922 C. F. Hoffmann and R. A. Montgomery
species’ ability to rally financial support for conservation (Courchamp et al., 2006; Lorimer, 2007; Macdonald et al., 2015; Albert et al., 2018). As the majority of conservation funding comes from Western societies (Albert et al., 2018), charisma is most often framed in a Western context (Ducarme et al., 2013; Courchamp et al., 2018). Within this Western perspective, African lions and leopards are consis- tently highly ranked in lists of the most charismatic species (Smith et al., 2012;Macdonald et al., 2015; Albert et al., 2018; Davies et al., 2018). African wild dogs are also considered to be charismatic, but their overall cultural appeal is prob- ably reduced because they are comparatively less recog- nizable outside their range countries (Di Minin et al., 2013; Monsarrat & Kerley, 2018). Spotted hyaenas, in con- trast, tend to be perceived negatively nearly everywhere (Dickman, 2010; Macdonald et al., 2015). There are notable examples of local reverence, respect and tolerance for the species (Baynes-Rock, 2013). However, spotted hyaenas are commonly perceived in Western cultures as ugly, greedy, unintelligent scavengers and are almost exclusively absent from the scientific literature on charisma (Goldman et al., 2010; De Pinho et al., 2014; Mitchell et al., 2019). We infer that these narratives, and comparative lack of charisma, limit the ability of spotted hyaenas to drawfinancial support from Western institutions for sustained research-informed conservation. Species such as the African lion, considered to be charis-
matic in the West (Albert et al., 2018), also tend to be asso- ciated with complex social dynamics in their range countries (Inskip & Zimmermann, 2009; Dickman, 2010; Goldman et al., 2013). These dynamics may be driven by factors such as the role of the species in traditional ceremonies, the relative socio-economic position of the local commu- nities, or the political history of the region (Inskip & Zimmermann, 2009; Dickman, 2010; Pooley et al., 2017). The cultural implications of these factors influence the will- ingness of local people to participate in conservation actions (Pooley et al., 2017; van Eeden et al., 2018a,b). The social context surrounding depredating carnivores is also linked to the species’ life history. The African lion, for instance, tends to select cattle over concurrently available smaller live- stock such as sheep and goats (Holmern et al., 2007; Kissui, 2008; Hemson et al., 2009). As in many communities cattle carry higher economic and cultural value than other live- stock types, preventing depredation by African lions is of particular importance in many parts of sub-Saharan Africa (Holmern et al., 2007; Hemson et al., 2009). Com- bined with high levels of charisma, this cultural context has probably resulted in species such as the African lion being prioritized as central species in human–carnivore conflict research, with less charismatic species, such as the spotted hyaena, under-emphasized. Not all reported mea- sures of livestock depredation in the studies we reviewed were indicative of the financial or emotional impact of
livestock loss, and therefore we do not contend that the African lion’s prevalence in the literature is without merit. Nevertheless, we did find that taxonomic bias exists within the human–carnivore conflict literature. This taxonomic bias has two primary consequences for
the mitigation of livestock depredation, and therefore for the conservation of large carnivores in sub-Saharan Africa. Firstly, coexistence between people and large carnivores largely depends upon increasing the tolerance of local peo- ple for carnivores (Bruskotter & Wilson, 2014;Treves& Bruskotter, 2014; Pooley et al., 2017). Tolerance is informed by a complex combination of attitudes, behaviours and per- ceptions, all of which are informed by socio-cultural norms as well as political and economic trends (Goldman et al., 2013; Bruskotter & Wilson, 2014; Treves & Bruskotter, 2014; Margulies & Karanth, 2018; van Eeden et al., 2018a,b). Importantly, tolerance of large carnivores is also strongly influenced by overall rates of livestock depredation (Kolowski & Holekamp, 2006; Bruskotter & Wilson, 2014; Treves & Bruskotter, 2014). Increased rates of livestock de- predation can degrade human attitudes towards carnivores and increase the probability of retaliatory killing, even for unoffending species or individuals (Romañach et al., 2007; Miller et al., 2016a,b; Farhadinia et al., 2017). Spotted hyae- nas, as the primary depredators of livestock across much of sub-Saharan Africa, may be eroding human tolerance of sympatric carnivore species. Yet, few studies emphasize livestock depredation by this species. The second consequence of this bias is the restriction of
the knowledge base upon which conservation efforts are built. Taxonomic biases result in a large amount of knowl- edge on a small number of species, limiting the development of broad theoretical insights (Clark & May, 2002; Hortal et al., 2015; Rosenthal et al., 2017). This is not to suggest that research centred on one carnivore species necessarily omits others during fundraising, data collection and ana- lysis. It is possible that the studies we reviewed had compre- hensive research-informed conservation programmes that equitably assessed depredation patterns of multiple carni- vore species. However, our findings suggest that the result- ant publications framed the issue of human–carnivore conflict around a small group of highly charismatic species. As one-third of the studies that identified spotted hyaenas as the primary depredator of livestock did not include them as a central species, it follows that conflict management recom- mendations derived from these studies are not emphasizing the impact of this species. Additionally, we suspect that con- flict management recommendations as a whole are being framed around an understanding of livestock depredation by charismatic species, with recommendations for interven- tions derived from knowledge of the behavioural patterns of these species. The limited research on livestock depredation by spotted hyaenas indicates they exhibit patterns of depre- dation different from those of African lions and leopards
Oryx, 2022, 56(6), 917–926 © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605321000582
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164
