Human impacts on the world’s raptors

Raptors are emblematic of the global biodiversity crisis because one out of five species are threatened with extinction and over half have declining populations due to human threats. Yet our understanding of where these “threats” impact raptor species is limited across terrestrial Earth. This is concerning because raptors, as apex predators, are critically positioned in ecological food webs, and their declining populations can undermine important ecosystem services ranging from pest control to disease regulation. Here, we map the distribution of 15 threats within the known ranges of 172 threatened and near threatened raptor species globally as declared by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. We analyze the proportion of each raptor range that is exposed to threats, identify global hotspots of impacted raptor richness, and investigate how human impacts on raptors vary based on several intrinsic (species traits) and extrinsic factors. We find that humans are potentially negatively affecting at least one threatened raptor species across three quarters of Earth’s terrestrial area (78%; 113 million km2). Our results also show that raptors have 66% of their range potentially impacted by threats on average (range 2.7–100%). Alarmingly, critically endangered species have 90% of their range impacted by threats on average. We also highlight 57 species (33%) of particular concern that have > 90% of their ranges potentially impacted. Without immediate conservation intervention, these 57 species, including the most heavily impacted Forest Owlet (Athene blewitti), the Madagascar Serpent-eagle (Eutriorchis astur), and the Rufous Fishing-owl (Scotopelia ussheri), will likely face extinction in the near future. Global “hotspots” of impacted raptor richness are ubiquitous, with core areas of threat in parts of the Sahel and East Africa where 92% of the assessed raptors are potentially impacted per grid cell (10 species on average), and in Northern India where nearly 100% of raptors are potentially impacted per grid cell (11 species). Additionally, “coolspots” of unimpacted richness that represent refuges from threats occur in Greenland and Canada, where 98 and 58% of raptors are potentially unimpacted per grid cell, respectively (nearly one species on average), Saharan Africa, where 21% of raptors are potentially unimpacted per grid cell (one species on average), and parts of the Amazon, where 12% of raptors are potentially unimpacted per grid cell (0.6 species on average). The results provide essential information to guide conservation planning and action for the world’s imperiled raptors.

Incorporating social-ecological complexities into conservation policy

In the process of developing new conservation policies, policymakers must have access to information which will inform their decisions. Evidence rarely considers the complexities of social-ecological systems. The Social-Ecological Systems Framework (SESF) is an adaptable yet structured approach for understanding the processes that lead to changes in natural resources, using a systems-based approach that aims to treat ecological and social components equally. Few conservation planning and policy initiatives have implemented the SESF to assess the interlinked social and ecological consequences of conservation policies. We apply the SESF to explore the barriers to the potential implementation of a policy of consumptive utilisation of wildlife in Kenya, a policy regarded as successful in several southern African countries. Using secondary data and expert review we developed a conceptual model of the social-ecological system associated with consumptive utilisation of wildlife in Kenya. We then analysed how different combinations of first and second-tier variables interacted to create focal action situations, and subsequently identified seven barriers to this policy. Our analysis revealed that game ranching would require large-scale investment in effective monitoring systems, new regulations, training, market development and research, considerations about equity, and devolved ownership of wildlife. The least barriers existed for game farming. The SESF appears to be a useful framework for this purpose. In particular, it can help to reveal potential social and ecological barriers which conservation policies might face in attempting to meet intended goals. The information required to implement the SESF are necessarily cross-disciplinary, which can make it challenging to synthesise.

Reach and messages of the world's largest ivory burn

Recent increases in ivory poaching have depressed African elephant populations. Successful enforcement has led to ivory stockpiling. Stockpile destruction is becoming increasingly popular, and most destruction has occurred in the last 5 years. Ivory destruction is intended to send a strong message against ivory consumption, both in promoting a taboo on ivory use and catalyzing policy change. However, there has been no effort to establish the distribution and extent of media reporting on ivory destruction events globally. We analyzed media coverage of the largest ivory destruction event in history (Kenya, 30 April 2016) across 11 nation states connected to ivory trade. We used an online-media crawling tool to search online media outlets and subjected 5 of the largest print newspapers (by circulation) in 5 nations of interest to content analysis. Most online news on the ivory burn came from the United States (81% of 1944 articles), whereas most of the print news articles came from Kenya (61% of 157 articles). Eighty-six to 97% of all online articles reported the burn as a positive conservation action, whereas 4-50% discussed ivory burning as having a negative impact on elephant conservation. Most articles discussed law enforcement and trade bans as effective for elephant conservation. There was more relative search interest globally in the 2016 Kenyan ivory burn than any other burn in 5 years. Ours is the first attempt to track the reach of media coverage relative to an ivory burn and provides a case study in tracking the effects of a conservation-marketing event.