Commercially breed reptiles to reduce pressure on wild populations

Overall effectiveness category Awaiting assessment
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Wildlife breeding farms are sometimes used with the goal of alleviating the pressure of harvesting or collecting on wild reptile populations. However, if not carefully regulated, breeding farms may be used to ‘launder’ illegally harvested reptiles, thereby allowing illegal trade to continue (Lyons & Natusch 2011).

To be included, ideally studies should have tested the impact of commercial breeding on wild populations, and this should be taken into account when considering the effectiveness of this action. However, often the effects on wild populations are not explicitly or directly tested.

For studies that assess the impact of releasing captive-bred or head-started reptiles into the wild, see Species management – Release captive-bred reptiles into the wild and Head-start wild-caught reptiles for release.

^{Lyons, J.A. & Natusch D.J. (2011) Wildlife laundering through breeding farms: illegal harvest, population declines and a means of regulating the trade of green pythons (Morelia viridis) from Indonesia. Biological Conservation, 144, 3073–3081.}

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects on reptile populations of commercially breeding reptiles to reduce pressure on wild populations. This study was in the Cayman Islands.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

OTHER (1 STUDY)

Human behaviour change (1 study): One study in the Cayman Islands found that where there was a commercial turtle farm, consumption and purchase of wild turtle products was rare, though some residents still showed a preference for wild turtle meat.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A study in 2014 in the Cayman Islands (Nuno et al. 2018) found that where there was a commercial turtle farm, consumption and purchase of wild turtle products was rare, though some residents still showed a preference for wild turtle meat. Overall, around 1% of households illegally consumed eggs in the prior 12 months and 2% illegally bought turtle meat. Among consumers who preferred buying uncooked turtle meat, 14% showed a preference for wild meat over farmed meat. Of residents that consumed turtle during the prior 12 months, 37% bought it from the turtle farm and 62% did not buy uncooked turtle meat (e.g. consumed at restaurants). During the 12 months of the study, no source of legal, wild turtle meat was available to consumers. In 1968, a commercial breeding operation was established to provide turtle meat for consumption and reduce pressure on wild stocks. In 2014, surveys of 100 households from each of six districts were carried out, and respondents were asked about turtle meat consumption, purchase and participation in illegal behaviours relating to sea turtles (see paper for details of questioning methods). In addition, 182 consumers of turtle meat were asked further questions about their preferences.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Nuno A., Blumenthal J.M., Austin T.J., Bothwell J., Ebanks-Petrie G., Godley B.J. & Broderick A.C. (2018) Understanding implications of consumer behavior for wildlife farming and sustainable wildlife trade. Conservation Biology, 32, 390-400.

Please cite as:

Sainsbury K.A., Morgan W.H., Watson M., Rotem G., Bouskila A., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2021) Reptile Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for reptiles. Conservation Evidence Series Synopsis. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Reptile Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Introduce alternative income sources to replace hunting or harvesting of reptiles Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link
Commercially breed reptiles to reduce pressure on wild populations Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link
Patrol or monitor nesting beaches Action Link	Awaiting assessment	7	Synopsis Link