Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Global Change Biolog...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Global Change Biology
Article . 2022 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Global patterns of illegal marine turtle exploitation

Authors: Jesse F. Senko; Kayla M. Burgher; Maria del Mar Mancha‐Cisneros; Brendan J. Godley; Irene Kinan‐Kelly; Trevor Fox; Frances Humber; +3 Authors

Global patterns of illegal marine turtle exploitation

Abstract

AbstractHuman exploitation of wildlife for food, medicine, curios, aphrodisiacs, and spiritual artifacts represents a mounting 21st‐century conservation challenge. Here, we provide the first global assessment of illegal marine turtle exploitation across multiple spatial scales (i.e., Regional Management Units [RMUs] and countries) by collating data from peer‐reviewed studies, grey literature, archived media reports, and online questionnaires of in‐country experts spanning the past three decades. Based on available information, we estimate that over 1.1 million marine turtles were exploited between 1990 and 2020 against existing laws prohibiting their use in 65 countries or territories and in 44 of the world's 58 marine turtle RMUs, with over 44,000 turtles exploited annually over the past decade. Exploitation across the 30‐year period primarily consisted of green (56%) and hawksbill (39%) turtles when identified by species, with hawksbills (67%) and greens (81%) comprising the majority of turtles exploited in the 1990s and 2000s, respectively, and both species accounting for similar levels of exploitation in the 2010s. Although there were no clear overarching trends in the magnitude or spatial patterns of exploitation across the three decades, there was a 28% decrease in reported exploitation from the 2000s to the 2010s. The 10 RMUs with the highest exploitation in the 2010s included seven green and three hawksbill turtle RMUs, with most reported exploitation occurring in RMUs that typically exhibit a low risk of population decline or loss of genetic diversity. Over the past decade, the number of RMUs with “moderate” or “high” exploitation impact scores decreased. Our assessment suggests that illegal exploitation appears to have declined over the past decade and, with some exceptions, is primarily occurring in large, stable, and genetically diverse marine turtle populations.

Keywords

Conservation of Natural Resources, Aphrodisiacs, Animals, Humans, Animals, Wild, Turtles

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    34
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
34
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 1%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!