Conserving Carnivores: Politics in Play

Abstract

In their Review “Status and ecological effects of the world's largest carnivores” (10 January, DOI: [10.1126/science.1241484][1]), W. J. Ripple et al. propose the creation of a Global Large Carnivore Initiative (GLCI) endorsed by bold commitments from politicians around the world. However, large carnivores deliver political services in addition to ecological services, and this complication may prevent a GLCI from gaining strong political commitment. Conflicts involving the political response to large carnivores raise controversial questions about land-use and political economies. The animals serve as a powerful symbol to communicate difficulties (often those that they revealed but did not create) and to influence policies. Opposing the recovery of large carnivores or limiting their populations has therefore become an inexpensive way for politicians to pose as defenders of particular interest groups that they might otherwise ignore. An illustrative example is the decline of sheep farming in France. French sheep farmers claim that wolf attacks threaten their livelihoods ([ 1 ][2]). However, this story overlooks political factors. In 1985, French Special Forces sank Greenpeace's flagship boat in Auckland harbor to prevent protests against nuclear tests. As part of the compensation, France agreed to not take measures that could hinder the import of New Zealand lambs into the European Union ([ 2 ][3]). This sudden end to France's protectionist standing has been a tough economic challenge for French sheep farming. Since the wolf naturally came back to France from Italy in 1992, some French politicians took the opportunity to stand for national sheep farming by dramatizing the impact of livestock attacks and opposing the wolf return, without addressing the ultimate market-based causes of sheep farming decline. In 2012, wolf-linked subsidies to sheep farming amounted to 8.8 € million ([ 3 ][4]), and data now reveal that sheep farming fares better in wolf regions ([ 4 ][5]). There are strong political incentives to scapegoat large carnivores. We recommend developing a better understanding of the political ecology of large carnivore conservation. 1. [↵][6] 1. S. Sayare , “As wolves return to French Alps, a way of life is threatened,” New York Times, 4 September 2013, p. A4. 2. [↵][7] 1. C. Harding , Singapore Yearbook Int. Law 10, 99 (2006); . [OpenUrl][8] 3. [↵][9] Ministere de l'Ecologie de Developpement Durable et de l'Energie, Ministere de l'Agriculture de l'Agroalimentaire et de la Foret, “Plan d'Action National Loup 2013–2017” (Paris, 2013); [www.loup.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/130830\_PLAN\_LOUP_2013-2.pdf][10]. 4. [↵][11] 1. L. Garde 1. L. Garde , in Loup et Elevage: S'Ouvrir a la Complexite: CERPAM—Centre d'Etudes et de Realisations Pastorales Alpes Mediterranee, L. Garde , Ed. (CERPAM, Manosque, France, 2007), pp. 14–20. [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.1241484 [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #ref-3 [5]: #ref-4 [6]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [7]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text [8]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DSingapore%2BYearbook%2BInt.%2BLaw%26rft.volume%253D10%26rft.spage%253D99%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [9]: #xref-ref-3-1 View reference 3 in text [10]: http://www.loup.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/130830_PLAN_LOUP_2013-2.pdf [11]: #xref-ref-4-1 View reference 4 in text