Chelonicide: Slow and Steady Wins the Race to Oblivion

[Lagmonster]

I know I cannot win over the butcher. I can win over governments and consumers who do not have a vested interest in the continued practice of turtle-butchery.

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I seem to recall that the three basic reasons to keep a species around are genetic resources, ecosystem stability, and ethics (Of course, there's also the old joke - you've probably heard it before - about how "there's always one h.erectus who wishes he could have just one last mammoth steak"). Cynically speaking, it wouldn't be out of form for governments to engage in habitat and species preservation as a way of guaranteeing revenue from ecotourists.

[Erik von Nein]

That's crap, Aly. Arguing sustainability to people who hunt or fish has worked before. In my area there's a large group of fisherman who've worked closely with environmentalists to keep fishing sustainable and it's worked. There's no reason arguing economics won't meet with success. Sure, not always, but it's better than nothing. Especially since it's going to be a matter of not just convincing governments since, as you've said, regulations don't mean dick when no one enforces them, or if they're unsustainable in the first place.

[Alyrium Denryle]

That's crap, Aly. Arguing sustainability to people who hunt or fish has worked before. In my area there's a large group of fisherman who've worked closely with environmentalists to keep fishing sustainable and it's worked. There's no reason arguing economics won't meet with success. Sure, not always, but it's better than nothing. Especially since it's going to be a matter of not just convincing governments since, as you've said, regulations don't mean dick when no one enforces them, or if they're unsustainable in the first place.

As I have gone over, turtles cannot sustain any meaningful harvest in their native populations. So arguing that one can convince the fisherman analogues to maintain a sustainable harvest does not work.

Additionally, the fisherman and the butcher are two different animals. The butcher does not necessarily depend on turtles for his livelyhood, they are professional middle men. Turtles disappear, and they move to something else, a butcher has enough contacts with importers and smugglers that he can easily get something else and thus they have no incentive to drive the conservation of turtles. This is what happens when one species becomes ecologically non-existent. The demand just shifts to another species. If not turtles, than something else.

So you have to convince the local people who do the catching and smuggling (fisherman analogues), governments to enforce a ban, and consumers to stop demand.

Cynically speaking, it wouldn't be out of form for governments to engage in habitat and species preservation as a way of guaranteeing revenue from ecotourists.

That would be how you convince local governments to enforce their regulations, and the local people who do the trapping. Provided the ecotourism is done right. Which it seldom is.

The consumers... well the best way to do that is to pull on their heart strings and go for the throat of cultural change

[Bilbo]

I am not trying to turn this into a discussion on cultures or culture-bashing but how many Asian cultures really give a flying shit about the environment? The Chinese are turning their environment into a shithole with their willingness to build anything cheap for anyone no care for the impact. The Japanese hunt whales to the point of extinction with no shits about what happens when they are all gone. Millions of people think you can get a bigger boner if they eat this or that part of the tiger or some other endangered animal and dont give a shit if they kill every tiger on the planet in the process.

Until these cultures learn to respect the environment and stop falling back on the "its our culture you must accept it" line of bullshit when they butcher to their delight we will have this problem forever.

I take that back. We wont have this problem forever. Eventually they kill off all of these animals. When they kill the last tiger to get themself a bigger boner they will either wake up too late, or they will just decide that ground up lion penis, or jaguar, or panther will do the same and they will just move onto another species.

Western culture is far from perfect but we at least attempt to pass laws and enforce then to protect the environment. The communist block never gave a shit, and third world nations at the behest of corrupt officials or some Western businesses dont give a shit either.

[Ypoknons]

I am not trying to turn this into a discussion on cultures or culture-bashing but how many Asian cultures really give a flying shit about the environment? The Chinese are turning their environment into a shithole with their willingness to build anything cheap for anyone no care for the impact. The Japanese hunt whales to the point of extinction with no shits about what happens when they are all gone. Millions of people think you can get a bigger boner if they eat this or that part of the tiger or some other endangered animal and dont give a shit if they kill every tiger on the planet in the process.

You have valid points, but you have to remember Chinese society is in a state of rapid flux and change. 20 years ago they had literally nothing and now they're in a phase of rapid industrialization that is not too different from London of the industrial revolution. Indeed my economics professor has done work to point out societies tend to go through phases from subsistence, extreme industrialization and pollution, then to a more moderate phase. And Japan isn't polluted to hell like China is, and they do have respect for some animals, including their Macaques. The key for the world now is to encourage China to go through that cycle quick. Your "look at us and look at them attitude" doesn't help anything; it just makes you look more obnoxious to those we need to convince that the environment is worth saving. After all, the West went through a similar period in the past. I know the Hong Kong conservation groups quite well - we're not at all powerful, but there has been valuable work done on the Chinese White Dolphins. Local interest definitely spiked after environment groups start dolphin sighting tours, and in turn that leads to much more research done by organizations such as Ocean Park and the local Greenpeace types.

[Erik von Nein]

As I have gone over, turtles cannot sustain any meaningful harvest in their native populations. So arguing that one can convince the fisherman analogues to maintain a sustainable harvest does not work.

Granted, but it's not as if these people only harvest turtles.

However, I was curious; how well would these species do in captive breeding/farming? It might be a solution to keeping the species going in the wild if farming can take over demand.

Additionally, the fisherman and the butcher are twodifferent animals. The butcher does not necessarily depend on turtles for his livelyhood, they are professional middle men. Turtles disappear, and they move to something else, a butcher has enough contacts with importers and smugglers that he can easily get something else and thus they have no incentive to drive the conservation of turtles. This is what happens when one species becomes ecologically non-existent. The demand just shifts to another species. If not turtles, than something else.

Then they should be even easier to convince if they don't exclusively depend on turtles. If they have no vested interest, then it should be able to argue for them to cease selling it, especially if something of equal or slightly lesser than value can be found.

So you have to convince the local people who do the catching and smuggling (fisherman analogues), governments to enforce a ban, and consumers to stop demand.

That you do. I wasn't arguing that it's the only way, just a way.

In any event you have to start convincing some people there to stop and let them help you. I'm sure there are people there who don't want to see the turtles go extinct any more than we do.

[Bilbo]

I am not trying to turn this into a discussion on cultures or culture-bashing but how many Asian cultures really give a flying shit about the environment? The Chinese are turning their environment into a shithole with their willingness to build anything cheap for anyone no care for the impact. The Japanese hunt whales to the point of extinction with no shits about what happens when they are all gone. Millions of people think you can get a bigger boner if they eat this or that part of the tiger or some other endangered animal and dont give a shit if they kill every tiger on the planet in the process.

You have valid points, but you have to remember Chinese society is in a state of rapid flux and change. 20 years ago they had literally nothing and now they're in a phase of rapid industrialization that is not too different from London of the industrial revolution. Indeed my economics professor has done work to point out societies tend to go through phases from subsistence, extreme industrialization and pollution, then to a more moderate phase. And Japan isn't polluted to hell like China is, and they do have respect for some animals, including their Macaques. The key for the world now is to encourage China to go through that cycle quick. Your "look at us and look at them attitude" doesn't help anything; it just makes you look more obnoxious to those we need to convince that the environment is worth saving. After all, the West went through a similar period in the past. I know the Hong Kong conservation groups quite well - we're not at all powerful, but there has been valuable work done on the Chinese White Dolphins. Local interest definitely spiked after environment groups start dolphin sighting tours, and in turn that leads to much more research done by organizations such as Ocean Park and the local Greenpeace types.

Two points to consider.

1. China is going through second generation industrialization. Other nations have already been down the path and the damage to people and environment are well know. Either the Chinese are too ignorant to learn from those who went before them or they just dont give a damn. Considering the track record for environmentalism by command economies (communists make great examples here) I am thinking the second is the answer. The Chinese are far from ignorant or stupid. They just dont care.

2. Sure the Japanese protect their monkeys. Would be nice if they had the same attitude to international oceans. Unfortunately they do not. The Japanese would happily hunt whales to extinction in a very efficient manner. Hell they are basically doing that right now.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Granted, but it's not as if these people only harvest turtles.

However, I was curious; how well would these species do in captive breeding/farming? It might be a solution to keeping the species going in the wild if farming can take over demand.

Depends on the species. One can breed some species, like Trachemys scripta relatively easily and in huge volume, if you are willing to wait for animals to mature. The really big turtles however take 20 years to mature, and those are the ones in highest demand.

Then they should be even easier to convince if they don't exclusively depend on turtles. If they have no vested interest, then it should be able to argue for them to cease selling it, especially if something of equal or slightly lesser than value can be found.

Problem is, they dont have a vested interest in the species, but in the profits. They maximize short term profits by jacking up prices on rare turtles. Convincing them will be harder, not easier, because the rare status of the turtles puts them in a position they want to be in. Raking in short term profits.

1. China is going through second generation industrialization. Other nations have already been down the path and the damage to people and environment are well know. Either the Chinese are too ignorant to learn from those who went before them or they just dont give a damn. Considering the track record for environmentalism by command economies (communists make great examples here) I am thinking the second is the answer. The Chinese are far from ignorant or stupid. They just dont care.

I find little I can disagree with here, save that it is tactically better to be a bit more magnanimous.

It is not like the industrialization from the late 1800s through the 40s where the technology to be better just didn't exist. The technology china needs to be cleaner is readily available and they have the capital to implement it. They choose not to. And there is nothing about industrialization that induces them to reach into Indonesia and depopulate its herpetofauna.

2. Sure the Japanese protect their monkeys. Would be nice if they had the same attitude to international oceans. Unfortunately they do not. The Japanese would happily hunt whales to extinction in a very efficient manner. Hell they are basically doing that right now.

They protect their monkeys, but flout international whaling regs, and are rather knowingling fishing both directly and by proxy, blue fin tuna to extinction as well. Their own territorial waters are already essentially fished clean of all life.

[Ypoknons]

It is not like the industrialization from the late 1800s through the 40s where the technology to be better just didn't exist. The technology china needs to be cleaner is readily available and they have the capital to implement it. They choose not to. And there is nothing about industrialization that induces them to reach into Indonesia and depopulate its herpetofauna.

Yet the West in the 1800s did not act until they realized the extant of the damage; there is still room for the Chinese to act. The herpetofauna situation is quite ridiculous, I agree. However, we seem to have different interests - you and Bilbo have condemnation on your mind, and I am interested more in methods to improve the current situation. Would you suggest international sanctions?

[Bilbo]

[
It is not like the industrialization from the late 1800s through the 40s where the technology to be better just didn't exist. The technology china needs to be cleaner is readily available and they have the capital to implement it. They choose not to. And there is nothing about industrialization that induces them to reach into Indonesia and depopulate its herpetofauna.

Yet the West in the 1800s did not act until they realized the extant of the damage; there is still room for the Chinese to act. The herpetofauna is quite ridiculous, I agree. However, we seem to have different interests - you and Bilbo have condemnation on your mind, and I am interested more in methods to improve the current situation. Would you suggest international sanctions?

I would consider massive sanctions not aimed at China but at international companies that build in China or other third world areas to avoid/flaunt environmental laws of their home countries. Really this is no better than using child labor in sweat shops in the 3rd world to avoid home country labor laws.

[Ypoknons]

I would consider massive sanctions not aimed at China but at international companies that build in China or other third world areas to avoid/flaunt environmental laws of their home countries. Really this is no better than using child labor in sweat shops in the 3rd world to avoid home country labor laws.

But then how would this help the Chelonicide situation, a practice driven by traditional Chinese medicine?

[Alyrium Denryle]

It is not like the industrialization from the late 1800s through the 40s where the technology to be better just didn't exist. The technology china needs to be cleaner is readily available and they have the capital to implement it. They choose not to. And there is nothing about industrialization that induces them to reach into Indonesia and depopulate its herpetofauna.

Yet the West in the 1800s did not act until they realized the extant of the damage; there is still room for the Chinese to act. The herpetofauna situation is quite ridiculous, I agree. However, we seem to have different interests - you and Bilbo have condemnation on your mind, and I am interested more in methods to improve the current situation. Would you suggest international sanctions?

Lets be fair. I like doing both. They are not mutually exclusive.

The difference is that back in the 1800s, we didnt know what we were doing. Now, the data is publically available. The IUCN is not some obscure conservation group, it is an international body of scientists and wildlife managers under the auspices of the UN. The chinese, and japanese know exactly what they are doing. They cant claim ignorance, even willful ignorance. They just dont care.

I would LOVE to put pressure on local and national governments using soft power. Hit them with trade tariffs until they enforce their own regulations and treaties they have signed (like CITES). Hold out the proverbial carrot, while also holding a stick.

"Hey guys, if you enforce CITES, we will give you breaks on taxes and fees when you ship goods into the US/Europe. If you dont, it will become much more expensive to do business with us"

But I am too cynical to think that will happen.

[Ypoknons]

Lets be fair. I like doing both. They are not mutually exclusive.

The difference is that back in the 1800s, we didnt know what we were doing. Now, the data is publically available. The IUCN is not some obscure conservation group, it is an international body of scientists and wildlife managers under the auspices of the UN. The chinese, and japanese know exactly what they are doing. They cant claim ignorance, even willful ignorance. They just dont care.

I would LOVE to put pressure on local and national governments using soft power. Hit them with trade tariffs until they enforce their own regulations and treaties they have signed (like CITES). Hold out the proverbial carrot, while also holding a stick.

"Hey guys, if you enforce CITES, we will give you breaks on taxes and fees when you ship goods into the US/Europe. If you dont, it will become much more expensive to do business with us"

But I am too cynical to think that will happen.

Of course. There's not very much we're disagreeing on here, other than tone , though Erik can be a bit more substantive than I am at times. THe problem is, I have a paper on transparency and corruption on China to write and due tomorrow; otherwise I'd do some more digging and idea-giving.

[Bilbo]

I would consider massive sanctions not aimed at China but at international companies that build in China or other third world areas to avoid/flaunt environmental laws of their home countries. Really this is no better than using child labor in sweat shops in the 3rd world to avoid home country labor laws.

But then how would this help the Chelonicide situation, a practice driven by traditional Chinese medicine?

There is nothing you can directly do. You can put sanctions against the country but how much control of the ignorant peasants running this trade does the Chinese government really have?

You could create economic incentives for the people not to do this but then you are basically bribing people to keep them from doing something they shouldnt be doing anyway.

Or a third option is sanctions against companies that operate in China as a kind of "environmental tax" that helps to offset the damage to the planet the chinese have no problem inflicting.

[Alyrium Denryle]

There is nothing you can directly do. You can put sanctions against the country but how much control of the ignorant peasants running this trade does the Chinese government really have?

Dude. Draconian government. If they want to police something, they can. Most of the sale of turtles takes place in urban areas where the wealthy live and the profits are high.

One way to convince the middle men not to do business BTW is to arrest them... A few biologists were able to survey every meat market in three major cities. All of them for 5 months ever two weeks, then a smaller number every 2 weeks for thirty. You would need a few police dedicated to inspecting meat markets. have them do unannounced inspections.

Policing this is relatively easy all things considered

[Bilbo]

There is nothing you can directly do. You can put sanctions against the country but how much control of the ignorant peasants running this trade does the Chinese government really have?

Dude. Draconian government. If they want to police something, they can. Most of the sale of turtles takes place in urban areas where the wealthy live and the profits are high.

One way to convince the middle men not to do business BTW is to arrest them... A few biologists were able to survey every meat market in three major cities. All of them for 5 months ever two weeks, then a smaller number every 2 weeks for thirty. You would need a few police dedicated to inspecting meat markets. have them do unannounced inspections.

Policing this is relatively easy all things considered

Then you have to decide if its worth the effort to convince the Chinese government that stopping this trade is worth their while. Good luck though, like I said the Chinese have really shown no interest in the environment.

[Alyrium Denryle]

There is nothing you can directly do. You can put sanctions against the country but how much control of the ignorant peasants running this trade does the Chinese government really have?

Dude. Draconian government. If they want to police something, they can. Most of the sale of turtles takes place in urban areas where the wealthy live and the profits are high.

One way to convince the middle men not to do business BTW is to arrest them... A few biologists were able to survey every meat market in three major cities. All of them for 5 months ever two weeks, then a smaller number every 2 weeks for thirty. You would need a few police dedicated to inspecting meat markets. have them do unannounced inspections.

Policing this is relatively easy all things considered

Then you have to decide if its worth the effort to convince the Chinese government that stopping this trade is worth their while. Good luck though, like I said the Chinese have really shown no interest in the environment.

That is what the carrot on a stick+the beating stick is for.

[Bilbo]

That is what the carrot on a stick+the beating stick is for.

Guess we would then see how strong of a hold the Chinese government has.

[Erik von Nein]

Depends on the species. One can breed some species, like Trachemys scripta relatively easily and in huge volume, if you are willing to wait for animals to mature. The really big turtles however take 20 years to mature, and those are the ones in highest demand.

Sounds like it could be a solution, then. Shifting the demand onto turtles that can be breed in captivity. Waiting for a harvest isn't that unheard of, like waiting for wine harvests to mature enough to sell. How long does it take for the scripta to mature?

Problem is, they dont have a vested interest in the species, but in the profits. They maximize short term profits by jacking up prices on rare turtles. Convincing them will be harder, not easier, because the rare status of the turtles puts them in a position they want to be in. Raking in short term profits.

Well, the turtles being more rare would mean more profits. Until the turtle goes extinct. If you can give them a constant supply of turtles, say from the aforementioned captive breed ones, then they would have lesser profits pound-per-pound but they'd last for far longer. This is especially important if turtles are a big delicacy over in Asia.

Also, (though it's still the area I live in) the butchers/fish markets have been really amenable toward the idea of sustainable sources of various kinds of meat, either because they also love eating it or because it helps bring in more customers.

[Mayabird]

For that matter, how long has there been a ban on whaling? Yet that, too is defied continually, isn't it?

Not exactly defied, per se. It's lawyered, by the Japanese taking advantage of the "scientific research" exemption to claim that all of their whaling is for "scientific research purposes". Even if the whale meat ends up in supermarkets in Tokyo.

Meat that isn't even eaten, either. It just sits there in the freezers with no buyers. Even their unofficial but true reason for hunting whales is a joke, as big a joke as the papers published based on their 'research.'

[Lagmonster]

To be fair, to people who don't belong to the 'impulse donor' category of charities, arguments like "They look cute" and "it's bad" isn't going to mean shit. Can you describe the ecological impact of the turtles' absence? Are we likely to miss them about as much as we miss Mammuthus?

[Alyrium Denryle]

To be fair, to people who don't belong to the 'impulse donor' category of charities, arguments like "They look cute" and "it's bad" isn't going to mean shit. Can you describe the ecological impact of the turtles' absence? Are we likely to miss them about as much as we miss Mammuthus?

Turtles hold a middle position in a lot of ecosystems, depending on species, they essentially serve as a clean up crew. They eat carrion, preventing lovely decay and the spread of disease, plant material preventing eutrophication, some species eat things like crayfish controlling their populations and preventing them from de-lifing a pond or stream. They also provide food sources for a lot of other organisms, and adults are a diet staple for another keystone taxa. Crocodilians.


As a general rule something like a turtle that holds a middle position in a food web is a bad idea to get rid of.

Additionally, the ethical argument that nature exists for its own sake holds a good amount of sway with many people, because it is valid on its face.