842 R. Costa‐Araújo et al.
and reductions in rainfall, forest biomass and net primary production in southern Amazonia (Jiménez-Muñoz et al., 2016; Fearnside, 2017; Brando et al., 2020; Sales et al., 2020; IPCC, 2021). Conversely, we found that precipitation has a positive relationship with habitat suitability for P. vieirai, and forest biomass and primary production also have a positive relationship with titi monkey occurrence (Costa-Araújo et al., 2021a). Therefore, climate (IPCC, 2021) and forest (Soares-Filho et al., 2006) changes pro- jected for southern Amazonia will negatively affect the biotic and abiotic dimensions of the P. vieirai niche in the next quarter of a century, further exacerbating the threats to the species’ long-term survival. Habitat loss from deforestation and degradation because
of climate change have distinct implications for the conser- vation of P. vieirai populations at the northern and southern extents of the species’ range. Deforestation and forest fires are and will remain high (Soares-Filho et al., 2006; Brando et al., 2020) in the southern portion of the range of P. vieirai, where most forests are on private lands and where there are few and only small protected areas. Although deforestation has been and is expected to continue to be low (Soares-Filho et al., 2006) in the northern portion of the range of P. vieirai because of the existence of an extensive system of protected areas and Indigenous lands, this habitat is not safe from degradation driven by climate change. Therefore, the populations in the southern portion of the
range of P. vieirai require immediate conservation efforts. Beyond protecting primate populations (Paim et al., 2019), the demarcation of Indigenous lands and establishment of public and private protected areas in the Tapajós–Xingu interfluve would safeguard other endemic species and pro- tect representative tracts of Amazonia and the Amazonia– Cerrado ecotone, a unique and almost entirely unprotected ecosystem(Nepstad et al., 2006;Marques et al., 2019). These protected areas would also contribute to reducing the extent of land-use change and fire regimes in this region, maintain carbon stocks and sinks and generate income through REDD+ projects (Nogueira et al., 2018). For the same rea- sons, the effective protection of reservas legais (an area of 80% that legally must be preserved as forest in all private land holdings in Brazilian Amazonia) needs to be enforced and private landowners rewarded appropriately (Schielein & Börner, 2018). Law enforcement, the establishment of public pro-
tected areas and the demarcation of Indigenous lands rely on governmental administration, but changes in pol- icies and demonstrated inaction and a lack of regulation have resulted in increasing threats to Amazonian forests, biodiversity and traditional peoples in Brazil (Ferrante & Fearnside, 2019; Begotti & Peres, 2020).Moreover, the es- tablishment of private protected areas and the protection of reservas legais are unattractive to landowners profit- ing from the conversion of forests into agricultural
landscapes in the Tapajós–Xingu region (Crouzeilles et al., 2012; Printes, 2017). The model of income generation and the policies in Brazil that permit unsustainable extraction of natural resources in the Arc of Deforestation needs to shift towards the protection of the livelihoods of local people, biodiversity, climate change mitigation and themaintenance of the ecosystem services provided by Amazonia (Moutinho et al., 2016; Nobre et al., 2016; Carvalho et al., 2019). In this context, private landowners are the key stake-
holders (Nepstad et al., 2002; Soares-Filho et al., 2006, Fearnside, 2017) for biodiversity conservation and the pro- tection of representative tracts of remaining forests in the Arc of Deforestation, which would contribute to climate change mitigation (Fearnside, 2003, 2009; Nogueira et al., 2018). The owners of large farms are responsible for 70%of deforestation in private areas in Amazonia (Fearnside, 2017) but could change theirmodel of land use, which is currently putting at risk the ecosystem services and the resources pro- vided by the biome (Lovejoy&Nobre, 2018). The official cus- todians of natural resources in protected areas (traditional and native peoples, local and federal governments) are also key conservation stakeholders (Nepstad et al., 2006). As an important tool for the conservation of species and
habitats (Russon & Wallis, 2014), we believe that primate- watching tourism could be a viable, sustainable alternative to monoculture agriculture and cattle-ranching expansion in the Arc of Deforestation. Firstly, there is a wealth of opportunities for primate watching in the Arc of Deforesta- tion, with 52 species of primates (Costa-Araújo et al., 2021b). Secondly, primate-watching services on private lands, public protected areas and Indigenous lands are permitted under Brazilian environmental regulations. Thirdly, the logistics to facilitate ecotourism in the Arc of Deforestation are met by a network of roads, airports and lodging facilities. Additionally, regulations for the creation of private pro- tected areas in Brazil are compatible with primate-watching tourism and biodiversity protection (Crouzeilles et al., 2012). This scenario would facilitate the establishment of primate- watching activities in protected areas, Indigenous lands and private areas within the Arc of Deforestation, a region where logistic capacity (one of the main constraints on ecotourism; Pegas & Castley, 2014) exists. For example, a shift from agriculture to primatewatching
focused on P. vieirai in the private lands of the Tapajós– Xingu interfluve would contribute to reducing habitat loss in the southern portion of the range of P. vieirai and to miti- gating climate change, in turn contributing to protecting P. vieirai populations in the northern part of its range. It is equally important to elect politicians committed to biodiversity conservation, the welfare of traditional peoples and climate change mitigation (Silva, 2005; Carvalho et al., 2019), so that all key stakeholders can work together to improve outcomes for natural areas in the largest global deforestation frontier (Moutinho et al., 2018).
Oryx, 2022, 56(6), 837–845 © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S003060532100171X
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
