Public perceptions of jaguars Panthera onca, pumas Puma concolor and coyotes Canis latrans in El Salvador
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High human population density, histories of social conflict, environmental change and negative social attitudes are crucial issues for large carnivore conservation and reintroductions, which may be influenced by human age and gender, animal size and behaviour. Jaguars and pumas are extinct in El Salvador, but conservation and reintroduction schemes are debated across Central and South America. This paper examines public attitudes in El Salvador towards the extinct jaguars and pumas, and the fairly common coyote. One hundred and thirteen people were contacted and classified according to age and gender in San Salvador, La Union, Ahuachapan, Apopa, San Miguel and Santa Ana. The majority of people believed: in the toleration and removal of carnivores rather than shooting; in the introduction of jaguars and pumas into rural and special areas and zoos; that more animal protection was necessary; that the animals were good for human life, yet dangerous to children. Pumas were seen as the most dangerous, followed by jaguars and coyotes, but in most cases all three were seen as similar. Women were less tolerant of large carnivores, were more sensitive to negative impacts, and were more afraid of the animals than men. Younger people were more tolerant, and saw less danger to other animals and people, and were more supportive of animal reintroductions. Gender was irrelevant in the trapping and removal, and shooting of animals, protection levels, reintroductions and dangers to people and cattle. Age was irrelevant to animal protection levels, dangers to people and impacts on human quality of life. These findings are important for conservation policy and environmental geography.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".