Abstract
Humans have used animals and their products since the beginning of their shared history. Animals are used for different purposes, including food, medicines and magical-religious practices. This study analyzes two communities that reside in a conservation area to determine the role of mammals by these communities, considering the influences of factors such as gender and age on the knowledge and use of the mammals by individuals. Data were obtained through semi-structured interviews in the two communities in the Chapada do Araripe Environmental Protection Area (APA/Araripe) in Brazil. All of the inhabited houses in the communities were visited, and at most, two people were interviewed per household. A total of 229 interviews were conducted with local residents. A total of 32 species of mammals was recorded, with 8 used for medicinal purposes, 17 species used as food resources, and 23 species related to superstition. Men knew and used more mammals as zootherapeutics and as a food resource than women, whereas for superstition, there was no significant difference between the genders. Regarding age, adults knew and used more mammals as zootherapeutics, and the elderly used more mammals as a food resource. This study demonstrates that the use of wild mammals still occurs in rural communities in Brazil, even in conservation units where the federal laws are stricter.
Introduction
The use of animals by humans for food [1–2], garments and tools manufacturing [3–4], production of medicines [5–6], and magical-religious practices [4, 7–8] dates to the early history of humanity [3, 9–10]. Such uses have caused impacts that often threaten the exploited species [11–12]. Some studies show that use of the surrounding fauna resources occurs mainly among populations within disadvantaged socioeconomic conditions [2–3, 13–15]. Such a situation exists in a large majority of populations occupying the semi-arid regions of northeastern Brazil [12, 16]. The extreme needs experienced by these communities often lead to hunting of wild fauna for food purposes [2–3, 17]. Many byproducts of these animals are used in the production of zootherapeutic medications and are sometimes used for magical-religious purposes [4, 6, 8, 18–20]. In these communities, mammals and birds are the preferred groups of animals selected by hunters for food [2].
In Brazil, subsistence hunting was legalized in 1998 by the Environmental Criminal Law (Law 9.605/1998). Such practice has been utilized mainly by indigenous and traditional populations living in the country [21]. It is expected that reduced threats to biodiversity exist in conserved natural areas. In Brazil, these areas are called Conservation Units (
The study of popular knowledge regarding the use of animals is a crucial step in designing conservation strategies, because this knowledge reflects the values and attitudes adopted by a community or population regarding the local fauna [24–25]. For a better approach to this subject, the non-uniformity of knowledge among different genders and age groups should be considered [26–27]. In rural communities, for example, males usually have more contact with natural resources due to agriculture practices and hunting activities [28–30]. However, Almeida et al. [30] indicate that women have greater knowledge of the production of herbal medicines [31] and/or zootherapeutic products [32]. This difference most likely occurs because women are the main caretakers of children [30, 33]. In addition to gender, some studies show age as an important factor in knowledge regarding the use of wild animals [34–36]. Studies indicate that acquiring knowledge of natural resources occurs when individuals are still young [37–38], and there is a direct relationship between age and the knowledge obtained by the individual [39].
Given the precarious living conditions of the communities in the semi-arid regions of northeastern Brazil [2, 11] and the prevalence of hunting practice by these communities [12, 16], we believe that they still hunt wild animals even in the conservation areas. Considering the needs of these communities, this use would be predominantly for food and zootherapeutic purposes, with some elements of superstition. We believe that the purposes for the use might vary according to gender and age of informants. Because males have more contact with the wild fauna [27–29], they would have more knowledge about the use of such fauna for food. Moreover, due to child care, we assume that females will present more knowledge about the use of fauna for zootherapeutic purposes. Considering the informant age [39–40], we expect that in general, elderly respondents will have more knowledge about the role of wild mammals. Because mammals are the group of animals most affected by hunting [2], we analyzed two communities in a conservation area regarding the role of wild mammals, particularly seeking the reasons why these communities use these animals and if there is an effect of the gender and age of the informant.
Methods
Study area
The data were collected in two communities situated near the National Araripe Forest (
Study area: A – Caldas Community, B - Sítio Betânia Community. Municipality of Barbalha, state of Ceará, Northeast of Brazil.
The Sítio Betânia Community is in an area where agriculture is predominant. The community has one medical facility, one municipal school that offers early childhood education, and one church. The land for these public services was donated, and construction was by the residents of the community. The main activity of the population is subsistence agriculture with plantations of common bean, cassava and corn; small pastures for cattle and goats are maintained in some places. Firewood harvesting, for sale or for cooking food, is also very common. The community has approximately 50 families and a total of 258 inhabitants (personal communication from the M.S.P health agent).
The Caldas Community belongs to the municipality of Barbalha-Ceará state. Despite being a district away from the municipal center, Caldas is more urbanized than the previous community, having streets with sidewalks and a small local business. The community is next to the Araripe National Forest and has few public establishments, including only one medical facility, one kindergarten and elementary municipal school, one Catholic church, and some evangelical churches. The economy of the region is traditionally based on the local business, and agricultural practice is less common. There is also economic activity linked with tourism, because the district is close to the Riacho do Meio Ecological Park, which includes the Geotope Arajara and is part of the Geopark Araripe; this is an area of geological and paleontological interest and is the only one of its kind found in the South and North Americas. The Caldas Bathing Resort (
Data collection
Information was obtained through the use of semi-structured interviews [42]. All the houses of the two communities were visited, and a maximum of two people were interviewed per household. Contact between each interviewee with the next one was avoided to prevent the possibility that one informant could influence the answers of the other. In case of such contact, the interviewed person was eliminated from the sample. The sample was divided by gender among three age groups, based on the classification criteria of the Brazilian Ministry of Health: adolescents (12 to 19 years old), adults (20 to 59 years old), and elderly (over 60 years old).
A total of 229 interviews were conducted between October and November 2012, with 124 of the interviews conducted in Caldas Community and 105 in the Sítio Betânia Community. Of the interviewees, 117 were males, and 112 were females. According to age group, a total of 42 adolescents, 146 adults and 41 elderly were interviewed.
To assess knowledge about mammals, interviewees were first asked if they knew what mammals are, and following their response, other popular terms were used, such as “animals with fur” and “animals that breastfeed.” A photographic guide containing pictures of mammals of the region was also shown. The research focused on three types of use: food, zootherapeutic uses, and superstition. The questions were restricted to wild animals and addressed whether these animals are hunted and/or eaten not only by the interviewee but also by any acquaintance. Interviewees were also asked whether they use or have used mammals to produce zootherapeutic items. The diseases treated with zootherapeutic products were categorized according to the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems [43]. With regard to superstition, the following subcategories were considered: animals that bring good luck; animals that bring bad luck; and sacred animals (“divine creatures” that cannot be killed or harmed).
Before each interview, the interviewees received a Free and Informed Consent Form providing information about the nature and objectives of the study. For the interviewees who were minors, a permission form was presented to their guardians. Signatures of the interviewee or the guardian of the minor were requested, for the record required by current legislation (Resolution No. 196, dated 10/10/1996, Brazilian National Health Council). This study was authorized by the Biodiversity Authorization and Information System (
Statistical analysis
BioStat 5.0 software was used for the statistical analyses. The differences in knowledge and use of mammals between genders and age groups were compared with the Chi-squared test. A P value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. In cases of few answers (less than five) in a given category, the G-test was used. The tables were made with the spreadsheet application of Microsoft Excel© 2007.
A use-value for each species used as food or in zootherapeutic and magical-religious practices was calculated (adapted from Phillips' proposal [44]). This index shows the importance of the locally known species. This value is calculated using the following formula:
Results
A total of 32 mammal species (distributed in 19 families) was recorded through the interviews, which described their medicinal, food, or superstition uses. Of the total number of species recorded, 24 are wild species. According to the national [45] and international [46] lists of threatened species, four species of the mammals mentioned are vulnerable or near threatened with extinction:
The role of mammals as food resource
Based on the information from the forms, 126 (55%) interviewees stated that they have eaten meat from wild mammals. A total of 17 species of mammals used as food was recorded in both of the communities. The three species that showed the highest use-values were
When the interviewees were asked if they had ever consumed wild mammals, there was a significant difference between genders (
A total of 21 interviewees (9%) responded that they still consume wild mammals. There was no significant difference between genders (
Of the interviewees, 80% said they had consumed mammals' meat for more than one year. When asked why they use wild mammals as a food, the following answers were obtained: because they do not have the resources to buy another type of meat (40%), because these animals are tasty (20%), because it is a regional tradition (18%), because these animals are easily caught (12%) and because these animals are abundant (10%). More than half of the interviewees (71%) stated that the wild mammals used as food are hunted, 26% stated that they receive the animals from friends or acquaintances, 2% stated that they ask someone else to get them, and 1% stated that they buy the animals in street markets or from hunters of the community.
The role of mammals as zootherapeutic sources
A total of eight mammalian species (divided into six families) were recorded as used for medicinal purposes. From these species, six species are wild mammals, and two are domestic. The most important species mentioned were
The majority of interviewees answered negatively when asked if they use or have used mammals for zootherapeutic purposes. Of the 229 interviewees, 40 (17%) responded they use or have used some mammal or parts of the mammal to treat some illness. The chi-squared test showed no significant differences between men and women regarding the use of mammals for zootherapeutic purposes (
All the interviewees stated that they learned about the use of folk medicines derived from mammals from older individuals. When asked why mammals were used to produce some medicines, the following answers were obtained: because these animals are easily obtained (20%), because these folk medicines are better than the allopathic medicines (25%), and because they do not have the financial resources to buy allopathic medicine or do not have access to such medicines (55%).
The role of mammals in superstition
A total of 23 mammalian species related to superstition were recorded, comprising 15 wild species and eight domestic species. The most cited mammals for bringing good luck to humans were
No significant difference was observed between men and women in any of the questions related to superstitions involving mammals: “Do you consider any mammal as a sacred animal?” (
Analyzing the answers of the age groups, there was no significant difference when the respondents were asked if they consider any mammal to be a sacred animal (G = 0.5798, gl = 2, P = 0.74) or if they believe that some mammals can bring good luck (G = 0.5323, gl = 2, P = 0.76). When asked if they believe that some mammals can bring bad luck, there was a significant difference among age groups (G = 7.29, df = 2, P = 0.026), with 15% of the elderly answering yes compared to 21% of the adults and 5% of the adolescents.
Discussion
The apparent role of wild mammals in the communities studied here reflects the hunting importance of this animal group [3, 12, 48–56]. The factors that lead these communities to use wild mammals are similar to those indicated in the literature [2–3, 13–15]. Even when residing in a conservation unit in which any use of wild animals is prohibited, poverty associated with lack of inspection in such locations [3, 16] is most likely the reason these communities use wild mammals for both food and zootherapeutic purposes.
The role of mammals as food resources was controversial. On the one hand, the current use of mammals for food purposes proved to be low. On the other hand, this practice is still high when fitted into a time corresponding to less than one year. When interviewees were asked whether they have consumed wild mammals, the answer was positive for over 50% of them, mostly the elderly. This age group most likely experienced a period of time when subsistence hunting was more common. Such habits would also be associated with reduced inspection, greater geographic isolation, and lower family income [18] at that time. In general, mammals are the group of animals with the greatest hunting interest [15, 50–51] because some mammals have greater body volume [16, 49, 52–53] and are recognized for their flavorful meat [54]. In fact, many interviewees reported that they enjoy the meat of
Consumption of wild mammals was more common among males. This difference follows the trend observed by other authors [3, 28–29], who indicate that hunting activities are often performed by men in most societies. This difference most likely occurs because males have more contact with available natural resources than females [26–27].
In addition to the use of mammals for food purposes, our results showed that mammals also play a role in folk medicine. Studies show that in Brazil, the majority of animals used for medicinal purposes are wild animals [33, 55–57], which is similar to the situation in the current study. Alves et al. [58] reported in a study conducted in the semi-arid region of northeastern Brazil that 78% of the species with medicinal properties were wild animals. However, domestic animal species are also used for zootherapeutic purposes in the northeast region [57]. Animals such as sheep, recognized as an important medical resource in the surveyed area, are also cited in other regions of the Northeast and in several other places in Brazil [33, 56–57].
Lack of resources and difficult access to other medicines are cited as the main reasons for use of wild mammals as zootherapeutic agents. Today, however, adolescents and most of the adults live in a different scenario, where the source of income is not only agriculture [59]. Currently, there are several social welfare programs offered by the Brazilian government, such as family allowance (
All the home remedies mentioned in our study were prepared from mammalian byproducts. Moura and Marques [57] stated that many of the animals or their byproducts are used as zootherapeutic agents because they are useless for other purposes. The same fact had already been observed by Holanda [66] in the twentieth century and by Alves et al. [58], who mentioned the use of amulets and medicines obtained from parts of wild animals that are considered inappropriate for food or leather manufacturing, stating that medicinal use of these byproducts was very widespread at the time. The author cites horns, teeth, nails, bones, hooves, skin and fat among the parts that can be used, which were similar to the byproducts that were cited in our work for zootherapeutic practice. Interestingly, in some cases, the same byproduct is used to treat different diseases.
The role of mammals in superstition proved to be unusual in both of the surveyed communities. Men and women seem to share the same beliefs. Adults referred more often to superstition and mentioned two wild animal species as animals that bring bad luck. Local beliefs should not be underestimated, because they may have a negative impact on the associated species. Some interviewees demonstrated repugnance of species believed to bring bad luck. Thus, these animals were unwanted in these communities. In a study of the use of fauna for mystical-religious purposes conducted in the semi-arid region of Paraiba state, Brazil, Barbosa and Aguiar [19] found results similar to ours for
However, some species are associated with divine creatures. The veneration of some animals is also observed in other cultures [67–68]. Some cultures demonstrate a close integration and connections with totemic, mythological (imaginary) or god animals, as noted by Allaby [68]. In a study conducted in the agreste region of the Brazilian state of Paraíba, Barbosa and Aguiar [20] observed that animals such as birds and insects are considered sacred by residents of one community of this region. According to the interviewees,
Implications for conservation
Our study showed that the use of wild mammals in the surveyed communities is still a common practice and that current conservation strategies adopted throughout Brazil (i.e. establishing certain areas as conservation units) have not been effective. Unfortunately hunting practice and the use of products of wild animals are still widespread in the country, regardless of the region and protectionist status. This suggests that current conservation strategies need to be rethought. Most likely, what drives hunting in such communities are poverty, cultural traditions, and especially the lack of legal enforcement. However, it is very hard to assign conservation policies in communities where wild animals have always been seen as critical resources. To avoid ethical conflicts between human needs and wildlife conservation, these policies should take into account the social and cultural aspects of local communities in addressing the use and management of wild animals. The development of environmental education programs is of paramount importance. With the influence of these measures, the anthropogenic impacts on endangered species will most likely be reduced.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
We acknowledge the residents of Caldas Community and Sítio Betânia Community for receptively and enthusiastically participating in the interviews, especially Mr. Luiz Francisco Pedroza and his family for giving us accommodation at their residence. We also acknowledge ICMbio for permitting the execution of this study in this area and for providing accommodation in the house of Guarda Santa Rita. The Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (
Appendix 1. Wild mammals used as food resource by locals from the communities of Caldas and Sítio Betânia (APA/Araripe,Ceará,Brazil).
| Family/specie | Popular name in the region | N |
UV |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|||
| Raposa / goro (crab-eating fox) | 1 | 0.007 | |
|
|
|||
| Preá (spix's yellow-toothed cavy) | 21 | 0.166 | |
| Mocó (rock cavy) | 1 | 0.007 | |
|
|
|||
| Veado (gray brocket deer) | 86 | 0.682 | |
|
|
|||
| Tatu china (southern naked-tailed armadillo) | 2 | 0.015 | |
| Tatu verdadeiro (nine-banded armadillo) | 77 | 0.611 | |
| Tatu peba (yellow armadillo) | 51 | 0.404 | |
| Tatu bola (brazilian three-banded armadillo) | 1 | 0.007 | |
|
|
|||
| Cutia (black-rumped agouti) | 80 | 0.634 | |
|
|
|||
| Cassaco / saruê / timbú (white-eared opossum) | 3 | 0.023 | |
|
|
|||
| Punaré / rato do mato (common punaré) | 5 | 0.039 | |
|
|
|||
| Gato do mato / lagartixeiro (oncilla) | 5 | 0.039 | |
| Onça vermelha / bodeira (puma) | 16 | 0.126 | |
| Onça pintada (jaguar) | 1 | 0.007 | |
|
|
|||
| Gambá (striped hog-nosed skunk) | 8 | 0.063 | |
|
|
|||
| Tamanduá (southern tamandua) | 15 | 0.119 | |
|
|
|||
| Porco do mato (collared peccary) | 1 | 0.007 |
UV = use value.
Appendix 2. Wild mammals used as zootherapeutics by locals from the communities of Caldas and Sítio Betânia (APA/Araripe,Ceará,Brazil).
| Family / Specie | Popular name in the region | NC | UV | Used part | Disease(s) | Category of the disease |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
||||||
| Boi / vaca (bull/cow) | 1 | 0,025 | Calves' foot (1) | Nerve problems | Nervous system | |
| Carneiro / ovelha (sheep/lamb) | 17 | 0,425 | Fat/lard (2,3) | Flu (stuffy nose) | Respiratory system | |
| Tallow (2,3) | Cracked feet | Undefined disease | ||||
| Rheumatism and pain in the feet Swelling and luxation | Musculoskeletal system and connective tissue Injury, poisoning and other consequences of external causes | |||||
| Tooth pain | Specific teeth disorders and supporting structures | |||||
| Joint inflammation | Other joint disorders | |||||
| Strokes | External causes of morbidity and mortality | |||||
|
|
||||||
| Raposa / goro (crab-eating fox) | 3 | 0.075 | Fat/lard (2,3) | Back pain and rheumatism | Musculoskeletal system and connective tissue | |
| Hemorrhoids | Circulatory system | |||||
| Liver (4) | Cough | Respiratory system | ||||
|
|
||||||
| Veado (gray brocket deer) | 16 | 0.400 | Faeces (5) | Headache | Neurological disorders (headache) | |
| Cough | Respiratory system | |||||
| Horn (6,7,8,9,10) | Irritation during the birth of teeth in children | Undefined disease | ||||
| Toothache | Specific teeth disorders and supporting structures | |||||
| Earache | Ear and mastoid apophysis | |||||
| Snakebite | External causes of morbidity and mortality | |||||
| Calves' foot (11) | Wound | Injury, poisoning and other consequences of external causes | ||||
| Cracked feet | Undefined diseases | |||||
|
|
||||||
| Tatu peba (yellow armadillo) | 1 | 0.025 | Tail (9) | Earache | Ear and mastoid apophysis | |
|
|
Tatu bola (brazilian three-banded armadillo) | 1 | 0,025 | Carapace (12) | Cough | Respiratory system |
| (Linnaeus, 1758) | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| Cutia (black-rumped agouti) | 1 | 0,025 | Tail (9) | Earache | Ear and mastoid apophysis | |
|
|
||||||
| Gambá (striped hog-nosed skunk) | 4 | 0.100 | Urine (13) | Back pain | Musculoskeletal system and connective tissue | |
| Earache | Ear and mastoid apophysis | |||||
| Rheumatism | Musculoskeletal system and connective tissue | |||||
| Liver (5) | Rheumatism | Musculoskeletal system and connective tissue |
Domestic animal; NC = Number of Citations; UV = Use-value; Preparation and use: (1) = Cook the calves' foot (
Appendix 3. The role of mammals in superstition by the communities of Caldas and Sítio Betânia (APA/Araripe,Ceará,Brazil).
| N |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family/Specie | Popular name in the region | GL | BL | SA |
|
|
||||
| Boi / vaca (bull/cow) | 3 | – | 5 | |
| Carneiro / ovelha (sheep / lamb) | – | – | 3 | |
|
|
||||
| Macaco / Soin (common marmoset) | 2 | 9 | 2 | |
|
|
||||
| Cachorro (domestic dog) | 1 | – | – | |
| Raposa / goró (crab-eating fox) | 1 | 9 | – | |
|
|
||||
| Preá (spix's yellow-toothed cavy) | 2 | – | 1 | |
|
|
||||
| Veado (gray brocket deer) | 6 | 1 | 8 | |
|
|
||||
| Tatu peba (yellow armadillo) | 1 | – | 2 | |
|
|
||||
| Cutia (black-rumped agouti) | 4 | – | 3 | |
|
|
||||
| Cassaco / timbú (white-eared opossum) | – | 1 | – | |
|
|
||||
| Elefante (elephant) | 1 | – | – | |
|
|
||||
| Cavalo (horse) | – | – | 2 | |
| Jumento (donkey) | – | – | 4 | |
|
|
||||
| Gato doméstico (domestic cat) | 2 | 14 | 3 | |
| Gato do mato / Lagartixeiro (oncilla) | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Leão (lion) | – | – | 2 | |
| Onça pintada (jaguar) | 2 | 1 | 2 | |
|
|
||||
| Coelho (tapeti) | 12 | – | – | |
|
|
||||
| Rato (rat) | – | 1 | – | |
|
|
||||
| Gambá (striped hog-nosed skunk) | 1 | – | – | |
|
|
||||
| Tamanduá (southern tamandua) | – | – | 1 | |
|
|
||||
| Porco doméstico (domestic pig) | – | – | 1 | |
| Chiroptera** | Morcego (bat) | – | 1 | – |
Domestic animal
Unidentified animal species; GL = Good luck; BL = Bad luck; SA = Sacred animal.