The DOI matches its Crossref record; 94 of the 94 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 9 of the 132 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins
Open accessAbstract
Protein from forest wildlife is crucial to rural food security and livelihoods across the tropics. The harvest of animals such as tapir, duikers, deer, pigs, peccaries, primates and larger rodents, birds and reptiles provides benefits to local people worth millions of US$ annually and represents around 6 million tonnes of animals extracted yearly. Vulnerability to hunting varies, with some species sustaining populations in heavily hunted secondary habitats, while others require intact forests with minimal harvesting to maintain healthy populations. Some species or groups have been characterized as ecosystem engineers and ecological keystone species. They affect plant distribution and structure ecosystems, through seed dispersal and predation, grazing, browsing, rooting and other mechanisms. Global attention has been drawn to their loss through debates regarding bushmeat, the "empty forest" syndrome and their ecological importance. However, information on the harvest remains fragmentary, along with understanding of ecological, socioeconomic and cultural dimensions. Here we assess the consequences, both for ecosystems and local livelihoods, of the loss of these species in the Amazon and Congo basins.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This synthesis reviews bushmeat harvest in the Congo and Amazon Basins, estimating roughly 6 million tonnes of wildlife extracted annually and contrasting ecological impacts with rural and urban livelihood dependence. It argues that sustainable harvest, rather than outright bans, is needed, with different policy contexts in the two basins.
Key findings
- Updated 2010 estimates put annual extraction at 1,299,000 tonnes in the Amazon and 4,569,000 tonnes in the Congo Basin; consumption was 909,000 tonnes/year in the Amazon and 3,198,000 tonnes/year in the Congo Basin, including 289,000 tonnes/year urban in the Congo.
- Hunting lowers wildlife densities in hunted versus un-hunted forests: Table 2 reports declines of 80.8% across 23 Amazonian sites in Brazil, 43.0–100% at Makokou, Gabon, 42.1% and 12.9% in Ituri, DRC, and 43.9% in Mossapoula, CAR. Large-bodied, slow-reproducing species such as apes, large primates, carnivores, tapirs, buffaloes and elephants are most vulnerable; hunting is cited as a major cause of a reported 50% decline in apes in Gabon within two decades.
- Some resilient species persist or increase under hunting, and hunted taxa include keystone species and ecosystem engineers whose loss can disrupt seed dispersal, predation, plant regeneration and forest structure, creating “empty forests.”
- Bushmeat remains central to livelihoods: rural Amazonian consumption averaged 63 ± 25 kg/capita/year (range 10–190, n = 14), while Congo Basin urban consumption is significant (e.g., 4.7 kg/person/year average across Gabon, DRC and CAR; 7.2 in Libreville; 14.6 in Bangui). Reported trade volumes include 840–1,080 tonnes/year in Yaoundé markets, about 9,500 tonnes/year in Bangui, and an estimated 270 tonnes/year passing through a single European airport.
Methods
- Synthesis/review drawing on published and unpublished studies, market data and tables to compare ecological and livelihood dimensions of bushmeat use in the Amazon and Congo Basins.
- Updated 2010 consumption and extraction estimates were calculated using consumption data gathered in the work (Table 3) and updated population figures, assuming a 0.7 meat/live animal ratio.
- No new primary field sampling is reported; the analysis is descriptive and comparative across sites and basins.
Limitations
- Stated: information on the bushmeat harvest remains fragmentary; studies are often limited to single sites with multiple research approaches, limiting comparisons, and results are frequently disseminated in unpublished or inaccessible reports.
- Stated: urban bushmeat consumption data are especially scarce for the Amazon; Congo Basin population data are “notoriously unreliable” and consumption patterns very variable, so the authors caution against concluding that consumption has increased in the Amazon or stabilized in the Congo from their updated estimates.
- Evident: the synthesis relies on secondary sources and tables with missing or inconsistent data, and the paper notes that very little is known for most Central African hunted species and that four of about 30 commonly hunted Amazonian species are IUCN data deficient.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
30 Own interpretation · 26 No full text of the sources · 25 No basis given · 24 Sources not found · 24 Not checked yet · 6 Partly supported · 5 Own result · 2 Supported · 1 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This should however be qualified by the fact that where overhunting has occurred over long periods, larger and more vulnerable species (often endangered) have already disappeared with smaller, generally nonthreatened species, becoming prevalent in the harvest (Altrichter 2006, Bennett and Robinson 2000, Cowlishaw et al. 2005, Stearman 2000).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Altrichter 2006 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bennett and Robinson 2000 source
- Partly supportedcites Cowlishaw et al. 2005 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract and Discussion report that historical overhunting depleted vulnerable species in the Takoradi market, leaving robust taxa such as rodents and small antelope in the harvest. The Policy Implications section cautions that the authors could not establish whether species absent from the market were locally extinct. The paper also does not establish that the depleted species were often endangered or that the remaining species were generally nonthreatened. (LLM, conf=0.86)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“increasing certification and forcing logging companies to halt hunting and export of bushmeat from their concessions would do much to reduce urban consumption”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites Nasi et al. 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The available overview (passage 3, no page number) says the paper examines wildlife management in logging concessions and the role of certification. It does not address whether halting hunting and bushmeat exports would substantially reduce urban consumption; searches for that claim and for bushmeat and urban consumption found no relevant passage. (LLM, conf=0.70)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In Yaoundé, Edderai and Dame (2006) identified 15 markets and 145 restaurants and cafeterias selling bushmeat and providing an occupation for 249 people, of whom 84.3% are women.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Edderai and Dame (2006) source
The paper’s Abstract states that the authors inventoried bushmeat sales points in Yaoundé and located 15 markets and 145 restaurants and cafeterias. It also reports that the trade provided an occupation for 249 people, 84.3% of whom were women. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In Yaoundé, Edderai and Dame (2006) identified 15 markets and 145 restaurants and cafeterias selling bushmeat and providing an occupation for 249 people, of whom 84.3% are women.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Edderai and Dame (2006) source
The Abstract states that the census identified 15 markets and 145 restaurants and cafeterias selling bushmeat in Yaoundé. It also states that this trade provided an occupation for 249 people, 84.3% of whom were women. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirectn = 249- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have been unable however to find evidence that these taboos play a significant role in regulating harvests.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Reasons behind the consumption of bushmeat
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Even where bushmeat is used to satisfy basic subsistence requirements, many families also hunt wild game for sale to meet short term cash needs (Table 5).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Average extraction rates calculated for African forest mammals within each Red List category indicate that non-threatened species have the highest extraction rates.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the other hand, despite long and continuous sustained heavy harvesting, some bushmeat species continue to thrive in natural and modified habitats.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“When wild fish is available it can outweigh the importance of bushmeat in the diet of forest dwellers (Rushton et al. 2005 in Peru or Wilkie et al. 2005 in Gabon).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Reasons behind the consumption of bushmeat
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rushton et al. 2005
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Wilkie et al. 2005 source
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, people who depend on wild protein will substitute wild fish and wild meat for one another, depending on the price and availability of each.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Reasons behind the consumption of bushmeat
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 54
- Probably not a substantial claim. 21
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Brush-tailed porcupine (Atherurus africanus), pouched rat (Cricetomys eminii), blue (Cephalophus monticola) and red duikers (other Cephalophus spp.), represent the majority of the catch in the Congo Basin with blue duikers alone accounting often for about a third of the harvest (Kümpel 2006a, van Vliet 2008).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kümpel 2006a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites van Vliet 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Assessing hunting impact” (page unavailable), blue duiker accounts for 37.5% of recorded offtakes in Ntsieté, supporting the approximate one-third figure for that village. The paper does not establish that this proportion is common across the Congo Basin, or that the four named animals together make up most catches there; it instead identifies small diurnal monkeys and red river hog among Ntsieté’s other most-hunted species. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“For example, in Gabon, the small Blue duiker is significantly less abundant in remote forests within the boundaries of the Ivindo National Park than in hunted areas with similar vegetation cover close to the town of Makokou, while the larger Peter's (Cephalophus callipygus) and Bay duiker (C.dorsalis) are less abundant or even depleted (van Vliet 2008, van Vliet et al. 2007).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on hunted populations
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites van Vliet 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites van Vliet et al. 2007 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Rifles and shotguns are typically used for larger animals and arboreal species (Coad 2007, Kümpel 2006a, van Vliet 2008)”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Coad 2007
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Kümpel 2006a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites van Vliet 2008 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion says gun hunting increased opportunities to hunt larger animals and arboreal animals, including small diurnal monkeys. It does not identify rifles or shotguns specifically, so that detail is not supported by this source. (LLM, conf=0.83)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Steel leg hold traps have been used extensively to hunt furbearers such as ocelots and jaguars (Swank and Teer 1989).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Swank and Teer 1989 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The 'Causes of population decline' section says trapping jaguars was common in ranching country and that traps were supplied for the jaguar-pelt trade. It does not identify those traps as steel leg-hold traps or say they were used to hunt ocelots. It also says commercial trapping of jaguars had declined dramatically since the 1970s. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“as much of the commercial bushmeat that is consumed in urban households comes from logging concessions that represent the single largest landuse in the Congo Basin”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Nasi et al. 2011 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper description (no section or page given) calls industrial logging concessions the Congo Basin’s “most extant production system,” supporting their prominence but not explicitly establishing them as the single largest land use. The available passages do not say that much of the commercial bushmeat consumed by urban households comes from those concessions; searches for bushmeat, urban households, and the land-use claim found no further passage. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We can reasonably estimate that our figures are of the right order of magnitude and that annually 6 million tonnes of wildlife in the two basins.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > BUSHMEAT IN LOCAL PEOPLE'S LIVELIHOODS
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mammals make up the bulk of the catches both in number and biomass terms, with ungulates and rodents representing more than two thirds of the carcasses sold in urban markets or recorded from hunter off takes in both Congo and Amazon Basin (Table 1).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Empirical studies in both basins show that population densities are lower in hunted versus un-hunted areas, implying a potential decline in stocks (Table 2).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on hunted populations
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Our estimates for the Amazon Basin are ten times higher than Fa et al. 2002 and similar for the Congo Basin.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > BUSHMEAT IN LOCAL PEOPLE'S LIVELIHOODS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fa et al. 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Congo 2 | 1 612 000 | 57 046 | 41 199 | 2 909 000 | 289 000 | 3 198 000 | 4 569 000”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Amazon 1 | 3 938 000 | 14 425 | 24 352 | 909 000 | Negligible | 909 000 | 1 299 000”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As it is expected in hunted areas, the abundance and composition of mammal assemblages differ from un-hunted areas.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly, in the Amazon Basin, large rodents (Dasyprocta spp.and Cunniculus paca) and medium-sized ungulates such as brocket deer (Mazama spp.) and peccaries (Tayassu pecari and Pecari tajacu.12-45 kg) typically make up the bulk of the harvest, although the hunting of a few tapir (ca.200 kg) can be very important in biomass terms (Bodmer and Lozano 2001, Bodmer et al. 2004, Ojasti 2000, Peres 200”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bodmer and Lozano 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bodmer et al. 2004 source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ojasti 2000
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Many depend on wildlife resources as a buffer to see them through times of hardship (e.g.unemployment, illness of relatives, crop failure), or to gain additional income for special needs (e.g.school fees, festivals, funerals) (Fa and Brown 2009)”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Fa and Brown 2009 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Analysis of taste choices in Gabon indicated that consumers differentiate amongst bushmeat species and that wildlife cannot be treated as a generic food source (Knights 2008, Schenck et al. 2006).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Reasons behind the consumption of bushmeat
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Knights 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Schenck et al. 2006 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Fa et al. (2002) estimates for the Amazon were very low, equating to a consumption of 35 g/capita/day, largely below any published data (even contradicting their own data).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > BUSHMEAT IN LOCAL PEOPLE'S LIVELIHOODS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fa et al. 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the contribution of urban areas to the overall bushmeat consumption is high and likely to become higher as the population of Central African countries becomes more urbanised.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > BUSHMEAT IN LOCAL PEOPLE'S LIVELIHOODS
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A relatively low percentage of the population consumes bushmeat (mostly indigenous and the smaller rural communities).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > BUSHMEAT IN LOCAL PEOPLE'S LIVELIHOODS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rushton et al. (2005)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Vulnerability to hunting varies, with some species sustaining populations in heavily hunted secondary habitats, while others require intact forests with minimal harvesting to maintain healthy populations.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Top predators (e.g.large cats, raptors, crocodiles) impact biodiversity by providing resources that would otherwise be scarcely available to other species (e.g.carrion) or by initiating trophic cascades (Sergio et al. 2008, Terborgh 2010).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on ecosystems
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Sergio et al. 2008 source
- Not matchedcites Terborgh 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Hunting in high forest with snares and traps appears more frequent in the Congo Basin, but in both basins “garden hunting” is common using traps for relatively small game (mainly rodents) to protect farming plots (Naughton-Treves et al. 2003, Smith 2005).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In two seminal pieces using data from the end of the 1990's, Fa and Peres (2001) and Fa et al. 2002, concluded that “over 5 million tons of meat feed millions in Neotropical (0.15 million tons) forests and Afrotropical (4.9 million tons) forests annually”.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Fa and Peres (2001)
- Not matchedcites Fa et al. 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The loss of wildlife from forest ecosystems can lead to the disruption of ecological and evolutionary processes, changes in species composition within ecosystems and probably a general reduction in biological diversity (Emmons 1989, Redford 1992) creating”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on ecosystems
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Local extirpation of hunted species is widespread, with West and Central Africa particularly hard hit (Milner-Gulland et al. 2003).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Milner-Gulland et al. 2003 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“In Gabon, bushmeat is associated with the village, with rituals and with ceremonies, such as men's circumcision ceremonies (Angoué et al. 2000, van Vliet andNasi 2008).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Reasons behind the consumption of bushmeat
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Angoué et al. 2000
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites van Vliet andNasi 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Source-sink effects (Novaro et al. 2000, Salas andKim 2002), spatial heterogeneity (Kümpel et al. 2010a, van Vliet et al. 2010a) or high dispersal (Hart 2000a) can also help maintain populations in hunted areas, masking or compensating for hunting driven population decline.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on hunted populations
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Novaro et al. 2000 source
- Not matchedcites Salas andKim 2002
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Kümpel et al. 2010a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It can and does trigger numerous indirect effects, which in turn alter both (i) the hunted populations and (ii) the functioning, structure and composition of the ecosystem (Nasi et al. 2010).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on hunted populations
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Nasi et al. 2010
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Tapirs, peccaries, wild pigs, deer, duikers and the larger rodents are among the most active seed dispersers or predators; thus a significant change in their population densities will have a major effect on seedling survival and forest regeneration (Beck 2005, Bodmer 1991, Fragoso 1997).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on ecosystems
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For instance different Native American groups in the Amazon believe that shamans may reincarnate as peccaries, and these species may even be worshipped as deities in traditional belief systems (Donkin 1985).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Reasons behind the consumption of bushmeat
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Donkin 1985 source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Netting and trapping were traditionally carried out using a variety of specialized techniques (Dounias 1999, Smith 2010); but the use of steel wire snares is now prominent in Africa, although often “illegal”, as the material is inexpensive, durable and strong enough to capture large animals.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Dounias 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Smith 2010 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Further, results are frequently disseminated in unpublished reports or peer-reviewed articles that are not easily accessible to key audiences.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > INTRODUCTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The situation in the Amazon Basin is similar with 19 of 30 commonly hunted prey species not being listed in any of the threatened categories of the IUCN Red List (Vulnerable or Endangered), while a further four are data deficient.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is especially the case because central place foragers typically deplete large bodied species close to their base camps.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on hunted populations
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Similar patterns have been recorded in the Amazon with declining White-lipped peccary (Tayassu pecari) populations being accompanied by increasing density and larger group sizes for Collared peccaries (Pecari tajacu) (Fragoso 1994).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on hunted populations
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fragoso 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Note also that Rushton et al. (2005) emphasize that though only a small percentage of people in South America consume bushmeat -they are typically the poorest and most marginalized.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > BUSHMEAT IN LOCAL PEOPLE'S LIVELIHOODS
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Rushton et al. (2005)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The traditional role of bushmeat has also been shown in Equatorial Guinea, where some species are considered to have magical or medicinal properties that increase their value and others are taboo (Kümpel 2006a).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Reasons behind the consumption of bushmeat
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kümpel 2006a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Primates and large carnivores appear extremely vulnerable and their populations plummet with intense hunting (Henschel 2009, Oates 1996).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on hunted populations
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“although some native people still use blow pipes and or bows and arrows where constrained by the availability of fire arms and the cost of ammunition.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Some taxa appear highly vulnerable while others seem unaffected, and populations of a few taxa may even be enhanced by hunting (Bodmer et al. 1997, Cullen et al. 2000, Hurtado-Gonzales and Bodmer 2004, Isaac and Cowlishaw 2004, Salas and Kim 2002) -typically as a function of their ecological adaptability and population biology.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on hunted populations
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“In several African cities, bushmeat is still the cheapest source of protein and represents a crucial source of meat for the poorest urban households.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Reasons behind the consumption of bushmeat
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fargeot 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites van Vliet et al. in press
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Kümpel 2006a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Dogs are frequently used to find and corner prey (Noss et al. 2004).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Noss et al. 2004 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Hunted populations of Black colobus (Colobus satanas) in the Congo Basin, spider (Ateles sp.) and Woolly monkeys (Lagothrix sp.) in the Amazon basin have declined precipitously (Bodmer et al. 1994, Kümpel et al. 2010a, Robinson and Redford 1994).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Impacts on hunted populations
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bodmer et al. 1994 source
- Not matchedcites Kümpel et al. 2010a
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Robinson and Redford 1994
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Studies are frequently limited to single sites, using a multiplicity of research approaches, limiting prospects for comparisons.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > INTRODUCTION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In Latin America over 200 species of mammals, ca.750 bird species (including over 530 species for the pet trade), more than 60 species of reptiles and a minimum of 5 species of amphibians have been registered as harvested for household consumption and for markets (Ojasti 2000).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ojasti 2000
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite this evidence and increased international attention, more than ten years later information on the bushmeat harvest and trade is still fragmentary and our understanding of the complex interactions between ecological, socio-economic and cultural dimensions of the issue remains limited.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > INTRODUCTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Monkeys are hunted in large numbers in some areas but because of their generally small body size they usually represent a small part of the harvested biomass.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, information on the harvest remains fragmentary, along with understanding of ecological, socioeconomic and cultural dimensions.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This contrasts with the 21% of all mammal species which are considered threatened globally (IUCN 2008).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites IUCN 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“In Gabon, 23 of the partially protected species and 24 of the totally protected species were found to be used as bushmeat, but rare and vulnerable species such as great apes and elephants usually represent a small proportion (often less than 5%) of the total catch (Abernethy andNdong Obiang 2010, van Vliet andMbazza 2011).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Composition of the catch
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Abernethy andNdong Obiang 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites van Vliet andMbazza 2011
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The other possible wild substitute invertebrates, represents an important traditional habit and also, considering their nutritional composition, a substantial contribution to the human diet (Marconi et al. 2002, Vantomme et al. 2004) but they are generally seasonal and cannot fully substitute for meat and fish.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Reasons behind the consumption of bushmeat
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Marconi et al. 2002 source
- Not matchedcites Vantomme et al. 2004
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In Sarawak a strictly enforced law bans trade in wild animals and their parts, ensures strict control of shotgun cartridge availability and of hunting in logging concessions, and provides for broad education programs and involvement of local communities in the management of protected areas.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Bennett et al. 2000 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Starkey (2004) estimated that a total of 161 tonnes of bushmeat was sold per year in five markets in Gabon.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Starkey (2004)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The best known and largest wild game market is in Iquitos Peru where for instance in the 1990s bush meat prices could reach $4 per kg (e.g., for meat from the highly prized paca Cunniculus paca) and the meat from an individual large peccary could be worth as much as US$60 with the hide bringing in an additional $10 to the hunter (Bodmer andLozano 2001, Claggett 1998).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bodmer andLozano 2001
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Claggett 1998
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result, and because bushmeat plays a crucial role in the diets and livelihoods of people, options for sustainable harvest need to be investigated.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Another factor in South America is that as household wealth has increased in some rural communities wild game consumption has increased, in part due to greater availability of firearms (Espinosa 2008, Godoy et al. 2009).”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Espinosa 2008 source
- Not matchedcites Godoy et al. 2009
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Another special example of such use is the commercial harvest of Capybara meat for lent in Venezuela (Hoogesteijn andChapman 1997, Ojeda 1997) although cash benefits from this tend to accrue to large ranch owners rather than benefit poor rural livelihoods because the remaining land available for capybaras tends to be on extensive land holdings as opposed to small farms.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hoogesteijn andChapman 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Ojeda 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but combined and incorporated into solid national and regional bushmeat strategies, there is potential to achieve a more sustainable use of wildlife for food in the Congo Basin.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Elsewhere, bush meat may be sold in cities and on road side stands across the region, but typically not commanding higher prices than for domestic livestock such as cattle.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Knowledge on the ecology of major bushmeat species in the Amazon is better but four of some 30 such species are in the data deficient category of the IUCN Red List.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Indeed, rural and urban people in Central Africa and indigenous people and part of the rural poor in the Amazon, use bushmeat as a major source of protein and income or to serve multiple social roles.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Similarly, Fa et al. (1995) suggested that the volume of bushmeat traded annually in Equatorial Guinea's two main markets is of the order of 178 tons.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Fa et al. (1995)
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a similar way, bushmeat can further subsidize large ranch owners economically since they often resist providing livestock meat for their workmen, who are encouraged to hunt instead.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Increased hunting pressure has tangible effects on wildlife and is likely to have long term impacts on forest ecosystems.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Urban trade in bushmeat is limited in size and location -though not very well known -and is not a major driver.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This situation has some similarities to prevailing circumstances in most urban areas in the Amazon Basin, and might be a useful model to adapt or replicate.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
hedgedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This market arose due to the lack of cattle ranching in this part of the lowland Amazon.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the Amazon Basin, a relatively small number of indigenous people depend on bushmeat for their everyday life and hunt at sustainable levels for most species.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Another special example of such use is the commercial harvest of Capybara meat for lent in Venezuela (Hoogesteijn andChapman 1997, Ojeda 1997) although cash benefits from this tend to accrue to large ranch owners rather than benefit poor rural livelihoods because the remaining land available for capybaras tends to be on extensive land holdings as opposed to small farms.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > Local trade
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hoogesteijn andChapman 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Ojeda 1997
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The urban population has access to one of the most active livestock sector of the world and therefore does not depend on bushmeat for protein intake.”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Protein from forest wildlife is crucial to rural food security and livelihoods across the tropics.
“Protein from forest wildlife is crucial to rural food security and livelihoods across the tropics.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The harvest of animals provides benefits to local people worth millions of US$ annually.
“The harvest of animals such as tapir, duikers, deer, pigs, peccaries, primates and larger rodents, birds and reptiles provides benefits to local people worth millions of US$ annually and represents around 6 million tonnes of animals extracted yearly.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Hunters preferentially target large animals whenever they are available and these are often keystone species.
“Hunters preferentially target large animals whenever they are available and these are often keystone species.”
The paper relies on this without support.
When non-indigenous people become richer, they generally turn to alternative sources of protein.
“When they become”
The paper relies on this without support.
In remote forest areas of Central Africa and the Amazon basin, bushmeat is often the main source of animal protein available and plays an essential role in people's diets, especially where livestock husbandry is not feasible and wild fish not available.
“In remote forest areas of Central Africa and the Amazon basin bushmeat is often the main source of animal protein available and plays an essential role in people's diets especially where livestock husbandry is not a feasible option and wild fish not available.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Unlike rural or forest dwellers, urban consumers usually have a choice of several sources of protein but may opt for bushmeat for a variety of reasons that vary between regions.
“Unlike rural or forest dwellers, urban consumers usually have a choice of several sources of protein but may opt for bushmeat for a variety of reasons (e.g.cost, taste or preference) that vary between regions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In Latin America, fruit eating species are preferred over folivores, the meat of which is frequently described as
“In Latin America, fruit eating species are preferred over folivores, the meat of which is frequently described as”
The paper relies on this without support.
There are prohibitions or taboos on hunting some species, for instance brocket deer by the Ayoreo People of Bolivia and Paraguay.
“There are also prohibitions or taboos on hunting some of the species as well, for instance for brocket deer by the Ayoreo People of Bolivia and Paraguay.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Data on bushmeat consumption by urban dwellers is especially scarce for the Amazon Basin.
“Data on bushmeat consumption by urban dwellers is especially scarce for the Amazon Basin (see however the case of Iquitos in the following section).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The volume and impact of sports hunting and tourist consumption of bushmeat are essentially unstudied.
“However, the volume and impact of these latter uses are essentially unstudied.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Data on population in the Congo Basin are notoriously unreliable and consumption patterns very variable.
“As for the Congo Basin, data (e.g.population) are notoriously unreliable and consumption patterns very variable.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Pigs and chickens have much higher feed conversion rates than cattle and both can thrive on kitchen scraps and crop residues.
“Pigs and chickens have much higher feed conversion rates than do cattle and both can thrive on kitchen scraps and crop residues.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Bushmeat trade across borders is frequent in the Congo Basin, especially in forest blocks located close to national borders where civil unrest and war have increased the availability of ammunitions and the demand for bushmeat.
“Bushmeat trade across borders is frequent in the Congo Basin, especially in forest blocks located close to national borders where civil unrest and war have increased the availability of ammunitions and the demand for bushmeat.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Bushmeat trade to Western countries exists.
“Bushmeat trade to Western countries also exists.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Even where urban consumers in the Congo Basin have access to domesticated sources of meat, they are imported and/or expensive and bushmeat remains an important part of their diet.
“Even where urban consumers have access to domesticated sources of meat they are imported and/or expensive and bushmeat remains an important part of their diet.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The production of the main alternative source of protein (cattle) is also the main driver of deforestation in the Amazon basin, with well known negative effects on wildlife and ecosystems.
“The flip side of the coin is that the production of the main alternative source of protein (e.g.cattle) is also the main driver of deforestation in the Amazon basin, with well known negative effects on wildlife and ecosystems.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Sustainable harvest of bushmeat is achievable.
“Achieving sustainable harvest of bushmeat is therefore a necessity and by far, the best available option compatible with biodiversity conservation, local livelihoods, food security and food self sufficiency.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
“63 ± 25 kg/capita/year; range: 10-190 kg/capita/yr; n = 14”
§ Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins > CONCLUSION: EMPTY FORESTS AND EMPTY STOMACHS?
“| Transamazon highway, Brazil | 2.1-15.8 | Smith 1976 |”
Citations
Cites
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
(2012) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.49-6872 · Cited by 12,829
Redford, K. H. (1992) · BioScience · doi:10.2307/1311860 · Cited by 1,219
Hunting for sustainability in tropical forests
Robinson, J. G., & Bennett, E. L. (2000) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.13517565 · Cited by 937
Ecosystem consequences of bird declines
Sekercioglu, C. H., Daily, G. C., & Ehrlich, P. R. (2004) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0408049101 · Cited by 921
Milner-Gulland, E. J., & Bennett, E. L. (2003) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(03)00123-x · Cited by 757
Catastrophic ape decline in western equatorial Africa
Walsh, P. D., Abernethy, K. A., Bermejo, M., Beyers, R., De Wachter, P., Akou, M. E., Huijbregts, B., Mambounga, D. I., Toham, A. K., Kilbourn, A. M., et al. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01566 · Cited by 681
Top Predators as Conservation Tools: Ecological Rationale, Assumptions, and Efficacy
Sergio, F., Caro, T., Brown, D., Clucas, B., Hunter, J., Ketchum, J., McHugh, K., & Hiraldo, F. (2008) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173545 · Cited by 670
Effects of Subsistence Hunting on Vertebrate Community Structure in Amazonian Forests
Peres, C. A. (2000) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.98485.x · Cited by 660
Bushmeat Hunting, Wildlife Declines, and Fish Supply in West Africa
Brashares, J. S., Arcese, P., Sam, M. K., Coppolillo, P. B., Sinclair, A. R. E., & Balmford, A. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1102425 · Cited by 637
Bushmeat Exploitation in Tropical Forests: an Intercontinental Comparison
Fa, J. E., Peres, C. A., & Meeuwig, J. (2002) · Conservation Biology · doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.00275.x · Cited by 524
Research works printed but not linked: 13
- ANGOUÉ, C., ASSOKO NDONG, A., BINOT, A., CARETTE, S., DE MARET, P. and TREFON, T. 2000. Gabon. In: BAHUCHET, S. and MARET, P.D. (eds.) Les peuples des forêts tropicales aujhourd'hui: Volume III Région Afrique Central. Programme Avenir des Peuples des Forêts Tropicales (APFT), Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
- AUZEL, P. and WILKIE, D.S. 2000. Wildlife use in Northern Congo: hunting in a commercial logging concession. 413-454 p. In: ROBINSON, J.G. and BENNET, E.L. (eds.) Hunting for sustainability in tropical forests. Columbia University Press, New York.
- BAILEY, R.C. and PEACOCK, N.R. 1988. Efe pygmies of northeast Zaire: subsistence strategies in the Ituri forest. In: DE GARINE, I. And HARRISON, G.A. (eds.) Uncer- tainty in the food supply. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 88-117 p.
- BENNETT, E.L., NYAOI, A.J. and SOMPUD, J. 2000. Saving Borneo's bacon: the sustainability of hunting in Sarawak and Sabah. In: ROBINSON, J.G. and BENNETT, E.L. (eds.) Hunting for sustainability in tropical forests. Columbia University Press, New York. 305-324 p.
- DELVINGT, W., DETHIER, M., AUZEL, P. and JEANMART, P. 2001. La chasse villageoise Badjoué, gestion coutumière durable ou pillage de la ressource gibier ? 65-92 p. In: DELVINGT, W. (ed.) La forêt des hommes : Terroirs villageois en forêt tropicale africaine. Les Presses Agronomiques de Gembloux, Gembloux.
- In: BAHUCHET, S., BLEY, D., PAGEZY, H. and VERNAZZA-LICHT, N. (eds.) L'homme et la forêt tropicale. Travaux Société Ecologie Humaine, Paris.
- In: ROBINSON, J.G. and BENNETT, E.L. (eds.) Hunting for sustainability in tropical forests. Columbia University Press, New York.
- NOSS, A. 1999. La sostenibilidad de la caceria de subsisten- cia Izoceña. 535-543 p. In: CABRERA, E., MERCOLLI, C. and RESQUIN, R. (eds.) Manejo de fauna silvestre en Amazonıa y Latinoamerica. CITES Paraguay, Fundacion Moises Bertoni, University of Florida, Asuncion, Paraguay.
- NOSS, A.J. 2000. Cable snares and nets in the Central African Republic. 282-304 p. In: ROBINSON, J.G. and BENNETT, E.L. (eds.) Hunting for sustainability in tropical forests. Columbia University Press., New York.
- ROBINSON, J. and REDFORD, K. 1994. Community-based approaches to wildlife conservation in neotropical forests. In: WESTERN, D. and WRIGHT, R. (eds.) Natural Connections. Island Press.
- STEARMAN, A.M. 2000. A pound of flesh: Social changes and modernization as factors in hunting sustainability. 233-250 p. In: ROBINSON, J. and BENNETTE, E. (eds.) Hunting for Sustainability in Tropical Forests. Columbia University Press, New York.
- TERBORGH, J. 2010. Trophic Cascades. Duke University Press.
- TREFON, T. and DE MARET, P. 1999. Snack nature dans les villes d'Afrique Centrale. In: BAHUCHET, S., BLEY, D., PAGEZY, H. and VERNAZZA-LICHT, N. (eds.) L'homme et la forêt tropicale. Editions de Bergier. TRINCA, C.T. and FERRARI, S.F. 2007. Game populations and hunting pressure on a rural frontier in Southern Brazilian Amazonia. Biologia Geral e Experimental, Universidade Federal de Sergipe 7: 5-16.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Bushmeat hunting and extinction risk to the world's mammals
Ripple, W. J., Abernethy, K. A., Betts, M. G., Chapron, G., Dirzo, R., Galetti, M., Levi, T., Lindsey, P. A., Macdonald, D. W., Machovina, B., et al. (2016) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.160498 · Cited by 680
Green Infrastructure, Ecosystem Services, and Human Health
Coutts, C., & Hahn, M. B. (2015) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph120809768 · Cited by 479
Smith, P., Calvin, K., Nkem, J., Campbell, D., Cherubini, F., Grassi, G., Korotkov, V., Le Hoang, A., Lwasa, S., McElwee, P., et al. (2020) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.14878 · Cited by 422
Improving diets with wild and cultivated biodiversity from across the landscape
Powell, B., Thilsted, S. H., Ickowitz, A., Termote, C., Sunderland, T., & Herforth, A. (2015) · Food Security · doi:10.1007/s12571-015-0466-5 · Cited by 382
The costs and benefits of primary prevention of zoonotic pandemics
Bernstein, A. S., Ando, A. W., Temzelides, T., Vale, M. M., Li, B. V., Li, H., Busch, J., Chapman, C. A., Kinnaird, M. F., Nowak, K., et al. (2022) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abl4183 · Cited by 319
Metadata
- Authors
- Nasi, R., Taber, A., & Van Vliet, N.
- Affiliations
- CGIAR (FR)
- ORCID
- Nasi, R.
- Venue
- International Forestry Review
- Publisher
- Commonwealth Forestry Association
- Published
- 2011-09-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 355-368
- ISSN
- 1465-5489 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2135735879
- Semantic Scholar
- a68d7e2716a607267164ab03d360e30edb3fa3e4
- Cited by
- 457
- References
- 89
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 57 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 10.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.cifor.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- The International Forestry Review (publishedVersion)
- Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion)
- CGSPace A Repository of Agricultural Research Outputs (Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Wildlife Conservation and Criminology Analyses
- Keywords
- bushmeat, wildlife harvesting, livelihoods, food security, forest fauna, ecosystem engineers, keystone species, species extinction, Amazon basin, Congo Basin
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-03, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-03 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
