4.0 Article

Unregulated Trade in Turtle Shells for Chinese Traditional Medicine in East and Southeast Asia: The Case of Taiwan

期刊

CHELONIAN CONSERVATION AND BIOLOGY
卷 8, 期 1, 页码 11-18

出版社

ALLEN PRESS INC
DOI: 10.2744/CCB-0747.1

关键词

Reptilia; Testudines; Trionychidae; Geoemydidae; turtle; wildlife trade; turtle shell; Traditional Chinese Medicine; Taiwan; CITES

类别

资金

  1. Council of Agriculture, Republic of China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Based on customs trade statistics from 1999 to 2008, a total of 1989 metric tons of shells of hard-shelled chelonians have been imported into Taiwan for consumption in the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) market, with an average of 198.9 metric tons/y. The total amount of soft-shell turtle shells imported was 290 metric tons, averaging 29.0 metric tons/y. This volume indicates that millions of turtles and tortoises have been killed annually for the TCM market in Taiwan alone. The trade of turtle shells for TCM has existed in huge volumes for a long time, with no significant decrease in the market size through Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora listing of the main target species. Although the customs trade records were not species-specific, in the market survey conducted in 1996-2002, a total of 39 species of turtles and tortoises, mainly originating from China, Southeast and South Asia, were identified. Only 3 non-Asian species were found. The larger number and numerous ;species of origin in turtle-shell trade for the TCM market indicate blatant disregard by traders for law and authority of responsible agencies from both source and consumer countries. Observed levels of usage and trade of turtle shells appear to be highly unsustainable and may have a great impact on the chelonian fauna in source areas. For the sustainability of chelonian fauna in Asia, clear policies and close international cooperation for the regulation of turtle-shell trade are urgently needed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据