Relocating amphibians and reptiles to make way for human development rarely delivers long-term conservation success

Relocating amphibians and reptiles to make way for human development rarely delivers long-term conservation success Gaby Clark Scientific Editor Robert Egan Senior Editor Relocating amphibians and reptiles to protect them from development rarely leads to long-term conservation success, a new UBC-led global review has found. The findings highlight the importance of habitat protection rather than relying on moving animals out of harm's way. Researchers reviewed 313 global cases of translocation—the movement of animals from one location to another—involving frogs, snakes and other amphibians and reptiles between 2007 and 2023. The study, published in Conservation Biology, found that conservation-focused relocations intended to protect or restore species populations were more likely to achieve long-term success than those carried out to make way for development. "Our findings raise questions about the widespread use of translocation as a way to address habitat loss caused by human activities," said Megan Winand, lead author of the study and lab manager of the Conservation Decisions Lab at the University of British Columbia. "Our review highlights that moving these species away from a construction site does not mean they will survive in their new home or that their population will recover." Only 6% of development-related relocations led to population growth, and none achieved the highest standard of success: establishing a population that can survive and reproduce on its own. By comparison, 19% of conservation-focused relocations showed population growth or the potential for a population to survive over the long term. When translocation falls short Translocation is used for two main purposes: conservation, including restoring threatened or endangered populations and reintroducing species to areas where they have disappeared; and mitigation, by reducing the immediate risks animals face during construction and other development. However, the authors found that the two main approaches to translocation had markedly different outcomes. Development-related translocations had around twice the failure rate of relocations intended to support conservation. The researchers used a standardized framework to assess outcomes for 163 amphibian and reptile species. It measured the success in stages, from the initial survival of relocated animals to the reproduction, population growth and the survival of the newly established population over time. Planning and monitoring make a difference When the researchers examined the factors associated with successful translocations, two practices stood out: removing threats before animals are moved and monitoring them for longer after release. Conservation-focused projects are more likely to have incorporated these steps, while development-related relocations were less consistent. "Without adequate follow-up, we won't know whether animals survive in their new location, reproduce or establish a population that can survive over time," says Winand. "Relocated animals may also leave the release sites, encounter new threats or face difficult habitat conditions." Protecting habitat first The researchers say the findings add to concerns about relying on translocation to offset habitat destruction. In a separate study published in 2026, researchers at UBC documented approximately 5.1 million amphibian and reptile relocations linked with development in British Columbia between 2019 and 2022, with no requirement to monitor their survival. The authors argue that more focus should be placed on protecting and restoring habitat, rather than treating translocation as a substitute for preserving the places wildlife needs to survive. "We need to reconsider how the relocations of amphibians and reptiles for construction are managed in B.C., across Canada and around the world," says Winand. "When we destroy habitat for development, we risk losing the species that live there because moving them out of harm's way rarely ensures their long-term survival. We need to prioritize protecting habitat and explore alternatives to current mitigation practices, which this review shows are often failing to achieve meaningful conservation outcomes." Publication details M. Winand et al., Reevaluating the suitability of amphibians and reptiles for translocation, Conservation Biology (2026). DOI: 10.1111/cobi.70396 Journal information: Conservation Biology Provided by University of British Columbia