Analysis of People's Perceptions of Turtle Conservation Effectiveness for the Magdalena River Turtle Podocnemis lewyana and the Colombian Slider Trachemys callirostris in Northern Colombia: An Ethnozoological Approach
-
Published source details
Vallejo-Betancur M.M., Paez V.P. & Quan-Young L. (2018) Analysis of People's Perceptions of Turtle Conservation Effectiveness for the Magdalena River Turtle Podocnemis lewyana and the Colombian Slider Trachemys callirostris in Northern Colombia: An Ethnozoological Approach. Tropical Conservation Science, 11, 1-14.
Published source details Vallejo-Betancur M.M., Paez V.P. & Quan-Young L. (2018) Analysis of People's Perceptions of Turtle Conservation Effectiveness for the Magdalena River Turtle Podocnemis lewyana and the Colombian Slider Trachemys callirostris in Northern Colombia: An Ethnozoological Approach. Tropical Conservation Science, 11, 1-14.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
Action | Category | |
---|---|---|
Engage local communities in conservation activities Action Link |
![]() |
|
Use education and/or awareness campaigns to improve behaviour towards reptiles and reduce threats Action Link |
![]() |
-
Engage local communities in conservation activities
A replicated study in 2017 in 37 locations across six river drainage basins in northern Colombia (Vallejo-Betancur et al. 2018) found that in areas where communities were engaged in conservation activities, local residents claimed to have reduced their direct use of turtles compared to local residents in areas that were not engaged, although stated rates of hunting, buying and selling of turtles remained similar. Fewer local residents in areas engaged in conservation initiatives claimed to use the focal turtle species or other related turtle species as food (focal turtles: 10% of 50 participants; related turtles: 34% of 50) compared to local residents in areas with no conservation initiatives (focal turtles: 54% of 50 participants; sympatric turtles: 54% of 50), and more claimed to have changed their consumption habits regarding focal turtle species (with conservation initiatives: 36% of 50 participants; without conservation initiatives: 6% of 50 participants). However, stated rates of hunting, buying and selling turtles were similar whether or not residents were in areas with conservation initiatives (see original paper for details). Semi-structured interviews with local residents were carried out in 37 locations that were classified into areas where turtle conservation initiatives had been implemented (17 locations, 50 survey participants) and areas where they had not (20 locations, 50 survey participants). Conservation initiatives included head-starting (12 initiatives), community agreements to protect turtle habitat (2 initiatives), action against illegal wildlife trade (3 initiatives) and education in schools (1 initiative).
(Summarised by: Katie Sainsbury)
-
Use education and/or awareness campaigns to improve behaviour towards reptiles and reduce threats
A replicated study in 2017 in 37 locations across six river drainage basins in northern Colombia (Vallejo-Betancur et al. 2018) found that local residents exposed to turtle conservation initiatives claimed to have reduced their direct use of turtles compared to local residents not exposed to the initiatives, although stated rates of hunting, buying and selling of turtles remained similar. Fewer local residents exposed to conservation initiatives claimed to use the focal turtle species or other related turtle species as food (focal turtles: 10% of 50 participants; related turtles: 34% of 50) compared to local residents in areas with no conservation initiatives (focal turtles: 54% of 50 participants; sympatric turtles: 54% of 50). More local residents exposed to conservation initiatives claimed to have changed their consumption habits regarding focal turtle species (36% of 50 participants) compared to local residents not exposed to conservation initiatives (6% of 50 participants). However, stated rates of hunting, buying and selling turtles were similar whether or not residents had been exposed to conservation initiatives or not (see original paper for details). Semi-structured interviews with local residents were carried out in 37 locations that were classified into areas where turtle conservation initiatives had been implemented (17 locations, 50 survey participants) and areas where they had not (20 locations, 50 survey participants). Conservation initiatives included education in schools (1 initiative), community agreements to protect turtle habitat (2 initiatives), action against illegal wildlife trade (3 initiatives) and head-starting (12 initiatives).
(Summarised by: Katie Sainsbury)
Output references
|