CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 415Wildlife Ecology and ConservationRangeland and Wildlife ManagementConservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education

Conservation translocations: a review of common difficulties and promising directions.

Open access
Berger‐Tal, O., Blumstein, D. T., Swaisgood, R. R.·2020·Animal Conservation
DOI 10.1111/acv.12534
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Translocations are a common conservation and management strategy, but despite their popularity, translocations are a high‐cost endeavor with a history of failures. It is therefore imperative to maximize their success by learning from our collective experience. The Global Re‐introduction Perspectives Series is a collection of conservation translocation case studies, generated by the IUCN’s Conservation Translocation Specialist Group, and presented in a structured format with an emphasis on practical information. All 293 animal translocation case studies to date include a section in which the authors list the difficulties they have faced during the translocation project, with over 1200 difficulties described so far. We reviewed all difficulties reported in the series to get insights into the common perceived difficulties faced by wildlife managers during animal translocations. The most reported‐upon problems had to do with animal behavior, followed by monitoring difficulties, lack of funding, quality of release habitat, lack of baseline knowledge and lack of public support. We scrutinized each of these difficulties to highlight future research directions that are most likely to improve translocation success, and put a special emphasis on difficulties stemming from animal behavior, and on solutions that may alleviate these problems and improve conservation translocation success world‐wide.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/acv.12534

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • These sociological factors have been found to limit wildlife reintroduction opportunities and have limited bison re-establishment across jurisdictions in the United States.

    “These needs are not unique to bison conservation within the NGP, as each of these sociological factors has been found to limit wildlife reintroduction opportunities (Berger-Tal et al., 2020) and specifically, they have limited bison re-establishment across jurisdictions in the United States (Pejchar et al., 2021).”

    From The Potential of Bison Restoration as an Ecological Approach to Future Tribal Food Sovereignty on the Northern Great Plains (2022) · cites this paper as Berger-Tal et al., 2020

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Berger‐Tal, O., Blumstein, D. T., & Swaisgood, R. R.
Affiliations
  • Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Zoological Society of San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
Berger‐Tal, O.
ORCID
Venue
Animal Conservation
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-08-31
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
121-131
ISSN
  • 1367-9430 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1795
DOI
10.1111/acv.12534
OpenAlex
W2970116983
Cited by
415
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 72 · 2025: 81 · 2024: 70 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 9
FWCI
19.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Animal Conservation (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance
Funders
Australian Research Council (LP130100173)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
Keywords
conservation translocation, animal translocation, reintroduction, animal behavior, post-release monitoring, financial constraints, public support, translocation success

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review