Sustainability and comanagement of subsistence hunting in an indigenous reserve in Guyana

Although hunting is a key component of subsistence strategies of many Amazonians, it is also one of the greatest threats to wildlife. Because indigenous reserves comprise over 20% of Amazonia, effective conservation often requires that conservation professionals work closely with indigenous groups to manage resource use. We used hunter‐generated harvesting data in spatially explicit biodemographic models to assess the sustainability of subsistence hunting of indigenous Waiwai in Guyana. We collected data through a hunter self‐monitoring program, systematic follows of hunters, and semistructured interviews. We used these data to predict future densities of 2 indicator species, spider monkeys (Ateles paniscus) and bearded sakis (Chiropotes sagulatus), under different scenarios of human population expansion and changing hunting technology. We used encounter rates from transect surveys and hunter catch‐per‐unit effort (CPUE) to validate model predictions. Paca (Cuniculus paca) (198 /year), Currosaw (Crax alector) (168), and spider monkey (117) were the most frequently harvested species. Predicted densities of spider monkeys were statistically indistinguishable from empirically derived transect data (Kolmogorov–Smirnov D = 0.67, p = 0.759) and CPUE (D = 0.32, p = 1.000), demonstrating the robustness of model predictions. Ateles paniscus and C. sagulatus were predicted to be extirpated from <13% of the Waiwai reserve in 20 years, even under the most intensive hunting scenarios. Our results suggest Waiwai hunting is currently sustainable, primarily due to their low population density and use of bow and arrow. Continual monitoring is necessary, however, particularly if human population increases are accompanied by a switch to shotgun‐only hunting. We suggest that hunter self‐monitoring and biodemographic modeling can be used effectively in a comanagement approach in which indigenous parabiologists continuously provide hunting data that is then used to update model parameters and validate model predictions.     

Effects of climate and land-cover change on the conservation status of gibbons

Species shift their distribution in response to climate and land-cover change, which may result in a spatial mismatch between currently protected areas (PAs) and priority conservation areas (PCAs). We examined the effects of climate and land-cover change on potential range of gibbons and sought to identify PCAs that would conserve them effectively. We collected global gibbon occurrence points and modeled (ecological niche model) their current and potential 2050s ranges under climate-change and different land-cover-change scenarios. We examined change in range and PA coverage between the current and future ranges of each gibbon species. We applied spatial conservation prioritization to identify the top 30% PCAs for each species. We then determined how much of the PCAs are conserved in each country within the global range of gibbons. On average, 31% (SD 22) of each species’ current range was covered in PAs. PA coverage of the current range of 9 species was <30%. Nine species lost on average 46% (SD 29) of their potential range due to climate change. Under climate-change with an optimistic land-cover-change scenario (B1), 12 species lost 39% (SD 28) of their range. In a pessimistic land-cover-change scenario (A2), 15 species lost 36% (SD 28) of their range. Five species lost significantly more range under the A2 scenario than the B1 scenario (p = 0.01, SD 0.01), suggesting that gibbons will benefit from effective management of land cover. PA coverage of future range was <30% for 11 species. On average, 32% (SD 25) of PCAs were covered by PAs. Indonesia contained more species and PCAs and thus has the greatest responsibility for gibbon conservation. Indonesia, India, and Myanmar need to expand their PAs to fulfill their responsibility to gibbon conservation. Our results provide a baseline for global gibbon conservation, particularly for countries lacking gibbon research capacity.     

Meta‐Analysis of Attitudes toward Damage‐Causing Mammalian Wildlife

Many populations of threatened mammals persist outside formally protected areas, and their survival depends on the willingness of communities to coexist with them. An understanding of the attitudes, and specifically the tolerance, of individuals and communities and the factors that determine these is therefore fundamental to designing strategies to alleviate human‐wildlife conflict. We conducted a meta‐analysis to identify factors that affected attitudes toward 4 groups of terrestrial mammals. Elephants (65%) elicited the most positive attitudes, followed by primates (55%), ungulates (53%), and carnivores (44%). Urban residents presented the most positive attitudes (80%), followed by commercial farmers (51%) and communal farmers (26%). A tolerance to damage index showed that human tolerance of ungulates and primates was proportional to the probability of experiencing damage while elephants elicited tolerance levels higher than anticipated and carnivores elicited tolerance levels lower than anticipated. Contrary to conventional wisdom, experiencing damage was not always the dominant factor determining attitudes. Communal farmers had a lower probability of being positive toward carnivores irrespective of probability of experiencing damage, while commercial farmers and urban residents were more likely to be positive toward carnivores irrespective of damage. Urban residents were more likely to be positive toward ungulates, elephants, and primates when probability of damage was low, but not when it was high. Commercial and communal farmers had a higher probability of being positive toward ungulates, primates, and elephants irrespective of probability of experiencing damage. Taxonomic bias may therefore be important. Identifying the distinct factors explaining these attitudes and the specific contexts in which they operate, inclusive of the species causing damage, will be essential for prioritizing conservation investments. Meta‐Análisis de las Posturas hacia la Mamíferos Silvestres Causantes de Daños     

Effects of Local Disturbance of Tropical Forests on Frugivores and Seed Removal of a Small-Seeded Afrotropical Tree

Abstract:  Small-scale, local disturbance of tropical forests, for example from selective logging, is widespread, but its effects on biodiversity and ecosystem function have rarely been studied. In 3 East African tropical rainforests, we investigated the effect of different levels of local forest disturbance on the frugivore community and on tree visitation and fruit removal rates of the small-seeded tree Celtis durandii. We quantified birds and primates in little and heavily disturbed sites, distinguishing between forest specialists, forest generalists, and forest visitors. We quantified frugivorous tree visitors and seed removal rates of C. durandii trees in the same sites. Forest disturbance reduced the species richness and density of the frugivore community and of forest specialists. Frugivorous species and individuals visiting the study trees were reduced significantly, which led to a marginally significant decline in fruit removal by all frugivores and a significant reduction in removal by forest specialists. Reduction in fruit removal by forest specialists was not compensated for by increases in removal by forest generalists or visitors. Results did not differ among the 3 rainforests, which suggests they were consistent at a regional scale. So local forest disturbance led to a loss of frugivores and their seed removal services. This suggests that large-seeded tree species and trees with small fruits are losing seed dispersers. Thus, local forest disturbance appears to have a more general negative impact on frugivores and their seed dispersal services than anticipated previously.     

Do Regulators of Animal Welfare Need to Develop a Theory of Psychological Well-Being?

The quest for a ``theory of nonhuman minds' to assessclaims about the moral status of animals is misguided. Misframedquestions about animal minds facilitate the appropriation ofanimal welfare by the animal user industry. When misframed, thesequestions shift the burden of proof unreasonably to animalwelfare regulators. An illustrative instance of misframing can befound in the US National Research Council's 1998 publication thatreports professional efforts to define the psychologicalwell-being of nonhuman primates, a condition that the US 1985animal welfare act requires users of primates to promote. Thereport claims that ``psychological well-being' is a hypotheticalconstruct whose validity can only be determined by a theory thatdefines its properties and links it to observed data. Thisconception is used to contest common knowledge about animalwelfare by treating psychological well-being as a mentalcondition whose properties are difficult to discover. Thisframework limits regulatory efforts to treat animal subjects lessoppressively and serves the interests of the user industry.A more liberatory framework can be constructed by recognizing thecontested nature of welfare norms, where competing conceptions ofanimal welfare have implications about norm-setting authority, asit does in other regulatory contexts, e.g., food safety. Properlyconceptualized welfare should include both the avoidance ofdistressful circumstances and the relationship between ananimal's capacities to engage in enjoyable activities and itsopportunities to exercise these capacities. This conception ofanimal welfare avoids appropriation by scientific experts.The development of the psychological well-being regulation is agood illustration of how social norms are contested and thenappropriated, and a critique of this appropriation shows how itcan be challenged.     

Gastrointestinal Bacterial Transmission among Humans,Mountain Gorillas,and Livestock in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park,Uganda

Abstract: Habitat overlap can increase the risks of anthroponotic and zoonotic pathogen transmission between humans, livestock, and wild apes. We collected Escherichia coli bacteria from humans, livestock, and mountain gorillas (Gorilla gorilla beringei) in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda, from May to August 2005 to examine whether habitat overlap influences rates and patterns of pathogen transmission between humans and apes and whether livestock might facilitate transmission. We genotyped 496 E. coli isolates with repetitive extragenic palindromic polymerase chain reaction fingerprinting and measured susceptibility to 11 antibiotics with the disc‐diffusion method. We conducted population genetic analyses to examine genetic differences among populations of bacteria from different hosts and locations. Gorilla populations that overlapped in their use of habitat at high rates with people and livestock harbored E. coli that were genetically similar to E. coli from those people and livestock, whereas E. coli from gorillas that did not overlap in their use of habitats with people and livestock were more distantly related to human or livestock bacteria. Thirty‐five percent of isolates from humans, 27% of isolates from livestock, and 17% of isolates from gorillas were clinically resistant to at least one antibiotic used by local people, and the proportion of individual gorillas harboring resistant isolates declined across populations in proportion to decreasing degrees of habitat overlap with humans. These patterns of genetic similarity and antibiotic resistance among E. coli from populations of apes, humans, and livestock indicate that habitat overlap between species affects the dynamics of gastrointestinal bacterial transmission, perhaps through domestic animal intermediates and the physical environment. Limiting such transmission would benefit human and domestic animal health and ape conservation.