TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of pay-for-release conservation incentives for unintentionally caught threatened species
AU - Leduc, Antoine O.H.C.
AU - Hussey, Nigel E.
N1 - Funding Information:
We thank 2 anonymous reviewers, N. Dulvy, P. Rocha, J. Nunes, and B. Phalan for providing insightful critiques of this work, and C. Sampaio for organizing the 14th Brazilian Meeting for the Study of Elasmobranchs (Sociedade Brasileira de Estudo dos Elasmobrânquios) from which this work stemmed. This work was supported by a grant from Coordenac¸ão de Aperfeic¸oamento de Pessoal de Ńıvel Superior (CAPES), Programe Nacional de Pós-Doutorado (PNPD) to A.O.H.C.L, and NSERC Discovery funding to N.E.H.
Funding Information:
We thank 2 anonymous reviewers, N. Dulvy, P. Rocha, J. Nunes, and B. Phalan for providing insightful critiques of this work, and C. Sampaio for organizing the 14th Brazilian Meeting for the Study of Elasmobranchs (Sociedade Brasileira de Estudo dos Elasmobr?nquios) from which this work stemmed. This work was supported by a grant from Coordena??o de Aperfei?oamento de Pessoal de N?vel Superior (CAPES), Programe Nacional de P?s-Doutorado (PNPD) to A.O.H.C.L, and NSERC Discovery funding to N.E.H.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Society for Conservation Biology
PY - 2019/8
Y1 - 2019/8
N2 - In the developing world, the exploitation of threatened species jeopardizes their permanence in the wild. Because not all captures are intentional, for instance when capture methods have low selectivity, pressure on these species may be lessened by releasing living incidentally caught animals. However, it is often unrealistic to expect people to voluntarily do so because it means foregoing the benefits of resource extraction. Financial incentives for such animal release may foster conservation objectives. Reducing human–animal conflicts, protecting natural habitat, and conserving nests of threatened species are examples of conservation benefits that can be built on financial reward systems. However, incentives aiming to protect unintentionally captured threatened species are scarce. We considered pay for release, a type of ecosystem-service payment designed to foster the release of incidentally captured threatened species. We aimed to determine the best conditions to implement this scheme, its potential benefits (e.g., incentivizing the release of threatened species), and pitfalls and priority research needs (e.g., required conditions for pay for release to work) to show that its global applicability is possible. Given that approaches solely based on education and law enforcement may be ineffective under some circumstances, we argue that pay for release can protect incidentally captured endangered species if used under conditions conducive for its success. When local participants’ intrinsic motivation for conservation is weak, but the release of incidentally live-caught animals into their habitats is readily achievable, pay-for-release schemes could jump start urgently needed conservation efforts against indiscriminate animal harvesting.
AB - In the developing world, the exploitation of threatened species jeopardizes their permanence in the wild. Because not all captures are intentional, for instance when capture methods have low selectivity, pressure on these species may be lessened by releasing living incidentally caught animals. However, it is often unrealistic to expect people to voluntarily do so because it means foregoing the benefits of resource extraction. Financial incentives for such animal release may foster conservation objectives. Reducing human–animal conflicts, protecting natural habitat, and conserving nests of threatened species are examples of conservation benefits that can be built on financial reward systems. However, incentives aiming to protect unintentionally captured threatened species are scarce. We considered pay for release, a type of ecosystem-service payment designed to foster the release of incidentally captured threatened species. We aimed to determine the best conditions to implement this scheme, its potential benefits (e.g., incentivizing the release of threatened species), and pitfalls and priority research needs (e.g., required conditions for pay for release to work) to show that its global applicability is possible. Given that approaches solely based on education and law enforcement may be ineffective under some circumstances, we argue that pay for release can protect incidentally captured endangered species if used under conditions conducive for its success. When local participants’ intrinsic motivation for conservation is weak, but the release of incidentally live-caught animals into their habitats is readily achievable, pay-for-release schemes could jump start urgently needed conservation efforts against indiscriminate animal harvesting.
KW - bycatch
KW - conservation method
KW - financial rewards
KW - local livelihoods
KW - sawfishes
KW - trust-based interactions
KW - unselective capture methods
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062447166&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062447166&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/cobi.13300
DO - 10.1111/cobi.13300
M3 - Article
C2 - 30786061
AN - SCOPUS:85062447166
SN - 0888-8892
VL - 33
SP - 953
EP - 961
JO - Conservation Biology
JF - Conservation Biology
IS - 4
ER -