Interpreting People’s Behavior Toward Primates Using Qualitative Data: a Case Study from North Morocco

“Engaging the Enemy”: Orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus morio) Conservation in Human Modified Environments in the Kinabatangan floodplain of Sabah, Malaysian Borneo

Throughout the equatorial tropics, forest conversion to agriculture often fragments crucial primate habitat. In 30 years, 80% of the alluvial lowland forests along the Kinabatangan River in Sabah, Malaysian Borneo, have been supplanted by oil palm (Elaeis guineensis) plantations. Today, only about 20% of the former orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus morio) population remains in the region. Because most of the land is now under the tenure of agribusiness companies, we used a pragmatic approach of mixed biosocial methods and citizen science engagement of oil palm growers (N = 6) as active conservation partners to study orangutan use of the privately administered landscape between protected forest fragments. We found that 22 of 25 remanent forest patches (0.5 to 242 hectares) surveyed within plantations contained food or shelter resources useful for orangutans. Of these, 20 are in regular transitory use by wider-ranging adult male orangutans, and in 9 patches, females are resident and raising offspring isolated within oil palm plantations. These findings indicate that orangutans retain a measure of normal metapopulation dynamics necessary for viability at the landscape level despite drastic habitat modification. We found that barriers to in situ conservation in these agroforest matrices were due to the following misconceptions across sectors: 1) Good farming practices require exclusion of wildlife; 2) Orangutans seen in plantations must be “rescued” by people; and 3) Translocation is an appropriate conservation strategy, and nondetrimental to orangutans. Our exploratory study exemplifies the value of biosocial methods and collaboration with industrial-scale farmers to support primate resilience in forests fragmented by agriculture.

Working from the Inside Out: Fostering Intrinsic Motivation and Expanding Our Criteria for Conservation Success

Primatological research is often associated with understanding animals and their habitats, yet practical conservation depends entirely on human actions. This encompasses the activities of Indigenous and local people, conservationists, and NGOs working on the ground, as well as more remote funders and policymakers. In this paper we explore what it means to be a conservationist in the 2020s. While many primatologists accept the benefits of more socially inclusive dimensions of research and conservation practice, in reality there remain many challenges. We discuss the role primatologists can play to enhance interdisciplinary working and their relationships with communities living in and around their study sites, and examine how increased reflexivity and consideration of one’s positionality can improve primatological practice. Emphasis on education and stakeholder consultation may still echo colonial, top-down dialogues, and the need for greater emphasis on genuine knowledge-sharing among all stakeholders should be recognised. If we are sincere about this approach, we might need to redefine how we see, consider, and define conservation success. We may also have to embrace more compromises. By evaluating success in conservation we explore how reflexive engagements with our positionality and equitable knowledge-sharing contribute to fostering intrinsic motivation and building resilience.

Uses of nonhuman primates by humans in northeastern Brazil

Humans have used non-human primates (hereafter referred to as primates) as food source, medicine, parts of rituals, pets, and models for various studies worldwide. Here we investigated the extent of the use of primates by humans in three areas in northeastern Brazil, the country's most impoverished region. We carried out our study in three biomes (Caatinga, Cerrado, and Atlantic Forest). The results showed that humans exploited all five primate species occurring in the study sites: Callithrix jacchus, Sapajus flavius, Sapajus libidinosus, Alouatta belzebul, and Alouatta ululata. They used the primates as a food source, as pets and medicines, and for leisure. Despite socioeconomic differences in the study areas, we found similarities in the use of primates. Larger primates were targeted for meat, whereas the small common marmosets were targeted as pets. We found conflicting interactions between humans and bearded capuchins due to crop raiding, but no such conflict was found between humans and blonde capuchins, reflecting the differences in crop type, pattern, and tradition in the sites. A. ululata was used as medicine. We suggest that environmental education actions in the study areas should focus on (i) raising awareness among local people of the ecological importance of primates, (ii) providing alternative activities to hunting whenever possible, and (iii) minimising conflicts.