240 J Maher and T Wyatt and increasing opportunities for harm In response, NGOs have embraced the internet and new technology and scientific advancements to prevent and monitor (IFAW 2008) the wildlife trade, protecting both animal and human victims UNEP (2014, p 2) confirmed the benefits of technology—such as ‘acoustic traps, mobile technology, UAVs, radio frequency identification tags, encrypted data digital networks, camera traps, DNA testing, radio collars, metal scanners, and satellite imagery’—for rangers in source countries Protection is enhanced through increasing the effort needed to target the animal victims and their habitat and enabling surveillance across larger areas with fewer resources Importantly, this approach may prevent, rather than just respond to, the harm Prosecutions are also enabled through the evidence gathered According to Sonricker et al (2012), for example, the development of the HealthMap Wildlife Trade website, a digital surveillance system, is the most comprehensive and freely accessible monitoring tool available to support enforcement agencies The website augments traditional approaches by combining both official and unofficial (for example, social networks) data generated by an automated web-crawling surveillance system NGOs also work in source countries (WAP), offering alternative livelihoods to indigenous people to reduce the need to poach wildlife and to strengthen their participation in the conservation of animals (see also REDD in Brazil) Of the responses taken to IWT, this is the most likely to reduce abuse and directly impact the lives of animals The remit of NGOs varies considerably with regard to the prevention of abuse; while some organisations call for an end to all abuse (animal rights perspective), others aim to improve animal welfare or conservation of specific species and their environment Most commonly, responses aim to improve welfare and conservation—their focus is therefore on preventing ‘unnecessary suffering’ (see arguments against this approach in Beirne 2009) Consequently, there is little protection for individual trafficked victims There are also concerns over the effectiveness of conservation programmes Seidensticker (2010) argues that ongoing habitat destruction and poaching may simply make tiger conservation unsustainable The problem is more complex than simply providing funding for conservation Rather a multifaceted and multiagency response is required that is internationally focused on suppressing demand by changing anthropocentric attitudes towards the consumption of wildlife Furthermore, some strategies unhelpfully substitute the killing or harm of one animal for another For example, trophy hunting—highlighted in the controversial killing of ‘Cecil the Lion’ (Guardian 2015)—has been used extensively as a management tool to protect wildlife in South Africa (Department of