Author:
Diogo Veríssimo
(MENAFN- The Conversation)
Governments often use bans to protect wildlife that's most threatened by trade. However, in our recent study we ask the question: could banning wildlife trade in one threatened species increase the trade in other threatened species?
The expansion of online markets has made it easier for people to buy and sell wildlife. This potential for larger-scale commercial trade creates a potential threat to wildlife, particular when populations are small, which is often the case for species that inhabit islands.
To deal with the risk of overexploitation, the government of Japan, one of the world's largest wildlife markets, banned the trade of three threatened species: the giant water bug , the Tokyo salamander and the golden venus chub .
While the ban successfully halted legal sales of the policy-targeted species, it had an unintended consequence: an increase in the sales of similar, non-banned species, some of which are threatened.
This pattern, known as the“spillover effect”, suggests that when a species is no longer available, demand often moves to alternative species rather than disappearing entirely. However, these effects affected different species in different ways, with the spillover lasting for more than a year for water bugs, but disappearing over the same period for the salamanders and freshwater fish.
One of the policy-targeted species: giant water bugs.
Kota Tawa
These spillovers can be problematic as they can drive buyers to seek exotic pet species from other countries or even continents. Based on past experience in Japan and elsewhere, we know that these are often then released into nature by those that can no longer keep them. This increases the pressure on native fauna through competition and the spread of disease which may threaten not only native wildlife but also human health. Our findings highlight the need for a more comprehensive approach to wildlife trade regulations – one that considers both direct conservation efforts and indirect global impacts.
Balancing bans
While wildlife trade bans can play an important step, their ability to address overexploitation on their own is limited. To conserve species, we need complementary strategies that can manage demand and monitor supply.
Prior to a ban, it is key to work to reduce the demand for the species to be targeted or redirect it to species that are well managed and not of conservation concern. This would be likely to minimise the effects of any unintended spillover after the trade ban comes into effect. If buyers understand why a species is at risk and are offered sustainable alternatives, they may be less likely to shift their interest to other vulnerable wildlife.
One of the spillover species: Japanese black salamander.
Noe Matsushima
Governments also need to enforce stronger monitoring to be able to track which species are traded and in what amount. This may be hard to implement across all trade but is feasible when we talk about online legal trade, which represents a large part of the global wildlife trade. Instead of focusing only on banned species, authorities should keep an eye on similar species that could become the next target for trade.
For this to be effective, international cooperation, in the form of data sharing, for example, is critical since wildlife trade crosses borders. Countries need to work together to track and regulate trade so that bans don't simply push demand to other regions.
Finally, promoting legal, ethical and sustainable alternatives – such as responsible captive breeding programs or well-managed wild source populations – can help meet consumer demand without harming wild species.
Our study serves as an important reminder: conservation has no silver bullets and we must be willing to embrace a multitude of tools if we are to deal with the different sides of an issue as complex as the wildlife trade. If we only focus on banning species without considering how the market will react, we risk simply moving the risk of extinction from one species to the next. A well-rounded approach – one that includes consumer behaviour change, improved monitoring and sustainable alternatives – offers the best chance of protecting wildlife for the long term.
Don't have time to read about climate change as much as you'd like?
Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation's environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who've subscribed so far.
MENAFN03022025000199003603ID1109163107
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.