Only adopting law will not possible to conservation. Law is certainly necessary but more importantly we require awarness. Awarness should be convey to the common people. Besides that alternative livelihood is also important factor who totally depends on forest resources. Today I have seen community conservation (sacred Grove) play a vital role regarding effective conservation in several parts of the world.

Thank you for your question. Yes, laws against wildlife trafficking and their enforcement are considered conservation actions, because of their potential to reduce poaching of the native populations that are targeted by the traffickers or their suppliers. In general, the issue of what counts as conservation may be a complex one, which we discuss very briefly in our paper. We are working on more detailed guidelines that will include this issue. Another complex question is how to assess the impact of such law enforcement for a given species; i.e., estimate what the status of the populations would have been (or will become) if such laws did not exist or cease to be enforced. Comparison of populations in different jurisdictions with different levels of enforcement may help with this question.

Law enforcement by itself doesn't give guarantee for conservation but it is the best tool for biodiversity conservation.

Dear Nacho: This is important concern. It is important that the law enforcement would have great impact curbing wildlife trafficking; however, the other factors like effective conservation management, local cooperation from community people and systematic monitoring would be essential. It would be vital that the law implementation be used without biases. There are many areas especially the tough terrains and the mountains where management staff needs good equipments and support to face this challenge of catching the culprits.

I would look forward to have details of your programme.

Best wishes, Hemant K Badola

Yes, absolutely it is a conservation action. This includes not only trafficking in live animals but also their parts. The situation in Africa is a perfect example. Were it not for law enforcement against poachers, the black rhino would likely already be extinct. I would also consider law enforcement action against the buyers and sellers of rhino horn a conservation action.

Law enforcement is definitely a conservation action. Laws protecting wildlife, air and water resources, special habitats such as estuaries and wetlands, and many other components of our natural world are essential elements of a sound conservation strategy. But the laws mean little without a strong law enforcement component. I assisted in a 3-year undercover initiative in New York State that identified dozens of people violating wildlife protection laws. Without on-the-ground law enforcement work none of these illegal actions would have been discovered and stopped. In the U.S. law enforcement is hindered by the fact that wildlife laws are inconsistent across state boundaries. There are numerous cases where an animal is illegally collected from one state where it is protected and taken to a state where there are no laws protecting that species. In an attempt to remedy that situation a group of us within Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation developed Model Regulatory Guidelines for amphibians and reptiles that provide a framework for states to consider when adopting new laws pertaining to these species.

chaque espèce doit vivre dans son biotope. je suis contre le déplacement des espèces d'un lieux à un autre. Il faut protéger les animaux et les laisser vivre dans leur habitat naturel

chaque espèce doit vivre dans son biotope. je suis contre le déplacement des espèces d'un lieux à un autre. Il faut protéger les animaux et les laisser vivre dans leur habitat naturel

That is just one part of the purpose of law enforcement efforts in the area of enforcement.

Dear Nacho: You should detail out your programme here.

Can you give some model examples where law enforcement has been successful in your area.

Dear Hemant,

There is a general lack of evaluation of both perceived and real effectiveness of law enforcement on wildlife crime and illegal trade. That is the reason under my question.

It is more fruitful If someone provide model example on law enforcement

Thanks Nacho; I agree with you. Still exploring some isolated examples every country has may be useful in discussing this important question. For example, in Sikkim state of India where I have been researching over a dozen years, the law enforcement in wildlife has been taken with seriousness and with utmost sincerity. Many examples of taking field decisions in Khangchendzonga National Park and other sanctuaries immensely helped curbing wildlife crime.

Sometimes law enforcement and policy measures are applied from the intuition, without knowing if something really works. For example, capital punishment for traffikers is on the table http://aitonline.tv/post-west_african_attorneys_general_seek_death_penalty_for_human_traffickers but it is known that increasing the severity of punishment does little to deter crime.

It is needed to evaluate several measures to know if thery really works. For example:

• Are patrols preventing poaching or they just displace it to other areas?
• It is more disruptive to seize & arrest in the source country or cooperate and coordinate a controlled delivery to seize & arrest in the country of destination?
• Does big seizures (at certain points in the supply chain) lead to greater poaching (and stockpile thefts) levels to be able to supply consumers despite the lost?

We need to better understand what works and what doesn't works to develop a evidence-based policing for wildlife crime, but taking into account that the main goal is the conservation of wildlife.

Good answer. We may discuss a lot on the points you raised.

Nacho Díaz Castaño and Hemant K. Badola thank you raising an important discussion.

My Ph.D. research aims to understand the wildlife crime prevention measures undertaken in the Mudumalai Tiger Reserve. I measure it under four variables, namely,

1. Proactive mechanisms to deter wildlife crime

2. Intelligence-led approach to detect and prevent wildlife crime

3. Ability and capacity of forest staff to respond to wildlife crime

4. Extent of involvement of the local community in wildlife conservation

Data collection has been finished and now I am analysing the data. By the end of March 2021, I will share with you all the synopsis of the results. It is an attempt to understand the evidence-based enforcement efforts in a protected area. Also, this will throw some light on what works and what not works, where* works and where it doesn’t work.

* Core tiger habitat or buffer tiger habitat.

The widespread rise in Wildlife poaching during the Covid-19 time in 2020 is alarming, as reported elsewhere. What efforts were made by the various governments is a crucial issue, may be debated.

The 2020 UN report on wildlife crime in the world is, however, very interesting.

https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/wildlife/2020/World_Wildlife_Report_2020_9July.pdf

Yes, law enforcement is important and critical part of actions to combat wildlife trafficking.