late May, the variant, which was first detected in China this past January, accounted for 10% of the SARS-CoV-2 sequences tested from around the world, recent surveillance data found. That's a significant jump from 2.5% four weeks prior. A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) spokesperson told HuffPost that the agency is in regular contact with international partners about the activity of NB.1.8.1. Up until late May, only 20 NB.1.8.1 sequences had been identified in the U.S. — that's below the threshold needed for a variant to appear on the agency's COVID dashboard. (As soon as its prevalence increases, NB.1.8.1 will pop up on the tracker, the spokesperson added.) It's nerve-wracking to hear that a new variant is making the rounds, but infectious disease specialists say there are no glaring differences between the symptoms of NB.1.8.1 and those caused by other versions of SARS-CoV-2. 'Currently it appears that NB.1.8.1 would have similar symptoms to other COVID variants that have recently been circulating,' Dr. Zachary Hoy, a pediatric infectious disease specialist with Pediatrix Medical Group in Nashville, Tennessee, told HuffPost. Here's what to know about the newest COVID variant that's gaining traction around the world. NB.1.8.1's mutations likely make it more transmissible. Compared to the currently dominant variant in the U.S. (LP.8.1), NB.1.8.1 has a handful of new mutations on the spike protein that may enhance its ability to bind to our cells, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). The agency suspects these mutations will increase the virus's transmissibility and, potentially, diminish the effectiveness of neutralizing antibodies that prevent pathogens from latching to our cells. In other words, the variant may be skilled at dodging some of our immune defenses, research suggests. Here are the signs and symptoms doctors are seeing with NB.1.8.1. According to Dr. Amesh Adalja, an infectious diseases expert and senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security, NB.1.8.1's symptoms are pretty much the same as those seen with other SARS-CoV-2 variants. Two of COVID's hallmark symptoms are a mild but persistent dry cough and nasal congestion, Hoy said. Many people who come down with COVID are also hit with fatigue and tiredness. 'An infected person can still make it through the day, but they are resting more and feel more tired throughout the day,' Hoy said. Other common symptoms include a fever, chills, a sore throat and muscle aches. 'Some have described recent variants as less intense symptoms as compared to wintertime influenza viruses, but both can have severe symptoms,' Hoy said. There's no evidence suggesting the variant causes more severe disease or an uptick in hospitalizations or deaths, the WHO states. The only noticeable aspect, as of now, is that it's rising in prevalence, Adalja said. How effective are the vaccines against NB.1.8.1? It's too early to know exactly how effective the shots are — as the research on NB.1.8.1 is limited since it's so new — but scientists expect the shots to hold up well. NB.1.8.1 broke off from the Omicron JN.1 lineage, which the 2024-2025 vaccines target. 'The ability of the vaccines to prevent severe illness is intact though protection versus infection is limited and transient,' Adalja said. Anyone who is at risk of severe disease should stay up-to-date with the shots. 'Those in older populations or with underlying immune disorders or on immune-decreasing medications would benefit more from vaccination or those with increased exposure such as healthcare workers,' Hoy added. So if you have a condition that puts you at risk, it's worth getting vaccinated if it's been more than six months since your last vaccine or bout of COVID, Adalja advises. He also added that those who are low-risk likely do not need to go out and get another shot. Know when to treat NB.1.8.1 at home and when to go visit a doctor. Most people will be able to recover at home by resting and staying hydrated. While you're sick, acetaminophen and ibuprofen can help alleviate muscle aches and fevers, Hoy said. And, in most cases, symptoms should clear up within a week. For those who are at risk for severe disease, including older adults and people who are immune-compromised, it's worth contacting a physician as they can prescribe antivirals — Paxlovid and Molnupiravir — that can significantly lower the risk of severe complications and death. As was the case with previous variants, these antivirals work best when started within five days of symptom onset. As for when you should go to an urgent care or emergency room? When you have chest pain, have a hard time waking up or staying awake, or feel confused and disoriented, the CDC advises. Hoy says the most concerning symptom he warns patients about is difficulty breathing. 'If you have COVID or COVID-like illness and have worsening trouble breathing or chest pain, you should be evaluated at your doctor's office, urgent care or the ER,' he said. Related... RFK Jr. Says COVID Shot Will No Longer Be Advised For Healthy Kids, Pregnant Women COVID Cases Are Rising This Summer, But Not All The Data Shows It — Here's Why People Are Reporting A Frightening COVID Symptom Right Now — Here's What To Know
The Hill
a day ago
- The Hill
Views from the front lines of Trump's war on the science community
The Trump administration has unleashed a tsunami of budget cuts to federal science programs. Mass firings have taken place at both the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education, part of a deliberate decimation of research staff across the federal government. Since January, the administration has systematically cut science funding to its lowest level in decades and issued a flood of budget plans and executive orders that are reshaping how the government uses and supports science. Some outcomes have been immediate and tragic, including staffing shortages that have left cancer patients stranded during experimental drug trials and delays in approving COVID-19 vaccines. The extent of these actions is unprecedented. The administration for a time froze all grant funding at the National Science Foundation and abruptly terminated thousands of the ongoing projects that it funds, as well as those of the National Institutes of Health. As scientists at leading research institutions, we have personally witnessed the effects of the administration's policies — including colleagues relocating overseas and students leaving research altogether. Undergraduate science internship programs have been canceled, and graduate programs in many research universities paused. As a result, scientists are increasingly seeking jobs abroad. The administration claims its goals are to increase efficiency and raise the standards of scientific research. In fact, thousands of programs and projects have been cut solely on the basis of ideologically motivated keyword searches, without any concern for their performance, design or conduct. That's not efficient. A Trump executive order issued in May underscores the purely political nature of these attacks. Titled ' Restoring Gold Standard Science,' the order puts hand-picked presidential appointees into every agency to review and 'correct' any evidence or conclusions with which they disagree. That's not scientific. Further, many of the administration's policies effectively punish researchers simply for asking discomfiting questions and punish institutions for teaching about unpopular ideas. Viewed together, these outline a political strategy toward science that is both systematic and dangerous: a full-scale war on the scientific community, the network of individual researchers across many institutions whose collaboration is essential for scientific progress. Despite the media stereotype of a lone genius in a lab coat, science is really a communal activity. As Isaac Newton, one of the most important scientists of all time, wrote: 'If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.' Every research project builds on foundational theory, tested methods and vetted findings created and refined through previous research. And every scientist depends on the distributed efforts of an extensive community to vet and review manuscripts for publication and proposals for new research, maintain common journals, databases and tools needed to share and build upon knowledge and educate and train the next generation of talent who help operate their labs. Institutions of higher education are the traditional hosts for the scientific community in the U.S, providing an independent forum for developing and refining ideas, an environment for training students and infrastructure for labs and shared resources. For more than 80 years, U.S. society has partnered with these institutions to foster a healthy scientific community. Federal funding enabled universities to build and maintain the infrastructure necessary for scientific research and support the most promising students. The scientific community collaborated to evaluate proposals for research across fields, ensuring resources were directed to the highest-quality projects, independent of political and institutional bias. No system is perfect, but the external scientific community has successfully partnered with the government to provide independent guidance and vetting — balancing competing interests and perspectives to evaluate proposals, advise the agencies that set funding priorities, accredit the programs that train researchers, review research findings and publish research results. Scientists within the government participate in the larger scientific community, reinforcing community standards as they move between jobs, and preserve the autonomy to ask scientific questions and share their findings. The administration's policies represent a three-fold attack on the scientific community. First, the administration aims to directly seize control over the key community functions that support scientific independence: Administrative actions have politicized the review processes for funding at National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, suppressed scientific data and withdrawn support for students. Second, the administration aims to subdue universities that provide an independent home for the community by weaponizing institutional accreditation and student visas, threatening individual institutions and their leadership when they are slow to align with the administration's ideology. Third, the administration is isolating scientists and scientific functions within the government. It does so by sidelining scientific expertise, firing entire independent expert advisory panels, canceling government access to scientific journals, preventing government scientists from publishing in them and, now, subjecting scientific analysis to systematic political modification and censorship. The government's war against science is a disaster for both. Without intellectual and political independence, the scientific community can't function effectively to discover new knowledge and solve hard problems. It's magical thinking for politicians to expect to receive truthful answers about the world when they poll to find the most popular answer, pay to get the answers they want or ignore data they dislike. And it's anti-democratic when political leaders dictate whether questions, data, and conclusions are appropriately scientific. Society needs science to tackle complex problems and to teach others how to do so. Science doesn't function without a healthy scientific community. As citizens, we should debate what problems are essential. As voters, we should decide which problems deserve public research funding. As free people, we should not tolerate political attacks on science and the scientific community. Micah Altman is a social and information scientist at MIT's Center for Research on Equitable and Open Scholarship, MIT Libraries. Philip N. Cohen is a professor of sociology at the University of Maryland, College Park.
Newsweek
2 days ago
- Newsweek
'Disabling' Chronic Illness in Children Not Taken Seriously: Experts
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A new study by Rutgers University has highlighted that a significant number of young children are experiencing ongoing symptoms after COVID-19 infection, signifying that greater research needs to be poured into evaluating the risk and treatment of long COVID in children. The study, released on July 23, coincides with Pediatric Long COVID Awareness Week, running from July 21 to 25, run by the advocacy group Long Covid Families. Over the course of the week, the group has been bringing together families, clinicians, researchers, and advocates to raise more awareness on the wide-reaching impact of long COVID in children. "This is a public health crisis for children. And it demands action," Long Covid Families said in its promotion of the condition's awareness week. "Because people operate under the false assumption that if you are young and healthy, like kids, COVID is an inconsequential nothingburger and we should not worry about it," Dr Ziyad Al-Aly, a professor of medicine at Washington University in St. Louis, told Newsweek. "Of course, this is not accurate at all," he added. Long COVID in children "always demanded more attention and seriousness." File photo: a young girl is unwell lying in bed with a teddy bear. File photo: a young girl is unwell lying in bed with a teddy The Study Found The study assessed 1,011 children, of whom 472 were aged 2 or younger, and 539 were aged between 3 and 15. It was found that 101, or 15 percent, of the 677 children who had previously tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection were identified as likely having long COVID. Long COVID is recognized as symptoms and health complications following COVID infection that persist for several weeks or months after the initial infection. It can result in a wide range of symptoms, affecting multiple systems in the body. Co-author of the study, Lawrence Kleinman, who is also chair of the Department of Pediatrics at Rutgers University, told Newsweek that he was not "surprised by these findings and would not be surprised to learn in the future that they understate the prevalence of long COVID." Previous studies estimated the prevalence of long COVID in children to be between 10 and 20 percent—suggesting it has become one of the most common chronic illnesses in children. Asthma, often described as the most common chronic illness in children, affects 16 percent. "Our methods were designed to be conservative, that is to maximize the likelihood that we distinguished long COVID from other causes," Kleinman said. "That means that our estimates are likely to be lower than the actual rate of long COVID." "At the beginning of the pandemic, no one knew that long COVID existed," he added. The first reports from China included" inaccurate reports" that children were spared COVID, he said, adding that the reports "grew into a myth which in turn created a mindset that COVID in kids didn't matter." As a result, there "was a misconception that children could not get COVID - but we know that's not true," Melissa Stockwell, another author of the study and chief of the Division of Child and Adolescent Health at Columbia University, told Newsweek. "We are still very behind in raising awareness about long COVID in children," she added. Another reason why long COVID was not taken seriously in children is that "the symptoms associated with long COVID in children were not properly defined," Dr. Akiko Iwasaki, director of the Center for Infection and Immunity at the Yale School of Medicine, told Newsweek. She added that the study underscored "the need for the society to take long COVID in children seriously." However, Dr. Gerald Teague, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Virginia School of Medicine, told Newsweek that the study's investigators "did not confirm COVID infection with diagnostic tests nor did they measure antibodies to COVID in the participants," which would have provided a more accurate screening of the condition. He also noted that children not flagged as having COVID in the study may have had "asymptomatic infection." Although, despite some concerns, he said, with the study, that it was a "proof of concept that long COVID may be a bigger problem than we thought." The Impact Of Long COVID On Children "There is great concern for the younger generation, both about the long-term impacts of the pandemic itself, but also for those with Long Covid," Stockwell said. Long COVID in children can manifest in a number of different symptoms, ranging from "annoying to disabling," Kleinman said. The chronic illness can cause "pain, distress, or disability" in children, directly impacting the child's interaction with their family and friends, and may "hurt school performance, athletic performance, or even the capacity of children to conduct normally routine activities," he added. These factors are of great concern, Al-Aly said, as "we worry about kids' educational attainment, forming friendships, sports, and others, and all of these facets of normal development could be impaired in long COVID." "This may negatively affect kids in their most formative years—leaving them scarred for a lifetime," he added. Long COVID can leave some children bedbound for years, Iwasaki said. "If you have ever spoken to a parent of a child with long COVID, you quickly learn how devastating it can be to the lives of the children and their family," she added. What Experts Think Should Be Done One key part of tackling the issue is down to "improving vaccine uptake," Al-Aly said. However, the Trump administration has recently removed COVID vaccines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendation for healthy children and pregnant women, as part of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr's "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) campaign. Kennedy Jr, a well-known vaccine sceptic, said, when announcing the update on X: "It's common sense and it's good science." Another important step is increasing understanding, Stockwell said. "We really need pediatricians to understand what long COVID looks like in children and understand that symptoms are actually different in different-aged children as well," she added. Treatments are the next vital step, Kleinman said. "We need to develop and identify effective treatments for long COVID in a rapidly iterative and long-term approach to quickly identify promising treatments and to evaluate their effectiveness and safety in practice." That treatment, though, needs to "get at the root causes of the disease," Iwasaki said. She added that long COVID is a disease "driven by the virus and the host responses to the virus involving the immune, neurological, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal and pulmonary systems." From a policy perspective, "flexible attendance at school, proper training of teachers and pediatricians, insurance coverage and more funding for research" would all help tackle the issue, Iwasaki added. More broadly, supporting children with long COVID and preventing further cases will require "investment in health and health care services, physical and occupational rehabilitation, and mental health services," Kleinman added, saying this "will be critical for the population health of our children for the foreseeable future."
