Search

Local ecological knowledge (LEK) has been increasingly acknowledged as a potential source of information on natural resources, especially in under sampled areas. In the Amazon, a small-scale fishery is multispecific, and fishers are well acquainted with the biology and life history strategies of fish species. This study analyzed the potential of small-scale fishers' LEK to supply information on the biology and ecology of high-value species, including pirarucu (Arapaima spp.), tambaqui (Colossoma macropomum, Cuvier, 1816), and jaraqui (Semaprochilodus spp.). We interviewed rural and urban fishers about bio-ecological aspects of these species and reviewed the scientific literature on the same aspects. In addition, we evaluated the possible effects of their category (rural or urban) and fishing experience on responses. Results demonstrate that fishers have detailed knowledge about species predation, diet and habitat use, regardless of the category they fall into. However, LEK on weight and maximum length of pirarucu and tambaqui varied according to fisher category revealing different perceptions. We also found that fishing experience did not influence fisher's LEK on these bio-ecological characteristics. Our findings reinforce that LEK can be a useful source of ecological traits for these species, contributing to fisheries management in the Amazon. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The influence of sociocultural traits on hunting profiles has received little attention, though it is critical to an understanding of how human societies use wildlife for consumption. Here, we assess whether ethnolinguistic groups, ecoregion, country, and watershed affect hunting profiles among Pano and Arawak indigenous groups, and non-indigenous immigrants inhabiting a large area of Southwestern Amazonia. Using a secondary dataset, we recorded 39,049 individuals hunted from 72 taxa across 47 sites from 1983 to 2016. Hunted community composition was summarized by two principal coordinate analysis axes using difference dissimilarity index. Generalized least square models controlling for temporal trends in wildlife availability to hunters found that ethnolinguistic group identity significantly affected the taxa comprising the hunted assemblages, while the other predictors had no influence. While indigenous people showed a preference for large species, non-indigenous living in the same environments targeted medium-sized rodents. Among indigenous people, prey profiles differed between ethnolinguistic groups, as the Pano typically hunted peccaries, and the Arawak preferentially consumed large primates and birds. Overall, our results indicate that hunting nuances of traditional and non-indigenous Amazon cultures should be considered in management policies and hunting conservation planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Civil wars often coincide with global biodiversity hotspots and have plagued the everyday reality of many countries throughout human history. However, how do civil wars affect wildlife populations? Are these impacts the same in savannah and forest environments? How persistent are the post-war consequences on wildlife populations within and outside conflict zones? Long-term monitoring programs in war zones, which could answer these questions, are virtually nonexistent, not least due to the risks researchers are exposed to. In this context, only a few methodologies can provide data on wild populations during war conflicts. We used local ecological knowledge to assess the main consequences of a prolonged civil war (1975–2002) in Southwestern Africa on forest and savannah mammals. The post-war abundance in 20 of 26 (77%) mammal species considered in this study was lower in open savannah compared to the closed-canopy forest environments, with some species experiencing a decline of up to 80% of their pre-war baseline abundance. Large-bodied mammals were preferred targets and had been overhunted, but as their populations became increasingly depleted, the size structure of prey species gradually shifted towards smaller-bodied species. Finally, we present a general flow diagram of how civil wars in low-governance countries can have both positive and negative impacts on native wildlife populations at different scales of space and time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]