14 DAY TRIAL // Writing in the journal Conservation Letters, a team of specialists working with the Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology at the University of Kent explain that, according to their investigations, anti-poaching measures and enforcement are doomed to yield few, if any, results in terms of safeguarding endangered species.
In their paper, the researchers draw attention to the fact that, despite the hefty sums of money that are spent on said green-oriented initiatives on a yearly basis, many species still have very high chances to fall off the biodiversity map sometime in the not so distant future.
The University of Kent specialists say that, all things considered, this is because both anti-poaching campaigns and enforcement fail to address the root of the problem.
More precisely, they do not succeed in tackling the chief drivers behind poaching and illegal trading activities.
According to these researchers, these drivers are an increase in the demand for rare animals and/or body parts, and the rising price of illegal goods such as the ones supplied by poachers and traffickers.
Consequently, the specialists urge that conservationists and high officials who are indeed committed to safeguarding wildlife agree to spend some money on strategies that focus less on curbing poaching and ending the illegal wildlife trade, and more on getting people living close to endangered species to value them.
They theorize that, when given the right incentives, folks living in such communities are very likely to help protect certain rare animals from being hunted and killed.
“Current enforcement measures are proving unsuccessful and more needs to be done to bring local communities, which live in close proximity to the species on-board, by rewarding them for conserving wildlife,” says study co-author Dan Challender.
Furthermore, “When their children are hungry and cannot afford to go to school then saving pangolins seems much less of a priority to them.”
The researchers also claim that, as surprising as this may sound, it actually makes sense that a legal framework for trading wildlife be established.
This way, it would be possible to set in place various taxes and use the money collected in this manner to promote conservation efforts.
“In the longer term we should look to establish legal and sustainable trade in many species threatened by poaching using tax revenues from such trade to fund species conservation efforts.”
“We also need to take the pressure off wild populations by investing in supply approaches such as ranching and wildlife farming which could lower the incentive to poach,” explains specialist Douglas MacMillan.
The researchers go on to detail that marketing schemes intended to curb the global demand for animals and animal body parts are also very much needed.
However, they stress that, before such programs can be pieced together and implemented, it is mandatory that researchers take a closer look at the existing patterns of wildlife consumption.