Analysis of differences and commonalities in wildlife hunting across the Africa-Europe South-North gradient.

Hunting and its impacts on wildlife are typically studied regionally, with a particular focus on the Global South. Hunting can, however, also undermine rewilding efforts or threaten wildlife in the Global North. Little is known about how hunting manifests under varying socioeconomic and ecological contexts across the Global South and North. Herein, we examined differences and commonalities in hunting characteristics across an exemplary Global South-North gradient approximated by the Human Development Index (HDI) using face-to-face interviews with 114 protected area (PA) managers in 25 African and European countries. Generally, we observed that hunting ranges from the illegal, economically motivated, and unsustainable hunting of herbivores in the South to the legal, socially and ecologically motivated hunting of ungulates within parks and the illegal hunting of mainly predators outside parks in the North. Commonalities across this Africa-Europe South-North gradient included increased conflict-related killings in human-dominated landscapes and decreased illegal hunting with beneficial community conditions, such as mutual trust resulting from community involvement in PA management. Nevertheless, local conditions cannot outweigh the strong effect of the HDI on unsustainable hunting. Our findings highlight regional challenges that require collaborative, integrative efforts in wildlife conservation across actors, while identified commonalities may outline universal mechanisms for achieving this goal.

Range-wide indicators of African great ape density distribution.

Species distributions are influenced by processes occurring at multiple spatial scales. It is therefore insufficient to model species distribution at a single geographic scale, as this does not provide the necessary understanding of determining factors. Instead, multiple approaches are needed, each differing in spatial extent, grain, and research objective. Here, we present the first attempt to model continent-wide great ape density distribution. We used site-level estimates of African great ape abundance to (1) identify socioeconomic and environmental factors that drive densities at the continental scale, and (2) predict range-wide great ape density. We collated great ape abundance estimates from 156 sites and defined 134 pseudo-absence sites to represent additional absence locations. The latter were based on locations of unsuitable environmental conditions for great apes, and on existing literature. We compiled seven socioeconomic and environmental covariate layers and fitted a generalized linear model to investigate their influence on great ape abundance. We used an Akaike-weighted average of full and subset models to predict the range-wide density distribution of African great apes for the year 2015. Great ape densities were lowest where there were high Human Footprint and Gross Domestic Product values; the highest predicted densities were in Central Africa, and the lowest in West Africa. Only 10.7% of the total predicted population was found in the International Union for Conservation of Nature Category I and II protected areas. For 16 out of 20 countries, our estimated abundances were largely in line with those from previous studies. For four countries, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia, and South Sudan, the estimated populations were excessively high. We propose further improvements to the model to overcome survey and predictor data limitations, which would enable a temporally dynamic approach for monitoring great apes across their range based on key indicators.

Open-access platform to synthesize knowledge of ape conservation across sites.

Despite the large body of literature on ape conservation, much of the data needed for evidence-based conservation decision-making is still not readily accessible and standardized, rendering cross-site comparison difficult. To support knowledge synthesis and to complement the IUCN SSC Ape Populations, Environments and Surveys database, we created the A.P.E.S. Wiki (https://apeswiki.eva.mpg.de), an open-access platform providing site-level information on ape conservation status and context. The aim of this Wiki is to provide information and data about geographical ape locations, to curate information on individuals and organizations active in ape research and conservation, and to act as a tool to support collaboration between conservation practitioners, scientists, and other stakeholders. To illustrate the process and benefits of knowledge synthesis, we used the momentum of the update of the conservation action plan for western chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) and began with this critically endangered taxon. First, we gathered information on 59 sites in West Africa from scientific publications, reports, and online sources. Information was compiled in a standardized format and can thus be summarized using a web scraping approach. We then asked experts working at those sites to review and complement the information (20 sites have been reviewed to date). We demonstrate the utility of the information available through the Wiki, for example, for studying species distribution. Importantly, as an open-access platform and based on the well-known wiki layout, the A.P.E.S. Wiki can contribute to direct and interactive information sharing and promote the efforts invested by the ape research and conservation community. The Section on Great Apes and the Section on Small Apes of the IUCN SSC Primate Specialist Group will guide and support the expansion of the platform to all small and great ape taxa. Similar collaborative efforts can contribute to extending knowledge synthesis to all nonhuman primate species.

Ungulate management in European national parks: Why a more integrated European policy is needed.

1. Primary objectives of national parks usually include both, the protection of natural processes and species conservation. When these objectives conflict, as occurs because of the cascading effects of large mammals (i.e., ungulates and large carnivores) on lower trophic levels, park managers have to decide upon the appropriate management while considering various local circumstances. 2. To analyse if ungulate management strategies are in accordance with the objectives defined for protected areas, we assessed the current status of ungulate management across European national parks using the naturalness concept and identified the variables that influence the management. 3. We collected data on ungulate management from 209 European national parks in 29 countries by means of a large-scale questionnaire survey. Ungulate management in the parks was compared by creating two naturalness scores. The first score reflects ungulate and large carnivore species compositions, and the second evaluates human intervention on ungulate populations. We then tested whether the two naturalness score categories are influenced by the management objectives, park size, years since establishment, percentage of government-owned land, and human impact on the environment (human influence index) using two generalized additive mixed models. 4. In 67.9% of the national parks, wildlife is regulated by culling (40.2%) or hunting (10.5%) or both (17.2%). Artificial feeding occurred in 81.3% of the national parks and only 28.5% of the national parks had a non-intervention zone covering at least 75% of the area. Furthermore, ungulate management differed greatly among the different countries, likely because of differences in hunting traditions and cultural and political backgrounds. Ungulate management was also influenced by park size, human impact on the landscape, and national park objectives, but after removing these variables from the full model the reduced models only showed a small change in the deviance explained. In areas with higher anthropogenic pressure, wildlife diversity tended to be lower and a higher number of domesticated species tended to be present. Human intervention (culling and artificial feeding) was lower in smaller national parks and when park objectives followed those set by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 5. Our study shows that many European national parks do not fulfil the aims of protected area management as set by IUCN guidelines. In contrast to the USA and Canada, Europe currently has no common ungulate management policy within national parks. This lack of a common policy together with differences in species composition, hunting traditions, and cultural or political context has led to differences in ungulate management among European countries. To fulfil the aims and objectives of national parks and to develop ungulate management strategies further, we highlight the importance of creating a more integrated European ungulate management policy to meet the aims of national parks.