Animals, Magic and Biodiversity Conservation

Fantastic beasts and why to conserve them: animals, magic and biodiversity conservation G EORGE H OLMES,THOMAS A NEURIN S MITH and C AROLINE W ARD Abstract There is a broad set of human beliefs, attitudes interactions produce benefits and costs for both biodiversity and behaviours around the issue of magical animals, refer- and people. Yet there is an often-overlooked complexity to ring to both mythical animals not recognized by science and these cases, with important implications for conservation extant animals that are recognized by science but have outcomes. The species involved are either not recognized magical properties. This is a broad issue ranging from spir- by science, or the properties of these species that local people itual beliefs around mythical animals living in Malagasy for- resent or value are not recognized by science. The Icelandic ests, to cultural heritage associated with the Loch Ness protesters were protecting the habitat of Huldufólk, or elves. Monster in Scotland. Beliefs and behaviours around magical Ecotourists in Scotland were seeking the Loch Ness Monster animals can have positive and negative impacts on biodiver- Nessiteras rhombopteryx. The Ethiopian hyaenas provide sity conservation goals. Yet, so far, the discipline of conser- the ecosystem service of eating evil spirits. The Malagasy vation biology has not adequately considered magical snakes harm humans and cattle by transforming into animals, neglecting to account for the broader knowledge sharp spear-like forms and dropping from trees. We argue from outside the natural sciences on this issue, and taking that conservationists should take magical animals seriously, a narrow, utilitarian approach to how magical animals because they have important positive and negative implica- should be managed, without necessarily considering the tions for many species and habitats. Magical animals have broader impacts on conservation goals or ethics. Here we been neglected and oversimplified within conservation, explore how magical animals can influence conservation probably because of a lack of training in relevant disciplines goals, how conservation biology and practice has thought and an overly utilitarian view of human–animal relations, about magical animals, and some of the limitations of cur- and this has harmed the ability to conserve species. rent approaches, particularly the failure to consider magical We begin with a brief typology of magical and mythical animals as part of wider systems of belief and culture. We animals, before outlining the complexities and diversity in argue that magical animals and their implications for con- beliefs on magical and mythical animals across the global servation merit wider consideration. South and North. We then explore how magical animals affect broader conservation goals, and how they compare Keywords Conservation, ethics, Madagascar, magic, to other spiritual and similar issues in conservation, snakes, spirituality, Tanzania followed by a critique of existing conservation literature on magic. Two case studies of magical animals, in Madagascar and Tanzania, illustrate in detail some of Introduction these trends in two countries with significant conservation activity, and the inadequacies of how conservation has ap- n a proposed new highway in Iceland was contested proached magical animals. We conclude by exploring ways Iin court on the basis that it would cross the habitat of a to understand the conservation implications of magical valued species (The Guardian, ). In , , tour- creatures. ists visited a site in Scotland primarily because it is inhabited by a rare, endemic animal (ASVA, ), supporting a thriving ecotourism industry. Hyaenas Crocuta crocuta in Ethiopia Magic, animals and contemporary human societies are tolerated because they provide vital provisioning ecosystem services that benefit local communities (Baynes-Rock, Magical animals are complex. They are found worldwide, al- ). In Madagascar, in contrast, some snakes are per- though beliefs are locally specific and dynamic. They blur secuted because they provide ecosystem disservices, harm- boundaries between magic, spirituality, culture, tradition ful to human health (Tingle, ). These are seemingly and politics. We discuss here two kinds of magical animals: – straightforward conservation stories, where human animal mythical species not recognized by science, such as the Loch Ness Monster and Icelandic elves, and extant-but-magical species that are recognized by science but have properties GEORGE HOLMES (Corresponding author) and CAROLINE WARD University of Leeds, UK. E-mail [email protected] that are not, such as spirit-eating in hyaenas, or spear-like THOMAS ANEURIN SMITH University of Cardiff, UK behaviours in snakes. This joint focus is justified for three Received December . Revision requested March . reasons. Firstly, both are associated with protection of spe- Accepted April . First published online July . cies and habitats in many locations, including in Western/ This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence Downloaded(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP whichaddress: permits 170.106.202.126 unrestricted re-use,, on 28 distribution,Sep 2021 at and10:31:55 reproduction, subject in to any the medium, Cambridge provided Core thtermse original of use, work available is properly at cited. https://www.cambridge.org/core/termsOryx, 2018, 52(2), 231–239 ©. https://doi.org/10.1017/S003060531700059X2017 Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S003060531700059X 232 G. Holmes et al. ‘modern’/‘scientific’ societies and cultures. Secondly, where- In Sikkim, India, the Lepcha people have harnessed their as zoologists would distinguish between mythical and spiritual worldviews in an ethnic–nationalist project, extant-but-magical, local people treat them in very similar, (re)constructing their indigenous identity around sacred if not identical, ways. From the perspective of studying forest and species protection (Arora, ). By laying human culture and behaviour, the divisions between when claim to sacred spaces and species as being under their a creature is regarded as extant, mythical or as heritage can care, particular indigenous cultures could gain access to, be somewhat artificial. Thirdly, both have been neglected and control over, places and resources. within mainstream conservation literature. Here we define conservation as activities to preserve biological diversity and its associated values and services. Magical animals, conservation rationalities and the Concern for magical animals, and a broader assemblage conservation of non-magical biodiversity between the spiritual and the ecological, is not confined to indigenous communities of the global South (Abrahams, For conservationists, interactions between humans and ). Societies of the global North remain suffused with magical animals can be categorized according to how they magic, spiritualism, witchcraft and the occult (Comaroff & benefit or harm extant biodiversity, although these categor- Comaroff, ). There are degrees by which individuals in ies can overlap and interact in complex ways. Firstly, some all societies may hold the supposedly dissected worldviews species are tolerated or encouraged because of a belief in of the scientific and the spiritual, magical or religious, evi- their magical properties. In Accra, Ghana, vultures are asso- denced by the persistence of the fantastic (including magical ciated with magic, and therefore harming them is consid- animals) in popular culture (Rountree, ), and in major ered to bring bad luck (Campbell, ). This leads to and minor religions, cults and witchcrafts (Moore & demonstrable differences in attitudes and behaviours to- Sanders, ). Beliefs in magical animals are dynamic, wards vultures between those who hold these beliefs, and and can transcend from the spiritual or mystical to become those who do not. Such beliefs are most likely to be held cultural heritage (Comaroff & Comaroff, ), such as the by older women, and least likely to be held by younger Loch Ness Monster, Welsh dragons and the Beast of men, who tend to have a formal, western-informed educa- Bodmin Moor in the UK, trolls in Denmark (Karrebæk & tion, although increasing numbers of scavengers may Maegaard, ), and various lake-dwelling monsters across strengthen magical beliefs (Campbell, ). The spread the globe, including the Kanas Lake Monster in Xinjiang, of nationalized formal education, conversion to major reli- China, the Seljordsormen in Norway, the Lagarfjót Worm gions, and heightened immigration to certain communities in Iceland, and the Storsjöodjuret of Sweden (the latter have all reduced the efficacy of local worldviews and asso- was briefly given protected status by the Swedish ciated magical creatures (Metcalfe et al., ), although Environmental Protection Agency but this was later revoked witchcraft and spiritualism appear to be rising in modern by the Swedish Parliament; Sandelin, ). Alongside these Africa (Kohnert, ). The survival of large predators out- notable mythical creatures are more general magical asso- side protected areas depends on their acceptance or toler- ciations with extant species; for example, black cats and ance by local communities, forged by place-specific magpies (Peltzer, ). Ongoing shifts are partly attribut- circumstances in which spiritual beliefs may play a key able to syncretic religions appropriating pagan, folk and in-

Load more