4.7 Article

Quantifying the bat bushmeat trade in North Sulawesi, Indonesia, with suggestions for conservation action

Journal

GLOBAL ECOLOGY AND CONSERVATION
Volume 3, Issue -, Pages 324-330

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.gecco.2015.01.003

Keywords

Bushmeat; Conservation initiatives; Flying foxes; Indonesia; Market surveys

Funding

  1. Nagao Natural Environmental Foundation Programme
  2. Fulbright Student Research Fellowship
  3. American Indonesia Exchange Foundation
  4. American Philosophical Society through Lewis and Clark Fund for Exploration and Field Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The intense consumption of flying foxes in North Sulawesi, Indonesia has raised hunting pressure and extirpation is expected to spread into other regions. To assess local cultural attitudes towards bats for formulating a targeted conservation campaign, we conducted a survey of consumption practices of bats in 2013 at the eight major markets near Manado. Locals eat flying foxes at least once a month, but the frequency increases tenfold around Christian holidays. Approximately 500 metric tons of bats are imported from other provinces, with South Sulawesi as the main provider at 38%. No action has been taken to conserve the bats, as continued abundance in the market masks the effects of the bushmeat trade on wild populations. We suggest: (1) engaging churches as conduits for environmental education and quota enforcement; (2) legal regulation of interprovincial trade; (3) substituting bats with a sustainable option; (4) involving local students as campaigners to ensure higher receptiveness from local communities. Grassroots conservation initiatives combined with enforcement of existing laws aim to affect change on a local level, which has been successful in other conservation programs. These efforts would not only progress bat conservation, but conservation of other rare, endemic mammals common to the bushmeat trade. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available