1
|
Lamb CT, Willson R, Richter C, Owens‐Beek N, Napoleon J, Muir B, McNay RS, Lavis E, Hebblewhite M, Giguere L, Dokkie T, Boutin S, Ford AT. Indigenous-led conservation: Pathways to recovery for the nearly extirpated Klinse-Za mountain caribou. ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS : A PUBLICATION OF THE ECOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 2022; 32:e2581. [PMID: 35319140 PMCID: PMC9286450 DOI: 10.1002/eap.2581] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2020] [Revised: 09/08/2021] [Accepted: 12/09/2021] [Indexed: 05/29/2023]
Abstract
Indigenous Peoples around the northern hemisphere have long relied on caribou for subsistence and for ceremonial and community purposes. Unfortunately, despite recovery efforts by federal and provincial agencies, caribou are currently in decline in many areas across Canada. In response to recent and dramatic declines of mountain caribou populations within their traditional territory, West Moberly First Nations and Saulteau First Nations (collectively, the "Nations") came together to create a new vision for caribou recovery on the lands they have long stewarded and shared. The Nations focused on the Klinse-Za subpopulation, which had once encompassed so many caribou that West Moberly Elders remarked that they were "like bugs on the landscape." The Klinse-Za caribou declined from ~250 in the 1990s to only 38 in 2013, rendering Indigenous harvest of caribou nonviable and infringing on treaty rights to a subsistence livelihood. In collaboration with many groups and governments, this Indigenous-led conservation initiative paired short-term population recovery actions, predator reduction and maternal penning, with long-term habitat protection in an effort to create a self-sustaining caribou population. Here, we review these recovery actions and the promising evidence that the abundance of Klinse-Za caribou has more than doubled from 38 animals in 2013 to 101 in 2021, representing rapid population growth in response to recovery actions. With looming extirpation averted, the Nations focused efforts on securing a landmark conservation agreement in 2020 that protects caribou habitat over a 7986-km2 area. The Agreement provides habitat protection for >85% of the Klinse-Za subpopulation (up from only 1.8% protected pre-conservation agreement) and affords moderate protection for neighboring caribou subpopulations (29%-47% of subpopulation areas, up from 0%-20%). This Indigenous-led conservation initiative has set both the Indigenous and Canadian governments on the path to recover the Klinse-Za subpopulation and reinstate a culturally meaningful caribou hunt. This effort highlights how Indigenous governance and leadership can be the catalyst needed to establish meaningful conservation actions, enhance endangered species recovery, and honor cultural connections to now imperiled wildlife.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clayton T. Lamb
- Department of BiologyUniversity of British ColumbiaKelownaBritish ColumbiaCanada
| | - Roland Willson
- West Moberly First NationsMoberly LakeBritish ColumbiaCanada
| | - Carmen Richter
- Saulteau First NationsMoberly LakeBritish ColumbiaCanada
| | | | | | - Bruce Muir
- West Moberly First NationsMoberly LakeBritish ColumbiaCanada
| | | | - Estelle Lavis
- Saulteau First NationsMoberly LakeBritish ColumbiaCanada
| | | | - Line Giguere
- Wildlife InfometricsMackenzieBritish ColumbiaCanada
| | - Tamara Dokkie
- West Moberly First NationsMoberly LakeBritish ColumbiaCanada
| | - Stan Boutin
- Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonAlbertaCanada
| | - Adam T. Ford
- Department of BiologyUniversity of British ColumbiaKelownaBritish ColumbiaCanada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wells HBM, Crego RD, Opedal ØH, Khasoha LM, Alston JM, Reed CG, Weiner S, Kurukura S, Hassan AA, Namoni M, Ekadeli J, Kimuyu DM, Young TP, Kartzinel TR, Palmer TM, Pringle RM, Goheen JR. Experimental evidence that effects of megaherbivores on mesoherbivore space use are influenced by species' traits. J Anim Ecol 2021; 90:2510-2522. [PMID: 34192343 DOI: 10.1111/1365-2656.13565] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/16/2021] [Accepted: 06/23/2021] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
The extinction of 80% of megaherbivore (>1,000 kg) species towards the end of the Pleistocene altered vegetation structure, fire dynamics and nutrient cycling world-wide. Ecologists have proposed (re)introducing megaherbivores or their ecological analogues to restore lost ecosystem functions and reinforce extant but declining megaherbivore populations. However, the effects of megaherbivores on smaller herbivores are poorly understood. We used long-term exclusion experiments and multispecies hierarchical models fitted to dung counts to test (a) the effect of megaherbivores (elephant and giraffe) on the occurrence (dung presence) and use intensity (dung pile density) of mesoherbivores (2-1,000 kg), and (b) the extent to which the responses of each mesoherbivore species was predictable based on their traits (diet and shoulder height) and phylogenetic relatedness. Megaherbivores increased the predicted occurrence and use intensity of zebras but reduced the occurrence and use intensity of several other mesoherbivore species. The negative effect of megaherbivores on mesoherbivore occurrence was stronger for shorter species, regardless of diet or relatedness. Megaherbivores substantially reduced the expected total use intensity (i.e. cumulative dung density of all species) of mesoherbivores, but only minimally reduced the expected species richness (i.e. cumulative predicted occurrence probabilities of all species) of mesoherbivores (by <1 species). Simulated extirpation of megaherbivores altered use intensity by mesoherbivores, which should be considered during (re)introductions of megaherbivores or their ecological proxies. Species' traits (in this case shoulder height) may be more reliable predictors of mesoherbivores' responses to megaherbivores than phylogenetic relatedness, and may be useful for predicting responses of data-limited species.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Harry B M Wells
- Lolldaiga Hills Research Programme, Nanyuki, Kenya.,Sustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.,Space for Giants, Nanyuki, Kenya
| | - Ramiro D Crego
- National Zoo and Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Conservation Ecology Center, Front Royal, VA, USA
| | | | - Leo M Khasoha
- Mpala Research Centre, Nanyuki, Kenya.,Program in Ecology, Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA
| | - Jesse M Alston
- Program in Ecology, Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA.,Center for Advanced Systems Understanding (CASUS), Görlitz, Germany
| | - Courtney G Reed
- Mpala Research Centre, Nanyuki, Kenya.,Institute at Brown for Environment and Society, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.,Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Sarah Weiner
- Mpala Research Centre, Nanyuki, Kenya.,Program in Ecology, Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Duncan M Kimuyu
- Mpala Research Centre, Nanyuki, Kenya.,Department of Natural Resources, Karatina University, Karatina, Kenya
| | - Truman P Young
- Mpala Research Centre, Nanyuki, Kenya.,Department of Plant Sciences and Ecology Graduate Group, University of California, Davis, CA, USA
| | - Tyler R Kartzinel
- Mpala Research Centre, Nanyuki, Kenya.,Institute at Brown for Environment and Society, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.,Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA
| | - Todd M Palmer
- Mpala Research Centre, Nanyuki, Kenya.,Department of Biology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Robert M Pringle
- Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA
| | - Jacob R Goheen
- Mpala Research Centre, Nanyuki, Kenya.,Program in Ecology, Department of Zoology and Physiology, University of Wyoming, Laramie, WY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Abstract
Ecotourism can fuel an important source of financial income for African countries and can therefore help biodiversity policies in the continent. Translocations can be a powerful tool to spread economic benefits among countries and communities; yet, to be positive for biodiversity conservation, they require a basic knowledge of conservation units through appropriate taxonomic research. This is not always the case, as taxonomy was considered an outdated discipline for almost a century, and some plurality in taxonomic approaches is incorrectly considered as a disadvantage for conservation work. As an example, diversity of the genus Giraffa and its recent taxonomic history illustrate the importance of such knowledge for a sound conservation policy that includes translocations. We argue that a fine-grained conservation perspective that prioritizes all remaining populations along the Nile Basin is needed. Translocations are important tools for giraffe diversity conservation, but more discussion is needed, especially for moving new giraffes to regions where the autochthonous taxa/populations are no longer existent. As the current discussion about the giraffe taxonomy is too focused on the number of giraffe species, we argue that the plurality of taxonomic and conservation approaches might be beneficial, i.e., for defining the number of units requiring separate management using a (majority) consensus across different concepts (e.g., MU—management unit, ESU—evolutionary significant unit, and ECU—elemental conservation unit). The taxonomically sensitive translocation policy/strategy would be important for the preservation of current diversity, while also supporting the ecological restoration of some regions within rewilding. A summary table of the main translocation operations of African mammals that have underlying problems is included. Therefore, we call for increased attention toward the taxonomy of African mammals not only as the basis for sound conservation but also as a further opportunity to enlarge the geographic scope of ecotourism in Africa.
Collapse
|
4
|
Pozo RA, Cusack JJ, Acebes P, Malo JE, Traba J, Iranzo EC, Morris-Trainor Z, Minderman J, Bunnefeld N, Radic-Schilling S, Moraga CA, Arriagada R, Corti P. Reconciling livestock production and wild herbivore conservation: challenges and opportunities. Trends Ecol Evol 2021; 36:750-761. [PMID: 34103191 DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2021.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2021] [Revised: 04/20/2021] [Accepted: 05/04/2021] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
Increasing food security and preventing further loss of biodiversity are two of humanity's most pressing challenges. Yet, efforts to address these challenges often lead to situations of conflict between the interests of agricultural production and those of biodiversity conservation. Here, we focus on conflicts between livestock production and the conservation of wild herbivores, which have received little attention in the scientific literature. We identify four key socio-ecological challenges underlying such conflicts, which we illustrate using a range of case studies. We argue that addressing these challenges will require the implementation of co-management approaches that promote the participation of relevant stakeholders in processes of ecological monitoring, impact assessment, decision-making, and active knowledge sharing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R A Pozo
- Escuela de Agronomía, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Quillota, 2260000, Chile.
| | - J J Cusack
- Centro de Modelación y Monitoreo de Ecosistemas, Universidad Mayor, Santiago, Chile.
| | - P Acebes
- Terrestrial Ecology Research Group (TEG-UAM), Departamento de Ecología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, España; Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Cambio Global (CIBC-UAM), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, España
| | - J E Malo
- Terrestrial Ecology Research Group (TEG-UAM), Departamento de Ecología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, España; Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Cambio Global (CIBC-UAM), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, España
| | - J Traba
- Terrestrial Ecology Research Group (TEG-UAM), Departamento de Ecología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, España; Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Cambio Global (CIBC-UAM), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, España
| | - E C Iranzo
- Terrestrial Ecology Research Group (TEG-UAM), Departamento de Ecología, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, España; Centro de Investigación en Biodiversidad y Cambio Global (CIBC-UAM), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, España; Laboratorio de Manejo y Conservación de Vida Silvestre, Instituto de Ciencia Animal y Programa de Investigación Aplicada en Fauna Silvestre, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile
| | - Z Morris-Trainor
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
| | - J Minderman
- Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK
| | - N Bunnefeld
- Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK
| | - S Radic-Schilling
- Departamento de Ciencias Agropecuarias y Acuícolas, Universidad de Magallanes, Punta Arenas, Chile
| | - C A Moraga
- Departamento de Ciencias Agropecuarias y Acuícolas, Universidad de Magallanes, Punta Arenas, Chile; School of Natural Resources and Environment, and Wildlife Ecology and Conservation Department, University of Florida, FL, USA; Centro de Estudios del Cuaternario de Fuego-Patagonia y Antártica (Fundación CEQUA), Punta Arenas, Chile
| | - R Arriagada
- Department of Ecosystems and Environment, Millennium Nucleus Center for the Socioeconomic Impact of Environmental Policies (CESIEP), Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile; Center for Applied Ecology and Sustainability (CAPES), Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile; Center for Climate and Resilience Research (CR(2)), Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - P Corti
- Laboratorio de Manejo y Conservación de Vida Silvestre, Instituto de Ciencia Animal y Programa de Investigación Aplicada en Fauna Silvestre, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile
| |
Collapse
|