International disparities in conservation priorities are more complicated than Global North-Global South divisions

Two enduring ideological divisions in biodiversity conservation concern whether conservation should prioritize (i) the interests of people or wild animals and (ii) the interests of individual animals or groups of animals. Public debates suggest that people living in the Global North more strongly prioritize the interests of wild animals over people and the interests of individual animals over groups of animals. To examine this possibility, we measured and compared conservation priorities across 10 international publics living in rural and urban areas of sub-Saharan Africa, the United States of America (USA) and the United Kingdom (UK). Overall, distant respondents (i.e. living in the UK, USA and urban sub-Saharan Africa) more strongly prioritized the interests of wild animals over people and the interests of individual animals over groups of animals. Moreover, variation among local publics (i.e. living in high-biodiversity areas of rural sub-Saharan Africa) was greater than among distant publics. Our findings illuminate how ideological divisions may complicate international biodiversity conservation, especially around controversial topics such as culling, hunting, transloaction and protected-areas management. Policies and programmes more acceptable to distant people may be less acceptable to local people, creating difficulties for decision-makers charged with balancing biodiversity conservation alongside the values, needs, interests and concerns of multiple publics.

Exposing illegal hunting and wildlife depletion in the world's largest tropical country through social media data

Globally, illegal sport hunting can threaten prey populations when unregulated. Due to its covert nature, illegal sport hunting poses challenges for data collection, hindering efforts to understand the full extent of its impacts. We gathered social media data to analyze patterns of illegal sport hunting and wildlife depletion across Brazil. We collected data for 2 years (2018-2020) across 5 Facebook groups containing posts depicting pictures of illegal sport hunting events of native fauna. We described and mapped these hunting events by detailing the number of hunters involved, the number of species, the mean body mass of individuals, and the number and biomass of individuals hunted per unit area, stratified by Brazilian biome. We also examined the effects of defaunation on hunting yield and composition via regression models, rank-abundance curves, and spatial interpolation. We detected 2046 illegal sport hunting posts portraying the hunting of 4658 animals (∼29 t of undressed meat) across all 27 states and 6 natural biomes of Brazil. Of 157 native species targeted by hunters, 19 are currently threatened with extinction. We estimated that 1414 hunters extracted 3251 kg/million km2. Some areas exhibited more pronounced wildlife depletion, in particular the Atlantic Forest and Caatinga biomes. In these areas, there was a shift from large mammals and reptiles to small birds as the main targeted taxa, and biomass extracted per hunting event and mean body mass across all taxonomic groups were lower than in other areas. Our results highlight that illegal sport hunting adds to the pressures of subsistence hunting and the wild meat trade on Brazil's wildlife populations. Enhanced surveillance efforts are needed to reduce illegal sport hunting levels and to develop well-managed sustainable sport hunting programs. These can support wildlife conservation and offer incentives for local communities to oversee designated sport hunting areas.

Public perceptions of trophy hunting are pragmatic, not dogmatic

Fierce international debates rage over whether trophy hunting is socially acceptable, especially when people from the Global North hunt well-known animals in sub-Saharan Africa. We used an online vignette experiment to investigate public perceptions of the acceptability of trophy hunting in sub-Saharan Africa among people who live in urban areas of the USA, UK and South Africa. Acceptability depended on specific attributes of different hunts as well as participants' characteristics. Zebra hunts were more acceptable than elephant hunts, hunts that would provide meat to local people were more acceptable than hunts in which meat would be left for wildlife, and hunts in which revenues would support wildlife conservation were more acceptable than hunts in which revenues would support either economic development or hunting enterprises. Acceptability was generally lower among participants from the UK and those who more strongly identified as an animal protectionist, but higher among participants with more formal education, who more strongly identified as a hunter, or who would more strongly prioritize people over wild animals. Overall, acceptability was higher when hunts would produce tangible benefits for local people, suggesting that members of three urban publics adopt more pragmatic positions than are typically evident in polarized international debates.

Why humans kill animals and why we cannot avoid it

Killing animals has been a ubiquitous human behaviour throughout history, yet it is becoming increasingly controversial and criticised in some parts of contemporary human society. Here we review 10 primary reasons why humans kill animals, discuss the necessity (or not) of these forms of killing, and describe the global ecological context for human killing of animals. Humans historically and currently kill animals either directly or indirectly for the following reasons: (1) wild harvest or food acquisition, (2) human health and safety, (3) agriculture and aquaculture, (4) urbanisation and industrialisation, (5) invasive, overabundant or nuisance wildlife control, (6) threatened species conservation, (7) recreation, sport or entertainment, (8) mercy or compassion, (9) cultural and religious practice, and (10) research, education and testing. While the necessity of some forms of animal killing is debatable and further depends on individual values, we emphasise that several of these forms of animal killing are a necessary component of our inescapable involvement in a single, functioning, finite, global food web. We conclude that humans (and all other animals) cannot live in a way that does not require animal killing either directly or indirectly, but humans can modify some of these killing behaviours in ways that improve the welfare of animals while they are alive, or to reduce animal suffering whenever they must be killed. We encourage a constructive dialogue that (1) accepts and permits human participation in one enormous global food web dependent on animal killing and (2) focuses on animal welfare and environmental sustainability. Doing so will improve the lives of both wild and domestic animals to a greater extent than efforts to avoid, prohibit or vilify human animal-killing behaviour.

Ten years of coverage of trophy hunting in UK newspapers

Hunting is an increasingly contentious topic. Trophy hunting, whereby people hunt individual animals with desirable characteristics in order to keep body parts (e.g. horns, heads, hides, antlers) as mementos, is especially contested. Political pressure, often in the form of trophy import bans, is being applied in multiple nations, and campaigns to ban trophy hunting, or trophy imports, attract considerable media attention. However, trophy hunting often has conservation value, acting to protect habitat and provide income for local communities. Assuming that media coverage can influence public and political opinion, negative or simplistic media coverage of trophy hunting has the potential to cause adverse outcomes for conservation and local communities. Here, we analyse coverage of trophy hunting from July 2010 - June 2020 (five years before and five years after the death of Cecil the Lion) in the most popular UK media outlets (624 articles in total), assessing the overall sentiment of each article, and the species and countries covered. Ninety percent of all coverage occurred after the death of Cecil the lion, marking this event as a watershed moment in UK mainstream media depiction of trophy hunting. The overall sentiment of articles was largely against trophy hunting (63.1%), and this was more pronounced in tabloids (84.2%) than broadsheets (42.2%). Pro-trophy hunting articles were very uncommon overall (3.5%). Articles that described the complexity of trophy hunting decreased following Cecil and were most common in pre-Cecil broadsheets (35.7%, dropping to 30.6%) and rarest in post-Cecil tabloids (3.1%). Articles focussed mainly on charismatic but rarely hunted species including lion, elephant and rhino, with commonly hunted species (such as impala or Cape buffalo) only rarely being mentioned. When countries were mentioned, southern African nations predominated, with four nations (Zimbabwe, South Africa, Namibia and Botswana) being named in 68% of qualifying articles. We conclude that simplistic media depiction of trophy hunting has the potential to cause negative outcomes for conservation through its impact on public perception and political opinion.

Re-Thinking Felid–Human Entanglements through the Lenses of Compassionate Conservation and Multispecies Studies

Simple Summary

Felids have long and complex historical associations with humans, ranging from fear and persecution to worship and care. With many felid species in widespread decline, re-thinking the messy entanglements of feline predators and human societies is a necessary step for fostering coexistence as current conservation frameworks that rely on the separation of people from nature are failing felids. Here, we explore two distinct but related interdisciplinary fields that, when put into dialogue with one another, offer novel perspectives and insights on felid–human relationships and conservation initiatives more broadly. We identified numerous similarities and emergent properties within compassionate conservation and multispecies studies, despite these fields arising from the sciences and social sciences and humanities respectively. Combined, reorientation of conservation values and practices to be morally inclusive of individual animals and their subjective experiences has the potential to support cohabitation and tolerance for felids, promoting multispecies flourishing.

Abstract

With many felid species in widespread decline, re-thinking the messy felid–human entanglements is a necessary step for fostering coexistence as current conservation frameworks centered on human exceptionalism and widespread violence toward wild animals are conspicuously failing felids. This paper argues for fostering a critical awareness of how we understand our relationships with nonhuman animals, particularly in the context of conservation. We bring two distinct but related interdisciplinary fields into a dialogue to critically question the values and conceptual assumptions that frame the practices of felid conservation today. Compassionate conservation and multispecies studies share many synergies and conceptual overlaps despite emerging from different academic domains. We identified four key areas for further exploration: (1) A shift in emphasis from practices of killing to the underlying assumptions that make forms of killing permissible and ethically unproblematic. (2) Re-engagement with individuals, not just species, in conservation settings. (3) Unsettling human exceptionalism through an emphasis on the agency of animals and an ethic involving compassion. (4) Acknowledging the ways in which humans co-become with other animals and cultivating relationships of multispecies cohabitation and flourishing.

Trophy quality trends and hunting effort of selected big game in Chewore South Safari Area, northern Zimbabwe, 2009-2012

This study was based on a temporal analysis of trophy quality trends and hunting effort in Chewore South Safari Area (CSSA), Zimbabwe, for the period 2009–2012. We selected four of the big five species, namely; buffalo (Syncerus caffer), elephant (Loxodonta africana), the leopard (Panthera pardus) and lion (Panthera leo) for analysis. Existing database of 188 trophies from 2009 to 2011 was reviewed and recorded using the Safari Club International (SCI) scoring system. Further, 50 trophies for 2012 were measured and recorded based on the SCI scoring system. Local ecological knowledge on trophy quality and hunting effort in CSSA was obtained through semi-structured questionnaires from 22 conveniently selected professional hunters in 2012. The results indicated no significant change in trophy quality trends of buffalo, leopard and lion (p > 0.05) over the study period. In contrast, there was a significant decline in elephant trophy quality trend over the same period (p < 0.05). The results showed no significant change in hunting effort over the study period for all the four study species (p > 0.05). Furthermore, seventy-two percent (72%, n = 13) of the professional hunters confirmed that elephant population was declining in CSSA and this was likely due to poaching. Professional hunters perceived trophy hunting as a source of financial capital generation for wildlife conservation (61%, n = 11), as well as positively contributing to the local economy (56%, n = 10). It was concluded that hunting has limited negative impact on species trophy quality trends when a sustainable hunting system is consistently followed in CSSA. CSSA management need to continuously monitor trophy hunting, animal populations and employ adaptive management approach to quota setting and species conservation.

Critical shifts in the global tourism industry: perspectives from Africa

The study investigates critical shifts impacting the international tourism space in contemporary times. Furthermore, the current study examines tourism policies and product development challenges faced by tourist regions as a consequence of market dynamics. Drawing upon a sample of thirty tourism experts in southern Africa, the critical shifts were identified and key among them include BRICS, terrorism, ageing population, and trophy hunting, are increasingly framing a new narrative for the future growth trajectory of the international tourism industry's value chain in the context of Africa. A conclusion is reached that to attain long term sustainable development of the sunrise multi-trillion dollar industry, it is critical that tourism operators re-set and deploy sharpened strategies which are in synch with the realities obtaining in the broader operating environment. Policy recommendations and managerial implications are proffered.

The moral residue of conservation

Should conservationists use lethal management to control introduced wildlife populations? Should they kill individual animals to protect endangered species? Are trade-offs that prioritize some values at the expense of others morally appropriate? These sorts of ethical questions are common in conservation. In debating such questions, conservationists often seem to presume 1 of 2 possible answers: the act in question is right or it is wrong. But morality in conservation is considerably more complex than this simple binary suggests. A robust conservation ethic requires a vocabulary that gives voice to the uncertainty and unease that arise when what seems to be the best available course of action also seems to involve a measure of wrongdoing. The philosophical literature on moral residue and moral dilemmas supplies this vocabulary. Moral dilemmas arise when one must neglect certain moral requirements to fulfill others. Under such circumstances, even the best possible decision leaves a moral residue, which is experienced emotionally as some form of grief. Examples of conservation scenarios that leave a moral residue include management of introduced rabbits in Australia, trophy hunting in Africa, and forest management trade-offs in the Pacific Northwest. Moral residue is integral to the moral experience of conservationists today, and grief is an appropriate response to many decisions conservationists must make. Article impact statement: Defensible conservation decisions may neglect moral requirements, leaving a moral residue; conservationists should respond with grief.

Over 90 endangered fish and invertebrates are caught in industrial fisheries

Industrial-scale harvest of species at risk of extinction is controversial and usually highly regulated on land and for charismatic marine animals (e.g. whales). In contrast, threatened marine fish species can be legally caught in industrial fisheries. To determine the magnitude and extent of this problem, we analyze global fisheries catch and import data and find reported catch records of 91 globally threatened species. Thirteen of the species are traded internationally and predominantly consumed in European nations. Targeted industrial fishing for 73 of the threatened species accounts for nearly all (99%) of the threatened species catch volume and value. Our results are a conservative estimate of threatened species catch and trade because we only consider species-level data, excluding group records such as 'sharks and rays.' Given the development of new fisheries monitoring technologies and the current push for stronger international mechanisms for biodiversity management, industrial fishing of threatened fish and invertebrates should no longer be neglected in conservation and sustainability commitments.

Cautioning against overemphasis of normative constructs in conservation decision making

Questions around how to conserve nature are increasingly leading to dissonance in conservation planning and action. While science can assist in unraveling the nature of conservation challenges, conservation responses rely heavily on normative positions and constructs to order actions, aid interpretations, and provide motivation. However, problems can arise when norms are mistaken for science or when they stymy scientific rigor. To highlight these potential pitfalls, we used the ethics-based tool of argument analysis to assess a controversial conservation intervention, the Pelorus Island Goat Control Program. The program proponents' argument for restorative justice was unsound because it relied on weak logical construction overly entrenched in normative assumptions. Overreliance on normative constructs, particularly the invocation of tragedy, creates a sense of urgency that can subvert scientific and ethical integrity, obscure values and assumptions, and increase the propensity for flawed logic. This example demonstrates how the same constructs that drive biodiversity conservation can also drive poor decision making, spur public backlash, and justify poor animal welfare outcomes. To provide clarity, a decision-making flowchart we devised demonstrates how values, norms, and ethics influence one another. We recommend practitioners follow 3 key points to improve decision making: be aware of values, as well as normative constructs and ethical theories that those values inform; be mindful of overreliance on either normative constructs or ethics when deciding action is justified; and be logically sound and transparent when building justifications. We also recommend 5 key attributes that practitioners should be attentive to when making conservation decisions: clarity, transparency, scientific integrity, adaptiveness, and compassion. Greater attention to the role of norms in decision making will improve conservation outcomes and garner greater public support for actions.

Trophy hunters pay more to target larger-bodied carnivores

Hunters often target species that require resource investment disproportionate to associated nutritional rewards. Costly signalling theory provides a potential explanation, proposing that hunters target species that impose high costs (e.g. higher failure and injury risks, lower consumptive returns) because it signals an ability to absorb costly behaviour. If costly signalling is relevant to contemporary 'big game' hunters, we would expect hunters to pay higher prices to hunt taxa with higher perceived costs. Accordingly, we hypothesized that hunt prices would be higher for taxa that are larger-bodied, rarer, carnivorous, or described as dangerous or difficult to hunt. In a dataset on 721 guided hunts for 15 North American large mammals, prices listed online increased with body size in carnivores (from approximately $550 to $1800 USD/day across the observed range). This pattern suggests that elements of costly signals may persist among contemporary non-subsistence hunters. Persistence might simply relate to deception, given that signal honesty and fitness benefits are unlikely in such different conditions compared with ancestral environments in which hunting behaviour evolved. If larger-bodied carnivores are generally more desirable to hunters, then conservation and management strategies should consider not only the ecology of the hunted but also the motivations of hunters.