Animal culture, defined as "information or behavior-shared within a community-which is acquired from conspecifics through some form of social learning" (1), can have important consequences for the survival and reproduction of individuals, social groups, and potentially, entire populations (1, 2). Yet, until recently, conservation strategies and policies have focused primarily on broad demographic responses and the preservation of genetically defined, evolutionarily significant units. A burgeoning body of evidence on cultural transmission and other aspects of sociality (3) is now affording critical insights into what should be conserved (going beyond the protection of genetic diversity, to consider adaptive aspects of phenotypic variation), and why specific conservation programs succeed (e.g., through facilitating the resilience of cultural diversity) while others fail (e.g., by neglecting key repositories of socially transmitted knowledge). Here, we highlight how international legal instruments, such as the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), can facilitate smart, targeted conservation of a wide range of taxa, by explicitly considering aspects of their sociality and cultures. CONSEQUENCES OF SOCIAL KNOWLEDGE An important aspect of social learning is the speed with which new behaviors can potentially spread through populations, with effects that may be positive (e.g., adaptive exploitation of a new food source) or negative (e.g., increasing conflict with humans, such as when sperm whales learn to remove fish from longlines) (2). Transmission can be mediated by an inherent propensity to adopt innovations (e.g., "lobtail" feeding in humpback whales (1)), or curbed by cultural conservatism (e.g., southern resident killer whales' persistent foraging specialization on Chinook salmon (2)). Social learning can result in the emergence of subpopulations with distinctive behavioral profiles, erecting social barriers, as observed in distinct vocal clans of sperm whales (see the Figure). Culturally mediated population structure has important implications for conservation efforts (4), as it can influence species-wide phenotypic diversity and adaptability to changing conditions (5). In some cases, such as humpback or blue whale song, cultural variation can reflect demography and facilitate more efficient, or less invasive, assays of contemporary genetic population structure (1, 4). Most profoundly, culture can play a causal role in establishing and maintaining distinct evolutionary trajectories (6). Another consequence of social learning can be the increased importance of key individuals as repositories of accumulated knowledge, making their targeted protection particularly important for the persistence of social units. For example, the experience of African elephant matriarchs (see

A key goal of conservation is to protect biodiversity by supporting the long-term persistence of viable, natural populations of wild species. Conservation practice has long been guided by genetic, ecological and demographic indicators of risk. Emerging evidence of animal culture across diverse taxa and its role as a driver of evolutionary diversification, population structure and demographic processes may be essential for augmenting these conventional conservation approaches and decision-making. Animal culture was the focus of a ground-breaking resolution under the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), an international treaty operating under the UN Environment Programme. Here, we synthesize existing evidence to demonstrate how social learning and animal culture interact with processes important to conservation management. Specifically, we explore how social learning might influence population viability and be an important resource in response to anthropogenic change, and provide examples of how it can result in phenotypically distinct units with different, socially learnt behavioural strategies. While identifying culture and social learning can be challenging, indirect identification and parsimonious inferences may be informative. Finally, we identify relevant methodologies and provide a framework for viewing behavioural data through a cultural lens which might provide new insights for conservation management.

The incidental capture of cetaceans and other protected marine wildlife in fishing gear has significant welfare implications. Many thousands of cetaceans are bycaught in fishing gear in European waters and hundreds of thousands die globally. We can expect many more to survive, but suffer from such interactions. As marine policy focuses on “population level” impact assessments and “sustainability” of fishing to preserve fish populations, the impacts to the bycaught individual, and their wider social group, are often largely underestimated, despite the large numbers affected. The wide range of recorded injuries, including abrasions, cuts, bruising, and broken bones, along with the potential for panic associated with forced submersion, indicate that the welfare of bycaught cetaceans is, individually and collectively, very poor. Commercial fishing is the last human activity targeting wildlife (fish) on a grand scale where slaughter includes incidental killing of other large sapient wildlife on such a regular basis. Here, we review the compelling evidence of the short and long term welfare impacts of bycatch, and the progress made toward implementation of measures to understand and solve this significant welfare issue. We argue that policy decisions surrounding fishing do not adequately consider cetacean bycatch, including welfare impacts. Ultimately, there are welfare issues in all bycatch situations and suffering cannot plausibly be reduced without preventing bycatch. The well-documented welfare implications provide a strong argument for zero tolerance of cetacean bycatch and provide a compelling case for immediate action in fisheries where bycatch is taking place. The only way to reduce the suffering of bycaught cetaceans is to decrease, or ideally eliminate, the number of animals caught in fishing gear. Uncertainties around the scale of bycatch should not delay management, even where individual bycatch estimates are considered “sustainable.” Lack of monitoring of sub-lethal impacts on populations may result in flawed impact assessments. We urge that animal welfare considerations should become an integral part of management decision-making in relation to bycatch globally. Enhanced, robust and transparent management systems are urgently required for the range of fisheries within which cetacean bycatch occurs, with the aim to better document and most importantly, work toward eliminating cetacean bycatch altogether.

The three orders which comprise the extant marine mammals exhibit a wide range of behaviors, varying social structures, and differences in social information use. Human impacts on marine mammals and their environments are ubiquitous; from chemical and noise pollution, to marine debris, prey depletion, and ocean acidification. As a result, no marine mammal populations remain entirely unaffected by human activities. Conservation may be hindered by an inadequate understanding of the behavioral ecology of some of these species. As a result of social structure, social information use, culture, and even behavioral syndromes, marine mammal social groups, and populations can be behaviorally heterogeneous. As a result responses to conservation initiatives, or exploitation, may be complex to predict. Previous commentators have highlighted the importance of incorporating behavioral data into conservation management and we review these considerations in light of the emerging science in this field for marine mammals. Since behavioral canalization may lead to vulnerability, whereas behavioral plasticity may provide opportunity for resilience, we argue that for many of these socially complex, cognitive species understanding their behavioral ecology, capacity for social learning, and individual behavioral variation, may be a central tenant for their successful conservation.

Emergent evidence of aspects of sociality, such as social structure and social learning, across many vertebrate taxa, warrant more detailed consideration of their influence on welfare outcomes for wildlife. Sociality can be dynamic across organismal development, it can: provide protection through safety in numbers; may influence breeding outcomes via mate choice and alloparental care; can influence foraging success through transmission of social information and co-operation; and it can provide opportunities for the spread of novel behavior. Social learning itself provides an important mechanism for resilience in changing environments, but also has the potential to increase vulnerability or facilitate the spread of maladaptive behaviors. The welfare consequences of vertebrates living in social groups are explored using Wilson's 10 qualities of sociality as a framework, and the implications of human activities are discussed. Focus to date has been on the importance of social networks for the welfare of farmed or captive animals. Here I consider the importance of social networks and sociality more generally for the welfare of wildlife and explore Mellor's five domain model for animal welfare within the context of wildlife sociality.

No abstract

No abstract

Social learning of adaptive behaviour is widespread in animal populations, but the spread of arbitrary behaviours is less common. In this paper, we describe the rise and fall of a behaviour called tail walking, where a dolphin forces the majority of its body vertically out of the water and maintains the position by vigourously pumping its tail, in a community of Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins (). The behaviour was introduced into the wild following the rehabilitation of a wild female individual, Billie, who was temporarily co-housed with trained dolphins in a dolphinarium. This individual was sighted performing the behaviour seven years after her 1988 release, as was one other female dolphin named Wave. Initial production of the behaviour was rare, but following Billie's death two decades after her release, Wave began producing the behaviour at much higher rates, and several other dolphins in the community were subsequently sighted performing the behaviour. Social learning is the most likely mechanism for the introduction and spread of this unusual behaviour, which has no known adaptive function. These observations demonstrate the potential strength of the capacity for spontaneous imitation in bottlenose dolphins, and help explain the origin and spread of foraging specializations observed in multiple populations of this genus.