Black Stork Down: Military Discourses in Bird Conservation in Malta

Tensions between Maltese hunters and bird conservation NGOs have intensified over the past decade. Conservation NGOs have become frustrated with the Maltese State for conceding to the hunter lobby and negotiating derogations from the European Union’s Bird Directive. Some NGOs have recently started to organize complex field-operations where volunteers are trained to patrol the landscape, operate drones and other surveillance technologies, detect illegalities, and lead police teams to arrest poachers. We describe the sophisticated military metaphors which conservation NGOs have developed to describe, guide and legitimize their efforts to the Maltese public and their fee-paying members. We also discuss why such groups might be inclined to adopt these metaphors. Finally, we suggest that anthropological studies of discourse could help understand delicate contexts such as this where conservation NGOs, hunting associations and the State have ended in political deadlock

The Significance of African Lions for the Financial Viability of Trophy Hunting and the Maintenance of Wild Land

Recent studies indicate that trophy hunting is impacting negatively on some lion populations, notably in Tanzania. In 2004 there was a proposal to list lions on CITES Appendix I and in 2011 animal-welfare groups petitioned the United States government to list lions as endangered under their Endangered Species Act. Such listings would likely curtail the trophy hunting of lions by limiting the import of lion trophies. Concurrent efforts are underway to encourage the European Union to ban lion trophy imports. We assessed the significance of lions to the financial viability of trophy hunting across five countries to help determine the financial impact and advisability of the proposed trade restrictions. Lion hunts attract the highest mean prices (US$24,000–US$71,000) of all trophy species. Lions generate 5–17% of gross trophy hunting income on national levels, the proportional significance highest in Mozambique, Tanzania, and Zambia. If lion hunting was effectively precluded, trophy hunting could potentially become financially unviable across at least 59,538 km2 that could result in a concomitant loss of habitat. However, the loss of lion hunting could have other potentially broader negative impacts including reduction of competitiveness of wildlife-based land uses relative to ecologically unfavourable alternatives. Restrictions on lion hunting may also reduce tolerance for the species among communities where local people benefit from trophy hunting, and may reduce funds available for anti-poaching. If lion off-takes were reduced to recommended maximums (0.5/1000 km2), the loss of viability and reduction in profitability would be much lower than if lion hunting was stopped altogether (7,005 km2). We recommend that interventions focus on reducing off-takes to sustainable levels, implementing age-based regulations and improving governance of trophy hunting. Such measures could ensure sustainability, while retaining incentives for the conservation of lions and their habitat from hunting

Predicting livestock depredation risk by African lions (Panthera leo) in a multi-use area of northern Tanzania

Human-wildlife conflicts, especially those involving large carnivores, are of global conservation and livelihood concern and require effective and locally-adapted prevention measures. Risk of lion attack on livestock (i.e., depredation) may vary seasonally and may be associated with variation in wild prey abundance or landscape characteristics. To test these competing hypotheses, we used a resource selection approach, and determined whether prey catchability (indicated by geo-spatial variables), or prey availability (indicated by modeled abundance recorded via camera traps) explained spatial and seasonal variation in livestock depredation risk by African lions on Manyara Ranch Conservancy, a multi-use area in northern Tanzania. Seasonal variation in vegetative productivity and proximity to surface water appeared to be strong predictors of livestock depredation risk. Correlates for depredation risk were different between wet and dry seasons. During the dry season, depredation risk was positively correlated with vegetative productivity, whereas depredation risk during the wet season was highest near livestock enclosures (bomas). During both seasons, depredation risk was high closer to surface water. Landscape-driven risk maps were created to identify low risk areas that may be compatible with livestock grazing. Our results on depredation risk by lions are similar to other studies in protected areas and suggest that both prey catchability and prey availability are instrumental in predicting kill sites of lions. To facilitate lion and livestock coexistence in multi-use areas of Africa, we recommend minimizing spatiotemporal overlap between livestock and abundant wild prey by developing alternative livestock water and feeding locations and increasing caution near surface water areas

Ecological change, group territoriality, and population dynamics in Serengeti lions

Territorial behavior is expected to buffer populations against short-term environmental perturbations, but we have found that group living in African lions causes a complex response to long-term ecological change. Despite numerous gradual changes in prey availability and vegetative cover, regional populations of Serengeti lions remained stable for 10- to 20-year periods and only shifted to new equilibria in sudden leaps. Although gradually improving environmental conditions provided sufficient resources to permit the subdivision of preexisting territories, regional lion populations did not expand until short-term conditions supplied enough prey to generate large cohorts of surviving young. The results of a simulation model show that the observed pattern of “saltatory equilibria” results from the lions' grouping behavior

Examining Evident Interdisciplinarity Among Prides of Lion Researchers

Lions (Panthera leo) have experienced dramatic population declines in recent decades and today, inhabit just a fraction of their historic range. The reasons behind these declines are many, but conflict with humans, principally motivated by lion depredation of livestock, is among the most influential. Recent calls within the scientific community have identified that wicked problems like these should be addressed using interdisciplinary approaches. Here we examined the extent to which human-lion conflict research has been interdisciplinary. We conducted an extensive review of the literature and uncovered 88 papers, published between 1990 and 2015, that assessed human-lion interaction and the ecology of lions exposed to anthropogenic disturbance. While human-lion conflict research experienced near-exponential growth (y = 8E-194e0.222x, R2= 0.76) across this time period, the number of co-authors engaged in this research changed very little (x = 3.28, se = 0.19). Moreover, co-authors of this research tended to be affiliated with units from just three highly-related STEM disciplines (biology, wildlife management, and environmental science). Comparatively, co-authors affiliated with units in the humanities and social sciences occurred in < 4% of all papers examined. Our analysis also presents a novel framework that positions human-lion conflict research as having not two dimensions, as has been commonly conceptualized, but five dimensions. These dimensions include not only the human and the lion dimensions, but also the livestock, wild prey, and environmental dimensions. None of the papers that we evaluated concurrently studied all five of these dimensions to determine their impact on human-lion conflict. Furthermore, despite the fact that human-lion conflict research was primarily developed by co-authors from STEM disciplines, the most common dimension evaluated was the human dimension which requires social science and humanities expertise. Our analysis indicates that interdisciplinarity among human-lion conflict research has historically been low. These low levels of interdisciplinarity observed from 1990 to 2015 however, are not necessarily representative of the ongoing efforts to develop more inclusive research teams. Thus, we discuss the implications of this research for the development of sustainable solutions to conserve lions and preserve human well-being and identify potential avenues forward to create more interdisciplinary prides of lion researchers

Examining Evident Interdisciplinarity Among Prides of Lion Researchers

Lions (Panthera leo) have experienced dramatic population declines in recent decades and today, inhabit just a fraction of their historic range. The reasons behind these declines are many, but conflict with humans, principally motivated by lion depredation of livestock, is among the most influential. Recent calls within the scientific community have identified that wicked problems like these should be addressed using interdisciplinary approaches. Here we examined the extent to which human-lion conflict research has been interdisciplinary. We conducted an extensive review of the literature and uncovered 88 papers, published between 1990 and 2015, that assessed human-lion interaction and the ecology of lions exposed to anthropogenic disturbance. While human-lion conflict research experienced near-exponential growth (y = 8E-194e0.222x, R2 = 0.76) across this time period, the number of co-authors engaged in this research changed very little (x = 3.28, se = 0.19). Moreover, co-authors of this research tended to be affiliated with units from just three highly-related STEM disciplines (biology, wildlife management, and environmental science). Comparatively, co-authors affiliated with units in the humanities and social sciences occurred in &lt;4% of all papers examined. Our analysis also presents a novel framework that positions human-lion conflict research as having not two dimensions, as has been commonly conceptualized, but five dimensions. These dimensions include not only the human and the lion dimensions, but also the livestock, wild prey, and environmental dimensions. None of the papers that we evaluated concurrently studied all five of these dimensions to determine their impact on human-lion conflict. Furthermore, despite the fact that human-lion conflict research was primarily developed by co-authors from STEM disciplines, the most common dimension evaluated was the human dimension which requires social science and humanities expertise. Our analysis indicates that interdisciplinarity among human-lion conflict research has historically been low. These low levels of interdisciplinarity observed from 1990 to 2015 however, are not necessarily representative of the ongoing efforts to develop more inclusive research teams. Thus, we discuss the implications of this research for the development of sustainable solutions to conserve lions and preserve human well-being and identify potential avenues forward to create more interdisciplinary prides of lion researchers

Conserving large carnivores: dollars and fence

Conservationists often advocate for landscape approaches to wildlife management while others argue for physical separation between protected species and human communities, but direct empirical comparisons of these alternatives are scarce. We relate African lion population densities and population trends to contrasting management practices across 42 sites in 11 countries. Lion populations in fenced reserves are significantly closer to their estimated carrying capacities than unfenced populations. Whereas fenced reserves can maintain lions at 80% of their potential densities on annual management budgets of $500 km−2, unfenced populations require budgets in excess of$2000 km−2 to attain half their potential densities. Lions in fenced reserves are primarily limited by density dependence, but lions in unfenced reserves are highly sensitive to human population densities in surrounding communities, and unfenced populations are frequently subjected to density-independent factors. Nearly half the unfenced lion populations may decline to near extinction over the next 20–40 years