Commercial harvest

[Marguerite Whilden]

Marguerite Whilden

October 12, 2006 at 10:52 am #24112

It is important to note that the terrapin issue in Maryland has been neglected for five years. After the recommendations were issued in 2001, there was little concern from the Task Force membership or the state management agency. Over that five year period of neglect the Terrapin Institute worked to save the species and focused on the #1 recommendation of the Task Force, a moratorium on the commercial harvest. More recently we were overjoyed with the concern from other conservation groups, but we were not prepared to lower our standards or place the species in what we believed would be greater risk. Regarding the recent decisions of MD DNR and those who supported them, the Terrapin Institute believes it is more important and honorable to politely disagree and diplomatically reject bad conservation rules. Although it may be politically expedient, there is no conservation benefit to rewarding bad behavior or bad policy. Those groups defending the terrapin must have minimum standards or they risk the loss of credibility and reputation. In this recent situation, the end result is a public record in which several conservation groups in fact supported a continued harvest and a reduction in the minimum size at which terrapins may be harvested. Regardless of the expected outcome, that in and of itself is condoning bad policy and reactionary conservation. We believe this past July was the time to accept or reject, vote yea or nea, for or against the species. Others thought we could negotiate and curry favor with management agencies which in the long run would be better for the species. Our concern, with harvests up 400%, is the species may not have a long run. We respectfully disagreed in the best interest of the species. Regardless of the attenuating efforts conducted in the aftermath with the moratorium petition, when the species was on trial it did not receive a unified effort to save it. Rather the terrapin became a pawn among those who felt it necessary and productive to plea bargain and negotiate. There is no science, evidence or experience to support these regulations. However, there is legendary historical record of species collapse and abundant rationale to end the harvest. Sadly, our prediction that the new and “improved” conservation rules would only accelerate depletion of wild stocks is perhaps coming to fruition faster than anticipated. There are less terrapins in the wild today due to the recent regulations. The Terrapin Institute remains committed to pursuing our mission of effective conservation and implementation of the 2001 Terrapin Task Force. There was no reason to rewrite the script and devise another plan of conservation action. We strive for more terrapins in the wild and these regulations did not allow for that. In the end it is more important to say what you mean and mean what you say. Five years after it was declared the most devastating impact on terrapin survival is not the time to accept a continued harvest, especially one that allowed the harvest of smaller immature animals. With so many other species at risk, it seemed redundant to belabor this matter any further. We hope it will be possible to redirect all these well intended efforts towards the more needy species. We almost had this terrapin thing under control, we need to wrap it up and get working on other species. As always, the Terrapin Institute is grateful for the unwavering support and expertise we’ve received from the members of this group. Marguerite WhildenThe Terrapin InstituteP. O. Box 51Edgewater, MD 21037Voice 410 370 9171FAX 410 757 9268www.terrapininstitute.org “It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the ones most responsive to change.”

[Author]

Posts