cons by exploitation Flashcards
cambel 1998 has legal harvest eggs ostinal costa rica been sucess
-important scource income
-com benifts
-not detrimental turtle population
cambel 1998 what has made ostinal legal harvesting turtles a success
-secure significant benefits locals
-voluntary and paid cons activities = benefit wildlife
-empowered local people resource management
-com efforts diversify economy
how has ostinal project changed 20 years on
-still high level support
-more importance conservation and awernes
-more amnosity toward gov
-concern towards impoact ecotourism
what issues ostinal sea turtle facing cambel 2007
tourism increasing
less demand egg
hutton learder william 2003 what issues using ecs approach manage resources s.
may be able to use speice s. biologically but removal still harm ecs
direct use values not incentive maintain ecs
conclusion huitton, learder william 2003 s. use ecs
s. use polarised issue must ensure biologically s. and have incentive stop conversion land , must ensure cons center s. use
how does using fish for aquerium trade work guyana bicknel 2007
-pay daily wage locals to fish for aquerium trade
-target fish stop bycatch
-monitoring stop if drop species
has use fishing for aquerium trade been sucessful in guyana
y- profits $3000
- self sustaining project= increase biod
and com involvement
bodner and lzono 2000 why conflict between sustaible use and development
s. use= decrease economic benefit locals
dev= try increase income short term
bodner lzono 2000 how can s.use and dev be reconciled
dev projects created to absorb cost in the transition to s. use so that locals are not harmed when trying to stop extinction
robinson 2018 how many house hold involved reptile trade
13%
how reptile trade occur madagasca robinson 2018
opportunistically part time- finacially unreliable done alongside other activities
robinson 2018 economioc value reptile trade
most valuable wildlife export madagascan people
gordon 2003 what have been the benifits of the kipepeo butterfly project
-1994-2000- $130000
-positive benefit liveloohood and attitudes
-financially self sustaining no neg impact wildlife numbers
-increased education envi
Thorbjarnarson 1999 crocodile skins are s option crocodiles
-=incentive cons
-helped some pop recovered and downlist CITES
0profitable
-generate fund wildlife agencies
-farm= wildlife education
-funds help endangered species
N crocodile skins not s option Thorbjarnarson 1999
-market cyclical = price rise and fall
-farm remove need hunting manage wild
-farm undermine price and undermine price s.use crocodile
-farm non native, genetic breed - undermine wild skins
-fund focus commercial species not most endagered
-wildlife help reduce habitat lsoss
other exotic leather becoming more popular
thornjarnarson conclusion should we be relying on s use crocodiles skins
-rely market could undermine long term cons goals
- should diversify meeat production aswell as skin , look ecotourism options
moyle 2012 benefits aliigator farm
-create s trade = poaching collapse
moyle 2012 benefit wild egg collection alligators
-wild alligators eggs high mortality rear in captivity and release back wild = higher survival
-create habitat protection
-increase gov willingness manage
brooks et al 2012 moyle 2012 is alligator farming beneficial of harmful for alligator conservation?
-farms and wild harvest can coexist same time as catering for different markets
-although neg perception farming in reality reduce poaching= should be included cons stratagies
what are the issues with porcupine farming vietnam brooks et al 2010
-58% farmers buying stock wild
-restaurants not buying as cheaper get wild
-not saving porcupine specues
BROOKS ET AL HOW TO SAVE PORCUPINES VIETNAM 2010
-need to decenticvise hunting
-better monitoring and enforcement
issues wildlife farming as conservation stratagy butle damania 2005
-farming uncertian results cons
-illegal wildlife trade criminal network not follow principles supply and demand
-high comp farming= increased poaching
butle and damian 2005 how could you make wildlife farming benefical conservation
-have quotas otherwise create to much comp and poaching increase
what is defifnition sustainble use
-species s.
-ecs s,
social, econimcs s
what ecologal s in s.use
oftake pop not lead degregaition biod, ecosystem strucutre and function
arguments against sustainable use
-animal welfare
-animal rights
-tradegy of common
-poelple greedy = won’t exploit s.
-people cheat corruption rife
-uncertianty quotas
-must develop pas to conserve biod
what john terbprgh quote tradegy nature
the greatist challange for cons not scientific but social, economic and political
what percent pas allow s. use
49%
why can’t protect pristine habitats?
-prisitine habitat= myth
-most occupied humans
why pas can’t fully protect wildlife
-lots emerging threats
-can’t stop poeple using guards and barriers
-cc, disease , invasives
what issues manamging natural resorce use
-big business
-oftern MNCs
-little concern locals
-often overexploit resources
what link saving species and use peru
-unglates taken bushmeat
-palm oil = revenue
-unglates also need palm fruit
-need manage palm fruit s. or no more bushmeat for people
what key questions must be answered to ensure wildlife used s.
-is there surplus production that can be harvested?
-how accurate is field data?
-how robust pop estimates?
-is the regulatory framework stron and enforcable?
what field work is needede to work out s. use
-abundance
-reproduction
-mortality
-look different pops space and time
what approach should be taken s. use
precautionary
how can you have conservation by exploutation
-manage recreation hunting
-quotas below MSY
=pop recover
example of a species saved hunting
-north america- white tailed deer
what supply chain components of protecting oliv risdley turtles exploitation
-local familiies right to collect= income
-local representives go to market and sell and harvest
-price same chicken egg
what controlls in place olive ridley s.use
-low price deter ilegal harvest and commercial interest
-com involvement and support = enforcement com led
