Predicting intention to hunt protected wildlife: a case study of Bewick's swan in the European Russian Arctic

Illegal killing of wildlife is a major conservation issue that, to be addressed effectively, requires insight into the drivers of human behaviour. Here we adapt an established socio-psychological model, the theory of planned behaviour, to explore reasons for hunting the Endangered Bewick's swan Cygnus columbianus bewickii in the European Russian Arctic, using responses from hunters to a questionnaire survey. Wider ecological, legal, recreational and economic motivations were also explored. Of 236 hunters who participated overall, 14% harboured intentions to hunt Bewick's swan. Behavioural intention was predicted by all components of the theory of planned behaviour, specifically: hunters' attitude towards the behaviour, perceived behavioural control (i.e. perceived capability of being able to perform the behaviour) and their subjective norms (perception of social expectations). The inclusion of attitude towards protective laws and descriptive norm (perception of whether other people perform the behaviour) increased the model's predictive power. Understanding attitudes towards protective laws can help guide the design of conservation measures that reduce non-compliance. We conclude that conservation interventions should target the socio-psychological conditions that influence hunters' attitudes, social norms and perceived behavioural control. These may include activities that build trust, encourage support for conservation, generate social pressure against poaching, use motivations to prompt change and strengthen peoples' confidence to act. This approach could be applied to inform the effective design, prioritization and targeting of interventions that improve compliance and reduce the illegal killing of wildlife.

Hunters who will not report illegal wolf killing: Self-policing or resistance with political overtones?

Illegal killing of wildlife is challenging conservation efforts worldwide. Ecological research has shown that illegal killing is severely affecting the transboundary Swedish-Norwegian wolf population. A previous study indicated that unwillingness to report illegal killing of wolves among Swedish hunters contains an element of protest against perceived unjust treatment of hunting and hunters but that it could also simply be a reflection of ineffective law enforcement in the backcountry, driving hunters to effect forms of self-policing. Based on a survey of Norwegian hunters, the present research goes one step further. One in five hunters decline to report illegal wolf killings, and unwillingness to report is predicted by lack of trust in environmental institutions and a general anti-elite sentiment. Hunting-related issues and other factors also affect outcomes, but to a lesser degree. We conclude that unwillingness to report is often part of an oppositional stance related not only to wildlife management and conservation, but to contemporary social change in rural areas and perceived societal power relations. It is unlikely that reluctance to report is driven by frustration over inefficient official enforcement. While a political dimension is not always articulated, overlooking it may stoke conflicts and fortify a perception of unjust power relations.

Evaluating how lethal management affects poaching of Mexican wolves

Despite illegal killing (poaching) being the major cause of death among large carnivores globally, little is known about the effect of implementing lethal management policies on poaching. Two opposing hypotheses have been proposed in the literature: implementing lethal management may decrease poaching incidence (killing for tolerance) or increase it (facilitated illegal killing). Here, we report a test of the two opposed hypotheses that poaching (reported and unreported) of Mexican grey wolves ( Canis lupus baileyi ) in Arizona and New Mexico, USA, responded to changes in policy that reduced protections to allow more wolf-killing. We employ advanced biostatistical survival and competing risk methods to data on individual resightings, mortality and disappearances of collared Mexican wolves, supplemented with Bayes factors to assess the strength of evidence. We find inconclusive evidence for any decreases in reported poaching. We also find strong evidence that Mexican wolves were 121% more likely to disappear during periods of reduced protections than during periods of stricter protections, with only slight changes in legal removals by the agency. Therefore, we find strong support for the ‘facilitated illegal killing’ hypothesis and none for the ‘killing for tolerance’ hypothesis. We provide recommendations for improving the effectiveness of US policy on environmental crimes, endangered species and protections for wild animals. Our results have implications beyond the USA or wolves because the results suggest transformations of decades-old management interventions against human-caused mortality among wild animals subject to high rates of poaching.

Evaluating how lethal management affects poaching of Mexican wolves

Despite illegal killing (poaching) being the major cause of death among large carnivores globally, little is known about the effect of implementing lethal management policies on poaching. Two opposing hypotheses have been proposed in the literature: implementing lethal management may decrease poaching incidence (‘killing for tolerance’) or increase it (‘facilitated illegal killing’). Here, we report a test of the two opposed hypotheses that poaching (reported and unreported) of Mexican grey wolves (Canis lupus baileyi) in Arizona and New Mexico, USA, responded to changes in policy that reduced protections to allow more wolf-killing. We employ advanced biostatistical survival and competing-risk methods to data on individual resightings, mortality and disappearances of collared Mexican wolves, supplemented with Bayes Factors to assess strength of evidence. We find inconclusive evidence for any decreases in reported poaching. We also find strong evidence that Mexican wolves were 121% more likely to disappear during periods of reduced protections than during periods of stricter protections, with only slight changes in legal removals by the agency. Therefore, we find strong support for the ‘facilitated illegal killing’ hypothesis and none for the ‘killing for tolerance’ hypothesis. We provide recommendations for improving the effectiveness of US policy on environmental crimes, endangered species, and protections for wild animals. Our results have implications beyond the USA or wolves because the results suggest transformations of decades-old management interventions against human-caused mortality among wild animals subject to high rates of poaching.

Wildlife Crime: A Crime of Hegemonic Masculinity?

Scholarship within green criminology focusing on crimes and harms against nonhuman animals has been increasing. Little attention, however, has been directed at the gendered aspects of these crimes. For example, why is it that the great majority of offenders involved in wildlife trade and the illegal killing of endangered predators are male? The aim of this article is to fill the gap in the literature, relying on confiscation reports from Norwegian Customs of nonhuman animals—most of whom are listed in CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora)—as well as an analysis of verdicts in cases in Norwegian courts of “theriocides” (animal murders) of large predators. This article will assess the number of men and women involved in these crimes and harms, and will present some trends of theriociders. This article will employ ecofeminist and masculinities theories to better understand the gendered dynamics involved in wildlife trafficking and the theriocides of large carnivores.

Visioning African lionscapes: Securing space, mobilizing capital, and fostering subjects

In September 2016, 14 months after the illegal killing of Cecil the lion raised an international furore over trophy hunting, 58 individuals gathered at Oxford University for the Cecil Summit, a meeting of experts designed to vision the future of lion conservation in honor of Cecil. This paper explores the Cecil Summit through an analytic of government as a means to provide new insights into securitized and neoliberal conservation governance in action. On this basis, we show how the actors emboldened by the Cecil Moment claimed the authority to vision the Cecil Movement. Using video and document review, and semi-structured interviews, our discourse analysis highlights three components of intervention into African lionscapes emerging from the summit—securing space, mobilizing capital, and producing subjects—that are founded upon claims to scientific and economic rationality as well as specific representations of lions and rural Africans. Our analysis of the vision contributes to recent discussions in political ecology about the dovetailing of conservation, security, the economy—and we add—subjectivity. We conclude by pointing to the way in which militarized conservation appears to be inching closer to the lion and offering a critique of the vision for lion conservation put forward at the Cecil Summit.