Is the knowledge about the wild birds influenced by the socioeconomic conditions of the human populations?

Abstract

The human populations of the Brazilian semiarid region interact strongly with the avifauna throughout the entire occupation of its territory. These interactions were established in a context of adverse edaphoclimatic conditions that limited crop production and socioeconomic welfare, making the uses of birds as food and income frequent excuses to label them as important subsistence resources. It is relevant to know whether such interactions today are still influenced by socioeconomic factors and in what way. Semistructured questionnaires were applied to 105 residents, 45 men and 60 women, in rural communities of Casa Nova, Bahia state. Correlation analysis and regression models were performed to verify how the socioeconomic variables 'gender', 'age', 'education', 'monthly income' and 'residence time' of respondents explain the variation in the number of known species and the acknowledgement of the ecological importance of the birds. There were 840 bird citations, corresponding to 60 species. A correlation between age, income, residence time in the region and the number of species mentioned arouse, but there was no correlation with the acknowledgement of the ecological importance of the species. Men cited significantly more bird species than women. The results also indicate a low level of knowledge about bird species among younger populations. Socioeconomic factors strongly influence people's knowledge of bird species in their region. Exposure to wild birds and experience with it, gender, education and income together influence the knowledge about the diversity of this group.

Influence of the sociodemographic profile of hunters on the knowledge and use of faunistic resources

“…In this study, age was a statistically significant variable, but it presented a negative correlation, in which the group up to 40 years old cited more species than the group over 40 years of age, not corroborating other studies [ 15 , 31 , 48 ]. The age of the hunter has been a variable identified as statistically significant, presenting a positive correlation with the number of species mentioned.…”

“…The literature suggests that older hunters are more efficient, know greater taxonomic diversity and master more techniques [ 11 , 15 , 26 , 42 , 47 ]. A different perspective is pointed out by both Lima et al [ 31 ], and by Santos [ 48 ], in which age did not present a statistical correlation with the number of species.…”

“…Ethnozoological studies indicate that sociodemographic variables influence knowledge about the ecology of animals, use of faunal resources and patterns related to hunting [ 46 ]. Research indicates that the sociodemographic profile of the hunter can affect hunting efficiency [ 15 , 47 ], number of species hunted [ 41 ], knowledge about resources [ 48 ], number of hunting techniques [ 12 ], perception of resource abundance [ 26 ] and predictors of conflicts between people and wild animals [ 43 ].…”

“…In the same study, the results showed that women assumed the role of hunter, however, they killed a lower diversity of species and achieved a lower hunting income when compared to men [ 50 ]. Regarding the differences in knowledge between men and women, it depends on each study developed, in the research by Santos [ 42 ], Lima et al [ 31 ] there were no significant differences between the two groups; in another case study, men showed greater knowledge about species diversity and use value [ 48 ].…”

Cactaceae: uses and knowledge of rural communities in the semi-arid zones of Cucaita, Ráquira and Villa de Leyva (Boyacá, Colombia)

“…These results coincide with those reported by [70], who maintain that people between the ages of 55 and 90 are the greatest holders of local knowledge, due to the long history of contact that has favored the exchange of knowledge and experiences created with plants throughout their lives [71]. [72] point out that access to technologies by young people such as television, cell phones, radio, among others, has decreased their interest in outdoor activities, therefore their relationship with local biodiversity is weak.…”