Wildlife conservation throughout the world is an area in which the application of principles of economics finds very sparse. Oftentimes advocates for conservation of species and governments are loathe to consider commercial use and trade in wildlife. Unfortunately, in discussions on conservation,emotions tend to drive the debate and the instinctive reaction is to call for more laws and prohibition. As a result, the tiger population in Nepal has been consistently decimated to the level that it is not only close to extinction.
As reported here, in spite of the fact that Nepal was home to the third largest population of tigers, it is now estimated that there are fewer than 150 live tigers in the country. Acknowledgment of the problem is fine but I am loathe to accept the blame on the illegal trade in tiger parts. the entry of international gangs in the trade is itself proof that the existing regime is only of help to poachers and traffickers.
Having appeared a couple of years ago, this article by Barun Mitra in the NYT now appears prescient because it stated clearly that saving the tiger population was possible and could be accomplished through commercialization. Even if it is counter intuitive, his thinking is quite sensible and is akin to an earlier argument on elephants that I proposed on this blog. To continue with this wrong-headed approach of prohibitions merely ensures that there will be far fewer naturally bred tigers and that ultimately, only private breeders will own any. It is instructive to note that there are more tigers in private ownership than are available in the wild. Nepal's National Parks and Conservation Department should call on Barun Mitra here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree with the comercialisation aspect indeed, but we don't want tigers to be only available amongst private breeders. We want tigers to continue roaming the forests of nepal for other sentimental purposes beyond just hides and body parts. Until now the policy and legislative platform has just succeeded in creating an environment where poachers thrive and illegal trade flourishes. Why not open up hunting, and create property rights in hunting...
Post a Comment