Rob Carrier

Deane

Introduction to Research

4/14/2020

Pangolin Conservation in Recent Years: Status, Progress, and Difficulties

Pangolins are the most heavily trafficked mammal in the world. They account for as

much as 20% of the illegal wildlife trade. All eight species of pangolin are listed on the IUCN

Red List as vulnerable or worse, with some already classified as critically endangered (fws.gov).

Every single one of those species are reported to be currently declining in population, and yet, it

seems as though nobody knows that these animals even exist. The pangolin population is in dire

need of human intervention in all forms of support. This includes the realms of academia, policy,

and public relations. In academia, research and education on pangolins has been found to be

severely lacking in terms of studies of their behavior and reproduction. In policy, additional

international regulation and enforcement is required to combat rising and evolving poaching

efforts. In public relations, the pangolin is in such a unique and dangerous position that one

would expect it to be a commonly known animal. They are the only scaled mammals in the

world, they only exist on two continents, they are more trafficked than any other animal on the

planet, and yet the only people who seem to know about them are the ones attempting to capture

and kill them. The combination of these unfortunate truths has contributed to what some consider

to be the unofficial title of pangolins: “the most trafficked mammal you’ve never heard of”

(share.america.gov). Fortunately, the outrageous and criminally underpublicized situation that

pangolins have found themselves in may just yet be their ticket to be put on the list of priorities
for the government, nonprofit organizations, and the public interest as a whole. In recent years, a

considerable amount of research regarding long term studies of pangolins has surfaced, and

although research and development for pangolins is still in its infancy, it shows a potentially

bright future ahead for the species so long as they have the support of humanity.

Pangolins exist exclusively on two continents, four species to each continent, with high

concentration in the general regions of Central Africa and Southeast Asia. Africa is home to the

white-bellied, Temminck’s, black-bellied, and giant ground pangolins. Of these four species, the

white-bellied and giant ground pangolins are the most threatened, both listed as endangered on

the IUCN Red List with declining population trends. Currently, the giant ground pangolin has no

action recovery plan in place, which will lead to an exponential decrease in population if left

unaddressed. On top of this, the ground pangolin also has no systematic monitoring scheme or

area based regional management plan in place. The other two African species are listed as

vulnerable with varying recovery efforts in place. In summation, of the four African species of

pangolin, all are listed as vulnerable or worse, two of which have an action recovery plan in

place, none of which have a systematic monitoring scheme in place.

The asian counterpart species include the chinese, phillipine, sunda, and indian pangolins.

Of these four species, the Indian pangolin is the least threatened by comparison, listed as

endangered on the Red List. The other three species are currently listed as critically endangered.

This is, in some sense, the last foothold for the critically endangered species. The next step on

the Red List scale is “extinct in the wild”, which would spell disaster for pangolins due to the

fact that they rarely survive in captivity. All of the asian species have an action recovery plan in

place, but lack a systematic monitoring scheme, which has proven to be a common link between
all species of pangolin. They lack a systematic monitoring scheme, which is a planned and

calculated effort to monitor the population change of a species with relative accuracy to the

present date. This is due to the fact that pangolins, for one, have become increasingly rare due to

population declines, but it is also compounded by pangolin behavior leading to solitary,

reclusive, and nocturnal lifestyles. What this means for institutions such as the IUCN is that

population changes can only be inferred at this point, mostly by way of knowledge of local

community members and shifting trade dynamics. Simply put, this is a massive issue for the

research and conservation community because they may not know exactly how close the

pangolin is to extinction until it is too late (iucnredlist.org).

African pangolins, while still facing many issues, are slightly better off than asian

pangolins when it comes to policy and regulation. In fact, if it was not already apparent that the

Chinese ban on pangolin consumption was largely superficial, it sCurrent policy is still mostly in

development. Pangolins once again find themselves in a baffling position being technically at the

forefront of current events while simultaneously taking a backseat to the sensationalized main

events. This is, of course, in reference to the recent and ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. In light of

recent events, research on the nucleic acid sequences taken from pangolins was analyzed and

found to have a 99% match with SARS coronavirus 2. This led researchers to the conclusion that

the consumption of pangolins, which widely circulate in chinese wet-markets with other animals

said to carry COVID-19, could be to blame for the recent outbreak. However, this theory has

since been debunked as it has been clarified that a 99% match in nucleic acid sequences does not

indicate a match in the entire genome of the virus (Cyranoski 18-19). Nonetheless, this suspicion

led to Chinese lawmakers releasing a nationwide ban on the consumption of all non-aquatic
wildlife. This is an important step in eliminating the pangolins’ greatest threat, which is mass

poaching. Unfortunately, there is a massive cultural influence in China which could have led to

the somewhat halfhearted ban being mostly for the benefit of public relations rather than public

health or ecological concern. While the ban does attempt to eliminate the sale and consumption

of pangolin meat, it does not make any note of the production of pangolin scales for “medicinal”

purposes, which is the real reason pangolins are still traded so extensively in China (wcs.org).

The Chinese government has done little to truly make an impact on the trafficking of endangered

animals, especially the asian species of pangolin. They require further pressure from other world

powers and international organizations in order to truly make a difference on the impact of

poaching within their borders.

It should be known that an earlier and all encompassing ban was already passed prior to the

Chinese ban. In 2016, the 17th Conference of the Parties of CITES was held in South Africa.

CITES is a multicultural treaty that was created to protect endangered plants and animals on an

international level. At the 17th Conference of the Parties, the United States worked closely with

wildlife authorities in Africa to gain support for proposals listing regulations on pangolin trade.

In 2017, an international ban on the commercial trade of all eight pangolin species and their parts

was introduced. This ban also included the trade of pangolin scales (fws.gov). The truly

confusing aspect of the 2017 ban in comparison to the 2020 ban is the fact that China has been a

member of CITES since 1981, and so the ban would have applied to their jurisdiction as well

(cites.org).

A common question that follows the CITES ban is that, if the ban was implemented in

2017, why has there been no rise or even stabilization to the pangolin population yet? In order to
address that question it must first be explained that there are three major parts to the

implementation of a law that are vital to its effectiveness. Those three things are: the law/policy

itself, the enforcement of the law/policy, and the cultural view of said law/policy. The CITES ban

is an example of the physical law/policy being implemented. The law itself is not enough to stop

poaching, though, this is why enforcement of the law and cultural views play crucial roles. In

Africa and some southeast asian countries, poaching efforts are thwarted by the presence of

wildlife protection officials, and poaching has become a highly punishable offence due to the

power given to range-states by the CITES ban. In fact, the year the ban was implemented, Ivory

Coast authorities seized and burned nearly three tonnes of pangolin scales. This record was held

until 2019 when, in Singapore, officials announced the seizure of nearly 12 tonnes of pangolin

scales and almost 9 tonnes of elephant ivory, supposedly headed for Vietnam (traffic.org). These

numbers alone are sobering, but why, after cracking down on poaching and consumption over the

recent four years, do the reported numbers of trafficked pangolins appear to still be rising? This

is where perhaps the most important aspect of species conservation comes into play, cultural

impact.

Speaking strictly from results, policy implication did not seem to take hold quite yet, and

enforcement of laws seems to have little effect as well. This points to the root cause of pangolin

trade, which is the cultural view of the pangolin. If it were to be looked at from an economic

perspective, the driving force behind price in an open market is supply and demand. If there is no

demand for the product, the price plummets, leaving that specific market to lose its ability to be

profitable. If the supply of an item lowers, it becomes more expensive. Therefore, based on the

apparent increase in pangolin trade, either the demand is increasing or the supply is dwindling
(Challender 484). Due to the effects of poaching and illegal trafficking, the pangolin population

and the market is seeing just that. The “supply” for these poachers and traders is dwindling,

leading to an increase in potential profit for the poachers who essentially control the market. This

market control is supported by the demand of the buyers, which is either staying the same or

increasing. This is where the issue of culture lies. The poachers will continue to sap the natural

world of endangered species until there is nothing left. They will do so in spite of laws and

morals. However, they would have no motive to do so if the individuals buying trafficked goods

were educated. This is not to say people who purchase trafficked goods are unintelligent, but

they are ignorant to the facts presented by years of research regarding the medicinal benefits of

trafficked animal parts. To this day, there remains to be zero clinical evidence that pangolin

scales have any medicinal value whatsoever. Ironically enough, pangolin scales are made up of

the same material as rhino horns. This would suggest that perhaps the medicinal method behind

harvesting these materials has some sort of basis, only that argument falls apart when it is

revealed that the material that these parts are composed of is keratin, a substance known to have

no nutritional or medicinal value and is also the same material that forms human hair and

fingernails (Liu 165). However, despite this being a widely known fact, many parts of Asia such

as rural China and Vietnam still vehemently practice folk-medicine. Viewing this issue from a

cultural anthropological perspective, the areas that most commonly practice folk-medicine are

rural and lacking in formal education or health alternatives (Yang 505). In fact, the World Health

Organization states that, in some countries in Africa and Asia, up to 80% of the population rely

on folk-medicine for their healthcare needs. Surely it is no coincidence that these are the two

continents that pangolins reside in and are being sold to. The cultural hunger for pangolins in
Asia is so great that, upon the examination of seized pangolin scales that were caught being

trafficked in Hong Kong, it was found that the scales belonged to sunda pangolins, which are not

native to China but Malaysia and Vietnam. This means that, because of the Asian pangolins

being hunted to near extinction, poachers must look elsewhere for their quarry. Researchers are

also beginning to find evidence of African pangolin scales for sale in Asia (Zhang 414). This is

demonstrative evidence for just how massive and misinformed the wildlife market is in certain

parts of Asia that still allow the trafficking of endangered wildlife and even those that have

policies in place to prohibit them. Standing unchallenged by their government, poachers pose an

immediate and exponential threat to pangolins.

In an analytic article written by Daniel W.S. Challender, several points were raised about

the effect of poaching regulation and how enforcement on its own can not bring the already

rising numbers to a halt. He states that “in our view, intensifying enforcement effort is crucial,

but will ultimately prove an inadequate long‐term strategy with which to conserve high‐value

species”, of which pangolins are at the top of the list of said high-value species. Both the Chinese

and Sunda pangolin, while reported as having a declining population trend, are also reported as

having an increasing level of poaching pressure with a current value of roughly $1,550 USD per

animal, whose price trend is currently also on the rise. Instead, Challender lays out a general plan

of immediate, medium-term, and long term efforts that must be addressed in order to reduce and

hopefully extinguish the number of trafficked animals throughout the world.

It has been proposed by Challender and many others that the first crucial step in

thwarting the efforts of poachers is to provide an alternative for those who share their land with

pangolins. Just as those who live closest to an endangered species have the most power to doom
them, they have as much power to save them. This means providing an incentive for these people

to protect the species rather than exploit them. These incentives may take form in partnership

through local communities to offer monetary compensation or otherwise in exchange for work

that would benefit the species. Such work would include the creation of sanctuaries and parks

which act as havens for pangolins, habitat upkeep and maintenance, and population reporting and

analysis. Additionally, these local communities must be provided with a form of sustainable,

affordable healthcare that offers an alternative to traditional medicine. Simply demanding that a

group of individuals cease to continue their way of life would be fruitless. Instead, alternative

solutions that benefit both the communities and the animals must be sought out. The benefits of

community natural resource management are well known and effective. For instance, in a survey

taken of 100 villages in Northern Ethiopia, researchers found a general consensus that the

enlistment of community members to maintain and manage woodlots “contribute[d] substantially

to community wealth, increasing members' willingness to provide collective effort to manage the

woodlots” (Gebremedhin 129). By introducing a stable way for local people to generate income

without causing harm to indigenous flora and fauna, they subsequently report a decrease in

poaching pressure as the ability to maintain their lifestyles becomes coupled with the ability to

maintain the existence of endangered species. Furthermore, Challender goes on in his proposal to

recommend a medium-term strategy of regulated trade and farming of endangered species. He

states that this calls for a reexamination of the regulations currently in place. His theory suggests

that the farming of such animals would lead to an increase in supply of high-value animals,

therefore decreasing their price for illicit sales. While likely a controversial topic, the exploration

of farming pangolins is, at the very least, worth looking into.

 As of yet, captive breeding amongst pangolins has been shown to be ineffective.

Pangolins have highly specialized behavioral patterns and are desperately dependent on their

natural habitat, proven to adapt poorly to captive environments. Studies have shown through

video recordings that captive pangolins prefer to retreat to artificial caves and burroughs during

the night. Being that pangolins are largely nocturnal, this drastically affected their feeding pattern

and led to malnourishment and premature death of the subjects (Wu 401). As with their habitat,

they also require a climate that is specific to their species’ regional concentration. Typically for

asian pangolins this means warm subtropical environments with rich soil for burrowing. They

also require a nutrient-rich environment, as they usually build burrows in close proximity to large

insect spawning grounds such as termite mounds (although recent strides have been made in

creating artificial feeding solutions). In terms of the reproductive habits of pangolins, captive

breeding has seen perhaps the slowest improvement over time. Most species of pangolin have a

gestation period of roughly five months, giving birth to just one offspring. Their gestation period

coupled with an almost entirely solitary lifestyle creates another issue for farming and population

regrowth: their average population increase is incredibly low. Pangolins are rarely seen in groups

of more than two (usually a mother and her offspring for the first two years of its life) and only

meet once per year to mate, meaning that the maximum number of pangolins that a female can

produce in a year is only enough to equalize the population upon the mother’s death (Gong

99-114). This is one of the larger unalterable difficulties of increasing the population in the wild.

However, combining Challender’s idea to create a regulated ranching industry within local

communities and the efforts of captive breeders could provide a solution to many issues on both

sides. After all, there is likely no better habitat to cultivate a population of pangolins than their
own. By allowing local community members to create regulated and monitored farms, pangolins

would be provided with safe, nutrient rich, populated ecosystems in the climate that they prefer.

This goes hand-in-hand with the aforementioned incentive programs that would encourage

community cooperation. Farms concentrated on the production of pangolins could help to

increase pangolin population, nullify poaching operations, bring down illicit pangolin prices, and

simultaneously generate income for communities with close-proximity access to areas with

pangolin populations. Through taxation, this could also lead to a fiscal incentive for the

government to help protect local pangolin farming operations, creating a concrete level of

enforcement against unlawful pangolin capture and trade. While these proposals may seem

far-fetched or rooted in monetary gain, studies have proven that changes in the economic

sustainability of wildlife trade have had just as much of a role to play as policy implementations

when it comes to the rehabilitation of endangered species (Roe 4). However, perhaps before a

decision can be made on the benefits of the captive breeding of pangolins, far more research

must be conducted.

Many experts suggest that baseline research surrounding pangolin population and

behavior is lacking in detail or outright missing. In fact, when compared to the information

researchers have regarding pangolin behavior, the fact that they are dying off rapidly appears to

be one of the only conclusions that can be made. One journal suggests that the solution to this

issue again lies in the studies of culture and local knowledge. Vice-Chair of the IUCN SSC

Pangolin Specialist Group Helen C. Nash states that local ecological knowledge (referred to as

LEK) is, at this point, far more abundant than field study research and, when consolidated by

various ranges of surveys, can actually prove to be quite reliable. Community surveys were
conducted in various provinces of China in areas where the population lived in close proximity

to the nature reserves, some of the few places where forests of good quality for pangolins remain.

Of these surveys, almost all (90%) of individuals surveyed were able to recognize the animal

when shown a picture of a pangolin. When asked about the local status of the pangolin

population, 65% of those surveyed answered “none” in describing how many pangolins were

thought to be left. 34% of those surveyed answered “rare”. Local ecological knowledge was also

used in determining cultural outlooks on pangolins, poaching records, and population changes.

Nash noted that a relatively large number of those surveyed noted that pangolin skin could be

used as leather, suggesting that the use of pangolin byproducts is still abundant in these areas

despite the declining population. When asked about the hunting of pangolins, 74% of those

surveyed reported that they did not know whether or not hunting was conducted by locals or

outsiders, while 24% reported that hunting was conducted almost exclusively by locals. This

once again points to the need for regulated farming strategies in these areas. Large portions of

these local populations still believe in the value of pangolin parts and will likely continue to hunt

them while unknowingly destroying the population (Nash 189-195)

Nash’s survey, while acting more as a baseline investigation of the validity of local

ecological knowledge than a concrete statistical analysis, proved to be generally congruent with

the IUCN red list of endangered species in terms of population decline and poaching trends. This

suggests that further surveys can be conducted in other areas where the status of pangolins is less

formally researched, providing additional statistics with regards to population trends. If this

process is repeated over a large area, there will eventually be enough information to conduct

field studies with relative accuracy compared to previous studies which were lacking in results
due to poor guideline information. Building a network of information and mapping

concentrations of pangolin populations could possibly lead to the formation of IUCN systematic

monitoring schemes, of which none are in place as of yet for any species of pangolin.

Additionally, if the same studies are conducted in Central Africa, action recovery plans are also a

possibility for the four remaining species that are without one at the moment.

Although a systematic monitoring scheme and action recovery plan are among the most

important facets when it comes to large scale conservation efforts, many additional programs

have been set in place for the sake of the pangolin population. All eight species are listed by the

IUCN as subject to recent education and awareness programs as well as being included in

international legislation and subject to international management/trade controls (iucnredlist.org).

As mentioned before, however, policy and research can not save these animals alone. Statistical

analysis and regulation must meet with cultural adaptation and economic influence to help slow

and eventually stop the rapidly declining number of pangolins and many species like them. As

demand for these animals slows through further education and incentivization, international

legislation and enforcement can properly work to regulate the trade of pangolins and supervise

their regrowth.
 Works Cited

Buchanan, M., & Buchanan, M. (2016, February 26). What's the world's most trafficked

mammal? Retrieved from

https://share.america.gov/whats-worlds-most-trafficked-mammal/

Challender, D. W., & MacMillan, D. C. (2014). Poaching is more than an enforcement

problem. Conservation Letters, 7(5), 484-494.

Cyranoski, D. (2020). Mystery deepens over animal source of coronavirus. Nature,

579(7797), 18–19. doi: 10.1038/d41586-020-00548-w

Gebremedhin, B., Pender, J., & Tesfay, G. (2003). Community natural resource management:

the case of woodlots in northern Ethiopia. Environment and Development Economics,

8(1), 129-148.

Gong, Shiping, et al. “Captive Breeding of Pangolins: Current Status, Problems and Future

Prospects.” ZooKeys, vol. 507, 2015, pp. 99–114., doi:10.3897/zookeys.507.6970.

Heinrich, S., Lim, N., Chong, J. lian, Willcox, D., Nash, H., Panjang, E., … Iucn. (2019, May

2). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Retrieved from

https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/12763/123584856#population

List of Contracting Parties. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.cites.org/eng/disc/parties/chronolo.php
Liu, Z., Jiao, D., Weng, Z., & Zhang, Z. (2016). Structure and mechanical behaviors of

protective armored pangolin scales and effects of hydration and orientation. Journal of the

Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials, 56, 165–174. doi:

10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.11.013

News Releases. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://newsroom.wcs.org/News-Releases/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/13855/WCS-S

tatement-and-Analysis-On-the-Chinese-Governments-Decision-Prohibiting-Some-Trade-a

nd-Consumption-of-Wild-Animals.aspx

Pangolins. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.fws.gov/international/animals/pangolins.html

Nash, H. C., Wong, M. H., & Turvey, S. T. (2016). Using local ecological knowledge to

determine status and threats of the Critically Endangered Chinese pangolin (Manis

pentadactyla) in Hainan, China. Biological Conservation, 196, 189-195.

Roe, D. (2002). Making a killing or making a living: wildlife trade, trade controls, and rural

livelihoods (No. 6). IIED.

Singapore makes record-breaking African ivory and pangolin seizure. (n.d.). Retrieved from

https://www.traffic.org/news/singapore-makes-record-breaking-african-ivory-and-pangolin

-seizure/
Wu, S., Ma, G., Chen, H., Xu, Z., Li, Y., & Liu, N. (2004). A preliminary study on burrow

ecology of Manis pentadactyla. Ying yong sheng tai xue bao= The journal of applied

ecology, 15(3), 401-407.

Yang, F., & Hu, A. (2012). Mapping Chinese folk religion in mainland China and Taiwan.

Journal for the scientific study of religion, 51(3), 505-521.

Zhang, H., Miller, M. P., Yang, F., Chan, H. K., Gaubert, P., Ades, G., & Fischer, G. A.

(2015). Molecular tracing of confiscated pangolin scales for conservation and illegal trade

monitoring in Southeast Asia. Global Ecology and Conservation, 4, 414–422. doi:

10.1016/j.gecco.2015.08.002