Department of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences, Texas A&M University, 600 John Kimbrough Boulevard, College Station, TX, 77843, U.S.A.
Applied Biodiversity Science Program, Texas A&M University, Wildlife, Fisheries, and Ecological Sciences, Building #1537, College Station, TX, 77843, U.S.A.
Conserv Biol. 2020 Apr;34(2):338-353. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13396. Epub 2019 Sep 19.
Hunting presents a paradox for biodiversity conservation. It is both a problem and a solution to species declines and poverty. Yet, conservation scientists hold different assumptions about the significance and sustainability of hunting based on the cultures and identities of hunters. In Latin America, conservationists largely sort hunters as either indigenous or campesino. Indigenous hunters are often characterized as culturally driven stewards of wildlife sustainability. Campesino hunters, by contrast, are described as peasants-cultureless, uneducated, and uncaring toward wildlife sustainability. Although such ethnically fueled hunting discourse promotes hunting research, campesino hunters remain underrepresented in most comparative hunting reviews. Moreover, there are no targeted syntheses on the current state of knowledge about campesino hunting, nothing to guide conservation research and practice with and for the largest group of hunters in Latin America. We reviewed 334 articles published from 1937 to 2018 in English (55%) and Spanish (45%)-mostly published in 145 peer-reviewed journals-on the meanings, motivations, and sustainability of campesino hunting in Latin America. Although studies spanned 17 countries, 7 ecosystems, and >75 indigenous and nonindigenous demographics in 30 research contexts, they predominantly focused on nonindigenous campesinos for species-specific conservation and protected area management in tropical broadleaf forests of Mexico, Peru, and Colombia. Authors used 12 methods to collect campesino hunting data, primarily interviews, surveys, and questionnaires, and drew from 10 local and traditional knowledge themes about wildlife trends and uses. Eighteen drivers, 14 constraints, and 10 conflicts-mainly subsistence, income, ethics, regulations, and crop or livestock protection-shaped whether campesino hunters pursued 799 species, 70% of which were least concern species. Yet, only 25 studies (8%) empirically assessed sustainability. Our results show the need for increased interdisciplinary and geographic engagement with campesino hunting across Latin America.
狩猎对生物多样性保护提出了一个悖论。它既是物种减少和贫困的问题，也是解决这些问题的方案。然而，保护生物学家基于狩猎者的文化和身份，对狩猎的重要性和可持续性持有不同的假设。在拉丁美洲，保护主义者通常将狩猎者分为土著或农民。土著猎人通常被描述为具有文化驱动力的野生动物可持续性管理者。相比之下，农民猎人则被描述为没有文化、没有受过教育、对野生动物可持续性漠不关心的农民。尽管这种基于种族的狩猎话语促进了狩猎研究，但在大多数比较狩猎综述中，农民猎人的代表性仍然不足。此外，对于农民狩猎的当前知识状况，没有有针对性的综合研究，也没有任何指导拉丁美洲最大的狩猎群体的保护研究和实践的内容。我们回顾了 1937 年至 2018 年期间以英文（55%）和西班牙文（45%）发表的 334 篇文章，这些文章主要发表在 145 种同行评议期刊上，内容涉及拉丁美洲农民狩猎的意义、动机和可持续性。尽管这些研究跨越了 17 个国家、7 个生态系统和 30 个研究背景中的 >75 个土著和非土著群体，但它们主要集中在非土著农民身上，针对的是墨西哥、秘鲁和哥伦比亚热带阔叶林的特定物种保护和保护区管理。作者使用了 12 种方法来收集农民狩猎数据，主要是访谈、调查和问卷调查，并从 10 个关于野生动物趋势和用途的地方和传统知识主题中提取信息。18 个驱动因素、14 个约束因素和 10 个冲突因素——主要是生计、收入、伦理、法规以及作物或牲畜保护——决定了农民猎人是否会捕猎 799 种物种，其中 70%是最不受关注的物种。然而，只有 25 项研究（8%）对可持续性进行了实证评估。我们的研究结果表明，需要在拉丁美洲范围内加强对农民狩猎的跨学科和跨地区参与。
