Assessment of mammal reproduction for hunting sustainability through community‐based sampling of species in the wild

Wildlife subsistence hunting is a major source of protein for tropical rural populations and a prominent conservation issue. The intrinsic rate of natural increase. (r_max) of populations is a key reproductive parameter in the most used assessments of hunting sustainability. However, researchers face severe difficulties in obtaining reproductive data in the wild, so these assessments often rely on classic reproductive rates calculated mostly from studies of captive animals conducted 30 years ago. The result is a flaw in almost 50% of studies, which hampers management decision making. We conducted a 15‐year study in the Amazon in which we used reproductive data from the genitalia of 950 hunted female mammals. Genitalia were collected by local hunters. We examined tissue from these samples to estimate birthrates for wild populations of the 10 most hunted mammals. We compared our estimates with classic measures and considered the utility of the use of r_max in sustainability assessments. For woolly monkey (Lagothrix poeppigii) and tapir (Tapirus terrestris), wild birthrates were similar to those from captive populations, whereas birthrates for other ungulates and lowland‐paca (Cuniculus paca) were significantly lower than previous estimates. Conversely, for capuchin monkeys (Sapajus macrocephalus), agoutis (Dasyprocta sp.), and coatis (Nasua nasua), our calculated reproductive rates greatly exceeded often‐used values. Researchers could keep applying classic measures compatible with our estimates, but for other species previous estimates of r_max may not be appropriate. We suggest that data from local studies be used to set hunting quotas. Our maximum rates of population growth in the wild correlated with body weight, which suggests that our method is consistent and reliable. Integration of this method into community‐based wildlife management and the training of local hunters to record pregnancies in hunted animals could efficiently generate useful information of life histories of wild species and thus improve management of natural resources.     

Identifying key needs for the integration of social–ecological outcomes in arctic wildlife monitoring

For effective monitoring in social–ecological systems to meet needs for biodiversity, science, and humans, desired outcomes must be clearly defined and routes from direct to derived outcomes understood. The Arctic is undergoing rapid climatic, ecological, social, and economic changes and requires effective wildlife monitoring to meet diverse stakeholder needs. To identify stakeholder priorities concerning desired outcomes of arctic wildlife monitoring, we conducted in-depth interviews with 29 arctic scientists, policy and decision makers, and representatives of indigenous organizations and nongovernmental organizations. Using qualitative content analysis, we identified and defined desired outcomes and documented links between outcomes. Using network analysis, we investigated the structure of perceived links between desired outcomes. We identified 18 desired outcomes from monitoring and classified them as either driven by monitoring information, monitoring process, or a combination of both. Highly cited outcomes were make decisions, conserve, detect change, disseminate, and secure food. These reflect key foci of arctic monitoring. Infrequently cited outcomes (e.g., govern) were emerging themes. Three modules comprised our outcome network. The modularity highlighted the low strength of perceived links between outcomes that were primarily information driven or more derived (e.g., detect change, make decisions, conserve, or secure food) and outcomes that were primarily process driven or more derived (e.g., cooperate, learn, educate). The outcomes expand monitoring community and disseminate created connections between these modules. Key desired outcomes are widely applicable to social–ecological systems within and outside the Arctic, particularly those with wildlife subsistence economies. Attributes and motivations associated with outcomes can guide development of integrated monitoring goals for biodiversity conservation and human needs. Our results demonstrated the disconnect between information- and process-driven goals and how expansion of the monitoring community and improved integration of monitoring stakeholders will help connect information- and process-derived outcomes for effective ecosystem stewardship.     

Socioeconomic development and ecological traits as predictors of human–bird conflicts

Because of the significant impacts on both human interests and bird conservation, it is imperative to identify patterns and anticipate drivers of human–bird conflicts (HBCs) worldwide. Through a global systematic review, following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we analyzed the socioeconomic factors and bird ecological traits driving the degree of knowledge and extent of HBCs. We included 166 articles published from 1971 to 2020 in our analyses through which we built a profile of the socioeconomic conditions of 52 countries with reported conflicts and the ecological traits of the 161 bird species involved in HBCs. Although HBC expanded worldwide, it had the greatest impact in less-developed countries (estimate 0. 66 [SE 0.13], p< 0.05), where agriculture is critical for rural livelihoods. Species with a relatively greater conflict extent had a relatively broader diet (estimate 0.80 [SE 0.22], p<0.05) and an increasing population trend (estimate 0.58 [SE 0.15], p<0.05) and affected human interests, such as agriculture and livestock raising. In countries with greater biodiversity, HBCs caused greater socioeconomic impacts than in more developed countries. Our results highlight the importance of understanding and addressing HBCs from multiple perspectives (ecological, sociocultural, and political) to effectively protect both biodiversity and local livelihoods.     

Traditional Plant Harvesting in Contemporary Fragmented and Urban Landscapes

Abstract: Ecosystem fragmentation and destruction can lead to restrictive administration policies on traditional harvesting by indigenous peoples from remaining ecosystem tracts. In New Zealand, concerns about endangered species and governmental policies that focus on species and ecosystem preservation have resulted in severely curtailed traditional harvesting rights. Although provision has been made for limited gathering of traditional plants from government‐administered conservation lands, it is unclear how much harvesting is undertaken on these lands and elsewhere and what this harvest might consist of. We interviewed seven expert Maori elders from the Waikato, New Zealand, to identify plant species they currently harvested and from where. We compared these data with the data we collected on permits issued for plant collecting on conservation lands in the same region. We sought to gain information on indigenous plant harvesting to determine the extent of permitted harvesting from conservation lands in the Waikato and to identify issues that might affect plant harvesting and management. Elders identified 58 species they harvest regularly or consider culturally important; over 50% of these species are harvested for medicinal use. Permit data from 1996 to 2006 indicated no apparent relationship between species of reported cultural significance and the number of permits issued for each of these species. Currently, few plant species are harvested from conservation lands, although some unofficial harvesting occurs. Elders instead reported that medicinal plants are frequently collected from urban and other public areas. They reported that plant species used for dyeing, carving, and weaving are difficult to access. Elders also discussed concerns such as spraying of roadsides, which resulted in the death of medicinal species, and use of commercial hybrids in urban planning. Local government may have an increasingly important role in supporting native traditions through urban planning, which takes account of cultural harvesting needs while potentially reducing future harvesting pressure on conservation lands. We suggest that active participation by the Māori community in the development and management of urban harvesting resources will result in positive outcomes.