Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T01:30:36.218Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Small-mammal hunting by two ethnic groups in north-western Ecuador

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 April 2009

E. Suárez ,
J. Stallings  and
L. Suárez
E. Suárez
Affiliation:
EcoCiencia, Fundación Ecuatoriana de Estudios Ecológicos, PO Box 17-12-257, Tamayo 1339 y Av., Colón, Quito, Ecuador.
J. Stallings
Affiliation:
CARE/Ecuador, 151 Ellis Street, Atlanta, GA 30303, USA.
L. Suárez
Affiliation:
EcoCiencia, Fundación Ecuatoriana de Estudios Ecológicos, PO Box 17-12-257, Tamayo 1339 y Av., Colón, Quito, Ecuador.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A small-mammal hunting study was carried out in north-western Ecuador from October 1992 to October 1993, employing interview and trapping methods to document rodent and marsupial hunting by Chachi Indian and Afroecuadorian families. Based on 109 family interviews in 28 communities, it was determined that log-fall traps were used around family gardens and along forest trails. Afroecuadorian families used more than twice the number of traps than Chachis and trap lines of both ethnic groups were left open for approximately 6 days per trapping session. Chachi families left trap lines closed twice sas long as Afroecuadorian families. There were 857 individuals of seven rodent and four marsupial species trapped during the study, with Proechimys semispinosus representing more than 50 per cent of the small mammals trapped.

Type
Research Article
Information
Oryx , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , January 1995 , pp. 35 - 42
Copyright
Copyright © Fauna and Flora International 1995

References

Albuja, L. and Mena, P. 1987. Distribución y notas ecológicas de Proechimys semispinosus en el noroccidente Ecuatoriano. Politecnica: Revista de Información Técnico-Cientifica, Biologia, 12 (4), 145–160.Google Scholar
Arita, H.T., Robinson, J.G. and Redford, K.H. 1990. Rarity in neotropical forest mammals and its ecological correlates. Conservation Biology, 4 (2), 181–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres, J.M. and Ayres, C. 1979. Aspectos da caca no alto Rio Aripuna. Acta Amazonica, 9, 287–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cañadas, L. 1983. El mapa bioclimática y ecológica del Ecuador. MAG-PRONAREG. Quito, Ecuador.Google Scholar
Carrion de Samudio, J. 1992. Local People, Wildlife Use and a National Park in Bocas del Toro Archipelago, Panama. MA thesis, University of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
Cevallos, J. 1993. Diversidad y abundancia relativa de mamíferos en dos zonas de la parte baja de la Reserva Ecologica Cotacachi-Cayapas. Subir biodiversity report, EcoCiencia, Quito.Google Scholar
Dallmeier, F. 1991. Whistling ducks as a manageable and sustainable resource in Venezuela: balancing economic costs and benefits. In Neotropical Wildlife Use and Conservation (eds Robinson, J. G. and Redford, K. H.), pp. 266–287. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Emmons, L. H. 1990. Neotropical Rainforest Mammals. Chicago University Press, Chicago. 281 pp.Google Scholar
Hershkovitz, P. 1969. The evolution of mammals on southern continents. VI. The recent mammals of the neotropical region: zoogeographic and ecological review. Quar.Rev. Bio. 44 (1), 1–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linares, O.F. 1976. Garden hunting in the American tropics. Human Ecology, 4, 331–349.Google Scholar
Mittermeier, R.A. 1991. Hunting and its effect on wild primate populations in Suriname. In Neotropical Wildlife Use and Conservation (eds Robinson, J. G. and Redford, K. H.), pp. 93–110. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Orejuela, J.E. 1992. Traditional productive systems of the Awa (Cuaiquer) Indians of Southwestern Colombia and neighboring Ecuador. In Conservation of Neotropical Forests: Working from Traditional Resource Use (eds Redford, K. H. and Padoch, C.), pp. 58–82. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Pearson, D. 1992. Diagnostic Report on Wildlife in the Lower Portion of the Cotacachi-Cayapas Ecological Reserve. SUBIR Diagnostic Report, CARE/Ecuador, Quito.Google Scholar
Purdy, P.C. and Tomlinson, R.E. 1991. The eastern white-winged dove: factors influencing use and continuity of the resource. In Neotropical Wildlife Use and Conservation (eds. Robinson, J. G. and Redford, K. H.), pp. 255–286. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Redford, K.H. and Robinson, J.G. 1987. The game of choice: patterns of Indian and colonist hunting in the Neotropics. Am. Anthropol. 89, 650–657.Google Scholar
Robinson, J.G. and Redford, K.H. 1986. Body size, diet and population density of Neotropical forest mammals. Am. Nat. 128, 665–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, N.G.H. 1976. Utilization of game along Brazil's Transamazon highway. Acta Amazonica, 6, 455–466.Google Scholar
Stallings, J.R. 1989. Small mammal inventories in an eastern Brazilian park. Bull. Florida State Mus., Biol. Sci. 34 (4), 153–200.Google Scholar
Suárez, E. 1993. La importancia de los roedores y los marsupiales silvestres en la dieta de las comunidades Afroesmeraldeñas y Chachis de la zona baja del área de influencia de la Reserva Ecológia Cotacachi-Cayapas, Ecuador. SUBIR Technical Report, EcoCiencia, Quito.Google Scholar
Vickers, W.T. 1991. Hunting yields and game composition over ten years in an Amazon indian territory. In Neotropical Wildlife Use and Conservation (eds Robinson, J. G. and Redford, K. H.), pp. 53–81. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar