Roles of a flagship species

In this week’s post, I will be exploring the roles that flagship species can play in conservation. These are well-known, charismatic species that appeals to the public to promotes conservation efforts and for funds (Heywood, 1995). Examples would include elephants, gorillas and the giant panda. Frequently, these species are also umbrella species as conservation of these animals would also help in the conservation of lesser-known surrounding species. The reason I chose this topic is because eco-tourism is currently one of the fastest growing areas of the tourism industry. And what better way to encourage tourists than by attracting them with chances to meet these flag-ship species. Photography, being a major part of eco-tourism would inadvertently be more focused on these flagship species.

The main role of a flagship species is to be able to reach out to the public by acting as an ambassador. Most of the attention has been focused on large, “cute”, terrestrial megafauna. One prominent example would be the WWF’s logo which has a giant panda. By doing so, it appeals to the public to support the conservation efforts and for funding. For instance, the River Safari just had its Panda Party for Kai Kai and Jia Jia’s first anniversary in Singapore. While the use of such flagship species would undoubtedly increase donations, it does not benefit all species equally resulting in lower levels of concern in other ecosystems. For example, McClenachan et al. (2012) found that many of the charismatic marine fishes and invertebrates analysed were threatened by overexploitation. However, little conservation research has been done on them.

Meanwhile, large amounts of money, research and time goes into protecting the popular flagship species such as pandas. The giant panda has become a symbol for China and was even used as the mascot for the Beijing Olympics. Pandas are also occasionally used as diplomatic gifts between China and other countries, a practice termed “panda diplomacy”. For zoos, pandas are rented from China for a price. The Edinburgh zoo pays about US$1 million to rent a pair of pandas from the Chinese government (Vidal, 2014). Additional money would have to be spent to support the pandas for its upkeep and enclosure. While the large large sum does contribute to conservation efforts back in China, I would argue that it can be better spent on perhaps lesser known but threatened species. Furthermore, the new countries hosting the pandas might not be optimal for their health if the keepers lack experience. The use of panda as gifts also runs the risk of commoditising them. Outside of zoos, preliminary findings by Caro et al. (2004) found that the use of flagship species to demarcate the boundaries of protected areas did not help to increase biodiversity in those areas. Hence, the use of a flagship species might not help in conserving other wildlife.

On the outreach aspect, while flagship species do have a role, I feel that organisations should try to educate the public of the dangers to the whole ecosystem instead of focusing on only one or two species. This would help the public to gain a deeper understanding of how the whole ecosystem functions. After all, the ecosystem would not work if there are only flagship species left.

Any thoughts on the issue? I’d love to hear it. J

References:

Caro, T., Engilis, A., Fitzherbert, E., & Gardner, T. (2004). Preliminary assessment of the flagship species concept at a small scale. Animal Conservation, 7(1), 63-70. doi: 10.1017/S136794300300115X

Heywood, V. H. (1995). Global biodiversity assessment: Cambridge University Press.

McClenachan, L., Cooper, A. B., Carpenter, K. E., & Dulvy, N. K. (2012). Extinction risk and bottlenecks in the conservation of charismatic marine species. Conservation Letters, 5(1), 73-80.

Vidal, J. (2014). Zoos weigh up the costs of China's 'pandanomics'. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/13/edinburgh-zoo-pandas-tian-tian-china-pandanomics-birth-cub