Search

One of the major management problems in and around protected areas is the intensifying conflict between local people and wildlife, especially large carnivores. Livestock depredation and human fatalities caused by attacks of carnivores are found to be serious obstacles in conflict management. This study aims to explore the patterns, costs, causes and perceptions of human large carnivore conflict in the Nawalpur area of Chitwan National Park. The patterns of livestock loss and human casualties due to large carnivores (Panthera tigris and Panthera pardus) were analysed using the secondary data reported to Chitwan National Park from 2001 to 2019. To understand the people's perception towards carnivores and wildlife conservation, 150 victim respondents were asked, with one household selected from each grid. During 19-year study period, a total of 521 incidents caused by large carnivores were reported, which included 33 human casualties and 488 livestock depredations. Tiger was responsible for the maximum conflict incidents in Nawalpur. The total relief provided for human deaths and injuries was US$17524.41, whereas US$13702.18 was used to compensate for livestock depredation in the Nawalpur area by authorities of the Chitwan National Park. More than 64% of the respondents liked the presence of carnivores in their area and had a positive attitude toward the conservation of large carnivores, even though the carnivores were responsible for livestock depredation and human injury and death. People's satisfaction with the relief scheme provided by the government depended on ethnicity, gender, age class, occupation, education, insurance, and livestock ownership, but they believed the scheme was not effective. Hence, an effective relief scheme and awareness about the process of relief funding should be conducted in conflict areas. Conducting awareness programs for local communities about large carnivores, their behavior, and preparing predator-proof corrals would be helpful in minimizing conflict in the study area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) is a serious management problem in India where humans and wildlife share space and resources. This problem is particularly acute in the Himalayan Mountain region. As the lives and livelihoods of local residents are inextricably linked to wildlife, it is important to know the extent of damage caused by HWC to local people. Methods: In this work, the pattern of HWC was assessed in the Chowkibal-Tangdhar sector of Kupwara district, Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, based on self-reported losses of livestock to large carnivores by local people (N = 217). Results: The carnivores that were perceived by local stakeholders to be responsible for livestock depredation were identified as the Asiatic black bear, Himalayan brown bear and Common leopard. It was found that the leopards reportedly killed livestock throughout the year at the relatively low altitude zones, but black bears and brown bears reportedly killed livestock in the monsoon months at the relatively higher altitude zones. It was also reported that the leopards prefer to kill small to medium-sized livestock, but the bears had no such preferences. Conclusion: This work recommends that the Forest and Wildlife Department or community-based livestock insurance schemes should practice quick and efficient compensation systems, improve night livestock shelters, and community-based supervised livestock grazing practices to reduce livestock losses due to wild carnivores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human-wildlife conflict is one of the most pressing sustainable development challenges globally. This is particularly the case where ecologically and economically important wildlife impact the livelihoods of humans. Large carnivores are one such group and their co-occurrence with low-income rural communities often results in real or perceived livestock losses that place increased costs on already impoverished households. Here we show the disparities associated with the vulnerability to conflict arising from large carnivores on cattle (Bos taurus) globally. Across the distribution of 18 large carnivores, we find that the economic vulnerability to predation losses (as measured by impacts to annual per capita income) is between two and eight times higher for households in transitioning and developing economies when compared to developed ones. This potential burden is exacerbated further in developing economies because cattle keepers in these areas produce on average 31% less cattle meat per animal than in developed economies. In the lowest-income areas, our estimates suggest that the loss of a single cow or bull equates to nearly a year and a half of lost calories consumed by a child. Finally, our results show that 82% of carnivore range falls outside protected areas, and five threatened carnivores have over one third of their range located in the most economically sensitive conflict areas. This unequal burden of human-carnivore conflict sheds light on the importance of grappling with multiple and conflicting sustainable development goals: protecting life on land and eliminating poverty and hunger. The costs of human-wildlife conflict are measurably more impactful in areas of the developing world where the loss of cattle can mean the entire livelihood of a family being erased. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human-carnivore conflicts threaten the survival of large carnivore populations and impose high costs for humans. Knowledge co-building approaches can be successful for tackling these problems. We examined conflicts between the puma (Puma concolor) and pastoralists from an Argentine Puna village through semi-structured interviews and a focus group discussion. According to data from the community, 6% of livestock were killed by pumas in 2017, causing an estimated US $14,340 loss. Interviewees perceived pumas as dangerous and hunted them to protect livestock. Predation and diseases were identified as major causes of livestock losses, and infrequent checks on livestock, livestock being free-ranging, and an increase in the puma population were underlying causes of predation. Interviewees mentioned direct economic costs and indirect and hidden costs as consequences of livestock loss. Given that social factors are important drivers in human- wildlife conflicts, we highlight the importance of engaging the community during conflict research and management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Animals' fear of people is widespread across taxa and can mitigate the risk of human‐induced mortality, facilitating coexistence in human‐dominated landscapes. However, humans can be unpredictable predators and anthropogenic cues that animals perceive may not be reliable indicators of the risk of being killed. In these cases, animal fear responses may be ineffective and may even exacerbate the risk of anthropogenic mortality. Here, we explore these questions using a 10‐year dataset of movement and mortality events for the puma Puma concolor population in the fragmented Santa Cruz Mountains of California, for whom the leading cause of death was retaliatory killings by people following livestock loss. We modeled retaliatory killing risk and puma habitat selection relative to residential housing density to evaluate whether puma avoidance of human cues reflected their risk of being killed. We documented a mismatch between human cues, fear responses and actual risk. Rather than scaling directly with housing density, retaliatory killings occurred at intermediate levels of human development and at night. Pumas avoided these areas during the day but selected for these high‐risk areas at night, resulting in a mismatch between cue and risk impacting 17% of the study area. These results are unlikely to be driven by puma hunting behavior: livestock constitute a very small proportion of puma diets, and we found no evidence for the alternative hypothesis that state‐dependent foraging drove depredation of livestock and subsequent retaliatory killings. Our findings indicate that puma responses to human cues are not sufficient to enable human–carnivore coexistence in this area and suggest that reducing risk from humans in places with few perceptible human cues would facilitate carnivore conservation in human‐dominated landscapes. Furthermore, a mismatch between human cues and responses by carnivores can lead to selection rather than avoidance of risky areas, which could result in an ecological trap. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Niokolo Koba National Park (NKNP), in the South East of Senegal, we studied the current spotted hyena (Crocuta crocuta) population size, density and distribution and assessed human-large carnivores' conflicts. We implemented 26 calling stations operations, installed 87 camera traps and obtained data from tourists, local guides and rangers. In addition, a questionnaire survey was carried out in 31 villages around the park. Our results showed an estimated density from 1.77 to 3.53 spotted hyenas/100 km2 depending on used response rates (50–100%) with a minimum population size between 144 and 288 individuals. According to the query survey, the spotted hyena is responsible for the majority of livestock predation around the park (87% of all attacks on livestock), followed by African wild dog (6%), lion (4%) and leopard (3%). A total of 63.1% of all attacks were on cattle, while sheep and goats represent the remaining 36.9%. Spotted hyena and lion mainly predated on livestock at night (93.5% and 71.4% of all attacks, respectively) in contrast to predation by African wild dog and leopard, for which the majority of the attacks occurred during the day (63.9% and 62.5%, respectively). Furthermore, there was more livestock killed during the wet season (58% of all attacks) than during the dry season (42% of all attacks). The distribution of conflicts across five sectors surrounding the park illustrate that the West sector is most impacted (49% of all attacks; districts of Linkering and Medina Gounass) followed by the North West (32%; districts of Dialocoto and Missira). Insights into the severity and dynamics of human-wildlife conflict will contribute towards finding effective mitigation measures, minimising loss of livestock and reducing conflicts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Species that depend on anthropogenic waste for food can remove pathogens that pose health risks to humans and livestock, thereby saving lives and money. Quantifying these benefits is rare, yet can lead to innovative conservation solutions.To assess these benefits, we examined the feeding ecology and population size of peri‐urban spotted hyenas Crocuta crocuta in Mekelle, Ethiopia. We integrated these field data into a disease transmission model to predict: (a) the number of anthrax and bovine tuberculosis (bTB) infections arising in humans and livestock from infected carcass waste and (b) the costs associated with treating these infections and losing livestock. We compared these public health and economic outcomes under two scenarios: (a) hyenas are present and (b) the counterfactual, hyenas are absent.We estimated that hyenas annually remove 4.2% (207 tonnes) of the total carcass waste disposed of by residents and businesses in Mekelle. Furthermore, the scavenging behaviour of hyenas annually prevents five infections of anthrax and bTB in humans, and 140 infections in cattle, sheep and goats. This disease control service potentially saves USD 52,165 due to the treatment costs and livestock loss avoided.Synthesis and applications. This human–hyena interaction in Ethiopia is evidence that large carnivores can contribute to human health and economy. To retain these benefits and maintain tolerance of hyenas, we recommend introducing education programmes to promote safe outdoor behaviour around hyenas, training watchdogs to alert residents of hyena presence, constructing bomas to protect livestock from hyena attacks, and preserving the hyenas' access to carcass waste to reduce their dependency on livestock predation. With humans and carnivores coming more frequently into contact, understanding and communicating how these species can benefit humanity will be critical to motivating human–carnivore coexistence worldwide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large carnivores are controversial species, and associated conflicts between stakeholders with opposing views on large carnivores are observed across the globe. Social trust, the public's willingness to rely on those responsible for developing policies, has gained much attention regarding the acceptance of large carnivores and large carnivore management. However, trust in large carnivore science has not received as much consideration. In Norway, administrative management authorities are responsible to execute the political framework decided by the Norwegian Parliament while basing their decisions on recommendations from large carnivore science. As large carnivore science is the main knowledge provider for monitoring and measures implemented in management decisions to achieve viable carnivore populations, trust in science is crucial. Yet, scientific information is often challenged. As attitude studies show a tendency for the wider general public to be more positive towards large carnivores than people most adversely affected, we wanted to examine whether the trust in large carnivore science follows the same pattern. We used a geographically stratified sample of 2110 respondents, five respondents from each municipality in Norway, to model how trust varies across the sample. Our results indicate that elderly men, people with lower education, those who have experienced loss of livestock to carnivores associate with lower trust in large carnivore science. Lower trust was also found among big game hunters and people who fear large carnivores. This knowledge could help to guide targeted science communication and contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of cognitions important for management of conflicts involving large carnivores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conflict with humans is one of the major threats facing the world's remaining large carnivore populations, and understanding human attitudes is key to improving coexistence. We surveyed people living near Hwange National Park about their attitudes toward coexisting with lions. We used ordinal regression models with the results of the survey to investigate the importance of a range of tangible and intangible factors on attitudes. The variables investigated included the costs and benefits of wildlife presence, emotion, culture, religion, vulnerability, risk perception, notions of responsibility, and personal value orientations. This was for the purpose of effectively tailoring conservation efforts but also for ethical policy making. Intangible factors (e.g., fear and ecocentric values) were as important as, if not more important than, tangible factors (such as livestock losses) for understanding attitudes, based on the effect sizes of these variables. The degree to which participants' fear of lions interfered with their daily activities was the most influential variable. The degree to which benefits accrue to households from the nearby protected area was also highly influential, as was number of livestock lost, number of dependents, ecocentric value orientation, and participation in conflict mitigation programs. Contrary to what is often assumed, metrics of livestock loss did not dominate attitudes to coexistence with lions. Furthermore, we found that socioeconomic variables may appear important when studied in isolation, but their effect may disappear when controlling for variables related to beliefs, perceptions, and past experiences. This raises questions about the widespread reliance on socioeconomic variables in the field of human–wildlife conflict and coexistence. To facilitate coexistence with large carnivores, we recommend measures that reduce fear (through education and through protective measures that reduce the need to be fearful), reduction of livestock losses, and ensuring local communities benefit from conservation. Ecocentric values also emerged as influential, highlighting the need to develop conservation initiatives tailored to local values. Article impact statement: Intangible factors are more important than tangible factors in shaping tolerance for lions, and this is crucial for successful policies [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Financial mechanisms to mitigate the costs of negative human–carnivore interactions are frequently promoted to support human coexistence with carnivores. Yet, evidence to support their performance in different settings is scarce. We evaluated a community-based livestock insurance program implemented as part of a broader snow leopard conservation effort in the Tost Tosonbumba Nature Reserve, South Gobi, Mongolia. We assessed program efficiency and effectiveness for snow leopard conservation using a results-based evaluation approach. Data sources included program records from 2009 to 2018, as well as surveys conducted in 2016 and 2017, which allowed us to compare key indicators across communities that participated in the insurance program and control communities. Program coverage and number of livestock insured rapidly increased over the years to reach 65% of households and close to 11,000 livestock. Participants expressed satisfaction with the program and their contributions increased over time, with an increasing proportion (reaching 64% in 2018) originating from participant premiums, suggesting strong community ownership of the program. Participants were less likely to report the intention to kill a snow leopard and reported fewer livestock losses than respondents from control communities, suggesting increased engagement in conservation efforts. These results together suggest that the insurance program achieved its expected objectives, although it is challenging to disentangle the contributions of each individual conservation intervention implemented in intervention communities. However, in the first three years of the program, snow leopard mortalities continued to be reported suggesting that additional interventions were needed to reach impact in terms of reducing retaliatory killings of large carnivores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conflicts between large carnivores and shepherds constitute a major socio-ecological concern across the Himalaya and affects community attitudes and tolerance toward carnivores. We assessed the extent and intensity of Human-Brown Bear interactions in the same villages of Zanskar and Suru Valleys, Ladakh, in the Indian Trans-Himalaya during two time periods (2001–2003 and 2009–2012) through field and questionnaire surveys. During 2001–2003, 180 families of 32 villages in Zanskar, and 232 families of 49 villages in Suru were interviewed, and during 2009–2012, 145 families of 23 villages in Zanskar and 115 families of 33 villages in Suru were interviewed. Overall, 475 (119/year) and 454 (151/year) heads of livestock were reportedly killed by Brown Bears. The surveys of 2009–2012 revealed that livestock predation in ‘doksas’ (summer grazing camps) was higher (68 %) compared to the surveys carried out during 2001–2003 (42 %). The increased livestock depredation in doksas might be due to the extended stay and use of pastures by the local communities during spring and autumn. Damage to property in the form of breaking open of doors and windows by Brown Bear were reported during both the surveys. Economic losses and declining tolerance of people may trigger retaliatory killings of Brown Bear in Ladakh. We recommend compensation for livestock loss and improved husbandry practices in the conflict zones for bear-human coexistence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Livestock depredation by large carnivores is a global conservation challenge, and mitigation measures to reduce livestock losses are crucial for the coexistence of large carnivores and people. Various measures are employed to reduce livestock depredation but their effectiveness has rarely been tested. In this study, we tested the effectiveness of tall fences to reduce livestock losses to snow leopards Panthera uncia and wolves Canis lupus at night-time corrals at the winter camps of livestock herders in the Tost Mountains in southern Mongolia. Self-reported livestock losses at the fenced corrals were reduced from a mean loss of 3.9 goats and sheep per family and winter prior to the study to zero losses in the two winters of the study. In contrast, self-reported livestock losses in winter pastures, and during the rest of the year, when herders used different camps, remained high, which indicates that livestock losses were reduced because of the fences, not because of temporal variation in predation pressure. Herder attitudes towards snow leopards were positive and remained positive during the study, whereas attitudes towards wolves, which attacked livestock also in summer when herders moved out on the steppes, were negative and worsened during the study. This study showed that tall fences can be very effective at reducing night-time losses at corrals and we conclude that fences can be an important tool for snow leopard conservation and for facilitating the coexistence of snow leopards and people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Various species of wild, adaptable, medium-sized carnivores occur outside of protected areas, often coming into contact with people and their domestic animals. Negative human-carnivore interactions can lead to antagonistic attitudes and behavior directed at such species. In the South African Karoo, a semi-arid rangeland, the predation of small-livestock by mesopredators is common and farmers typically use a combination of non-lethal and lethal methods to try and prevent livestock losses. We used ethnographic field observations and semi-structured interviews as part of a mixed methods approach, including the quantitative and qualitative analysis of farmers' narratives to illustrate the nuanced ways in which sheep farmers relate to the two mesopredators that consume the most livestock on their farms; black-backed jackal and caracal. Overall, farmers attributed negative characteristics to jackal and caracal but farmers' narratives provided evidence of complex perceptions in that the animals were admired as well as disliked. Both species were seen as charismatic due to traits such as their physical appearance, their "cunning" nature and their remarkable adaptability to human activities, including lethal control. Aesthetic appreciation was an important predictor of tolerance towards both species whereas negative attitudes were associated with the perception that mesopredators should only occur within protected areas. Attitudes towards jackals also appeared to have been affected by cultural representations of them as "thieves". We showed that perceiving mesopredators as beautiful increased the average marginal probability of a farmer tolerating them, and that this strong relationship held when controlling for other covariates such as livestock predation. We advocate the importance of understanding the cultural and aesthetic aspects of predators and considering existing positive dimensions of human-wildlife relationships that may encourage increased farmers' tolerance, which might promote coexistence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Promoting human-carnivore coexistence is a main component of carnivore conservation. Coexistence programmes are usually informed by attitudinal studies that evaluate intended behaviour towards carnivores. This questionnaire survey assesses attitudes of governmental and non-governmental conservation stakeholders in Zimbabwe towards living with carnivores, large carnivore species and the conservation of wildlife, and determines whether being part of coexistence programmes (CAMPFIRE, TFCAs) positively affects attitudes. Stakeholder attitudes were most positive when employment was directly related to wildlife and stakeholders had knowledge about and exposure to carnivores. Stakeholders who depend on livestock and/or had little knowledge about and less exposure to carnivores were most negative, this included governmental stakeholders responsible for natural resource management. Positive attitudes were largely based on the aesthetic and economic value of carnivores, while negative attitudes were based on the fear of livestock loss and perceived danger to humans. Subsistence farmers were the most negative stakeholders, as such, the focus on this group to promote coexistence seems justified. However, although some stakeholders were more positive in CAMPFIRE areas or TFCAs, CAMPFIRE and TFCAs failed to improve attitudes of subsistence farmers, which highlights a need to evaluate and adapt these programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Livestock losses are often integral to human conflicts over carnivores; these conflicts threaten the livelihoods of many communities, as well as carnivore species survival. To begin assessing livestock depredation and conflict over carnivores in South Africa's Northern Cape Province, a farmers' union meeting was used to capture farmer (n = 22) perceptions of carnivores in 2017. Most farmers reported black-backed jackals and caracals (n = 11 and 10, respectively) as most frequently culpable for livestock losses. However, culpability and reported presence on farmlands by these and other carnivore species were not always aligned. Carnivores were generally perceived in a negative manner, with most respondents supporting livestock protection methods involving the removal or separation of carnivores from farmland, as opposed to those facilitating coexistence. Comprehensive socio-ecological investigation of factors relevant to improving humancarnivore coexistence of benefit to both farmers and wildlife is warranted in this region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We used multiple methods to examine livestock depredation by African lions (Panthera leo), spotted hyaenas (Crocuta crocuta), leopards (Panthera pardus) and black‐backed jackals (Canis mesomelas) in livestock enclosures across the Maasai steppe of Northern Tanzania. In this landscape, pastoralists keep cattle, goats, sheep and donkeys. All are vulnerable to depredation by carnivores. Various factors, such as boma characteristics, landscape attributes and attacks by multiple carnivores, were analysed to understand the best predictors of livestock loss at a boma. We found that livestock depredation was significantly correlated with the number of carnivore species that attacked the boma, the number of boma fences and proximity to protected areas, rivers and roads. Bomas with one fence experienced more loss than those with two walls of fencing. We also found that livestock depredation increased farther from protected areas (β = 0.50, SE = 0.10) and rivers (β = 0.39, SE = 0.10) and closer to roads (β = −0.28, SE = 0.11). These results highlight the complex interaction of fine‐scale factors that influence carnivore depredation of livestock at any given boma. We recommend that mitigation address the range of factors, including the structural integrity of a boma, landscape attributes and multiple carnivore raids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conflicts between the interests of agriculture and wildlife conservation are a major threat to biodiversity and human well‐being globally. Addressing such conflicts requires a thorough understanding of the impacts associated with living alongside protected wildlife. Despite this, most studies reporting on human–wildlife impacts and the strategies used to mitigate them focus on a single species, thus oversimplifying often complex systems of human–wildlife interactions. We sought to characterize the spatiotemporal patterns of impacts by multiple co‐occurring species on agricultural livelihoods in the eastern Okavango Delta Panhandle in northern Botswana through the use of a database of 3264 wildlife‐incident reports recorded from 2009 to 2015 by the Department of Wildlife and National Parks. Eight species (African elephants [Loxodonta africana], hippopotamuses [Hippopotamus amphibious], lions [Panthera leo], cheetah [Acinonyx jubatus], African wild dogs [Lycaon pictus], hyenas [Crocuta crocuta], leopards [Panthera pardus], and crocodiles [Crocodylus niloticus]) appeared on incident reports, of which 56.5% were attributed to elephants. Most species were associated with only 1 type of damage (i.e., either crop damage or livestock loss). Carnivores were primarily implicated in incident reports related to livestock loss, particularly toward the end of the dry season (May–October). In contrast, herbivores were associated with crop‐loss incidents during the wet season (November–April). Our results illustrate how local communities can face distinct livelihood challenges from different species at different times of the year. Such a multispecies assessment has important implications for the design of conservation interventions aimed at addressing the costs of living with wildlife and thereby mitigation of the underlying conservation conflict. Our spatiotemporal, multispecies approach is widely applicable to other regions where sustainable and long‐term solutions to conservation conflicts are needed for local communities and biodiversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Livestock guarding dogs (LGDs) have been used for centuries to reduce depredation on livestock and, more recently, to facilitate the conservation of threatened carnivores. Conservation organisations in southern Africa promote the use of Anatolian shepherds as LGDs. However, livestock farmers in Botswana use a variety of breeds for this purpose, including local landrace "Tswana" dogs. Our study sought to test the overall effectiveness of these local breeds as LGDs. Irrespective of breed, all LGDs reduced livestock losses, with 47.9% of farmers experiencing no losses after obtaining a guarding dog. Owners with more LGDs, and LGDs of a single sex, had greater reductions in livestock losses. Anatolian shepherds displayed more behavioural problems than other breeds in our study. The health of LGDs was reliant on them receiving a balanced diet, and owners with fewer dogs reported fewer health issues. Moreover, Tswana guarding dogs were cheaper to purchase and feed than their purebred counterparts. Our results show that local landrace dogs can be considered a cheaper and more practical alternative to purebred LGDs for reducing livestock losses and for mitigating human-wildlife conflict in Botswana. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Livestock depredation can be devastating to both farmers and the species considered responsible if they are subsequently persecuted. Many proposed conflict solutions are limited in their uptake because they may be short-term, localised, expensive or species-specific. Livestock guarding dogs have been a successful solution in many parts of the world, however recommended imported breeds are generally expensive or inaccessible to many rural farmers. In this study, we report on a program placing local Tswana dogs with farmers in Botswana as a tool to reduce livestock loss. Seventy-five farmers who experienced high conflict from carnivores in both rangelands and wildlife areas were selected to receive a Tswana puppy. Puppies were monitored regularly to determine their performance, survival and owner attitudes toward wildlife. From initial baseline reports of goat losses before farmers received a puppy, loss declined by at least 85% over the following three years. Farmers were very satisfied with the performance of their livestock guarding dog and attitudes toward protection and tolerance of wildlife improved after one year of receiving a puppy. Our study suggests locally bred Tswana dogs are an effective solution for livestock at risk to depredation, particularly for rural farmers and development of community-led programs can be further used to reduce conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We assessed losses of livestock to lions Panthera leo and leopards Panthera pardus in the Adiyo and Gimbo districts in Kafa Biosphere Reserve, Ethiopia. We quantified the economic impact, conducted household and group interviews, and explored potential solutions with local people. During 2009–2013 there were 350 and 62 attacks by lions and leopards, respectively. Households that suffered attacks on their livestock lost a mean of USD 287 and USD 310 in 2012 and 2013, respectively. Although lion attacks are more frequent than leopard attacks, our qualitative data indicate that tolerance for the former is higher because lions are more respected in the local culture. We describe how depredation is culturally mitigated and how retaliatory killing is avoided. Given people's tolerance towards them, carnivores may persist in their highland refugium, opening an arena for conservation that is not strictly linked to protected areas or to classical economics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fortified kraals are predator-proof enclosures designed to protect livestock at night. Globally, they show great promise in reducing depredation by carnivores, thus promoting co-existence with people. Their efficacy depends on effectiveness, durability, regular use, owner satisfaction, cost-efficiency, and design. We monitored 32 fortified kraals for 18 months in a high conflict area in northern Botswana ( n  = 427 kraal months) where lions ( Panthera leo ) frequently kill cattle. Monthly kraal use was 60% and was significantly influenced by kraal type, age, and shape. When used and maintained, kraals stopped livestock depredation. Due to poor maintenance, however, kraal age had a significant, negative influence on kraal use and effectiveness, compromising sustainability and cost-effectiveness. Fortified kraals built by a non-governmental organisation cost US$1322.36 per unit ( n  = 20) and mitigated a mean annual loss of $187.32. This suggests cost-recuperation after 7.0 years, or 2.3 times longer than observed kraal lifetime. Conversely, owner-built replicates cost $579.90 per unit ( n  = 4), recuperating investment after 3.1 years. Owner satisfaction was significantly higher for fortified kraals when compared with traditional kraals. However, owners of fortified kraals did not kraal their cattle more frequently than owners of traditional kraals. Regionally, the mean annual kraaling rate for 29 GPS-monitored cattle herds ( n  = 3360 nights) was 40%, leaving cattle vulnerable to depredation, and highlighting the importance of promoting vigilant herding together with kraaling to prevent losses. This combination could reduce regional livestock losses by 80%, or >$38,000 annually, however, kraal fortification alone does not provide a blanket solution to carnivore conflicts in Africa's agro-pastoral landscapes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Illegal hunting is a pervasive menace for many carnivore species in livestock-wildlife shared lands. Carnivore conservation under such socio-ecological context demands a comprehensive understanding of hunting drivers as well as alternatives for problem resolution. To contribute overcoming retaliation against carnivores we developed a holistic approach to address ranchers' non-compliance by understanding together: the context, magnitude, effectiveness, and motivations underlying illegal hunting. We surveyed sheep ranches across southern Chilean Patagonia where culpeo fox, chilla fox and puma cooccur and prey upon sheep. Sheep depredation occurred in 85 % ranches, accounting for 3.5 % of total holdings. Other sources of sheep mortality emerged equally sizeable or even higher than predation. Culpeo fox was the main predator across the region, and the most persecuted. Although hunting was significantly related to its perceived effectiveness, livestock guardian dogs conversely were asserted as the most effective tool for protecting the herds. Ranches where hunting is applied suffered significantly more predation than those where LGDs are deployed. Personal norms, perception towards carnivores, damage levels and ranchers' characteristics significantly related to hunting likelihood, yet their effects varied between species. Our approach advances in demonstrating clear opportunities for livestock-carnivores coexistence arising from a comprehensive understanding of the full context of the predation-retaliation problem, and the multiple drivers of hunting in a species-by-species basis. Such opportunities lie fundamentally in acknowledging all sources of livestock loss, the encouragement to adopt LGDs, and fostering pro-carnivore attitudes based on the ecological benefits they provide in rangelands. • Other sources of livestock mortality were equally and more relevant than predation. • Perceived effectiveness of management practices was decoupled from predation rates. • Nonlethal carnivore management practices lead to minor predation losses. • Species-specific multiple drivers underly illegal hunting likelihood. • Livestock producers' adaptation is pivotal to overcome retaliation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Resolving human-wildlife conflict is a conservation priority, but effective mitigation requires in-depth understanding of the complexity and relative importance of conflict drivers. We conducted 262 semi-structured interviews with villagers around Tanzania’s Ruaha National Park. The surveys provided data on respondents’ perceived problems with wildlife, knowledge, reported killing of carnivores, and their socio-economic characteristics. 98.5% of people perceived a problem with wildlife, and respondents viewed large carnivores as significantly more problematic than other species, due to the threats they posed to livestock and humans. Despite this, only 7.3% of people admitted to having killed any large carnivores. Depredation was widespread, having affected 61.1% of households, but was less important than other forms of stock loss – monthly recall data revealed 1.2% of stock were predated, compared to 9.1% lost to disease and 2.8% to theft. Although experience of depredation significantly predicted negative attitudes towards carnivores, it was not the most important factor. The study raises the possibility of ‘contagious conflict’, where perceived problems with one group of species were strongly associated with perceived problems with others. Furthermore, factors such as ethnic group and religious beliefs were significant predictors of perceived problems. This study suggests that effective conflict mitigation should involve measures to improve attitudes towards a broad range of species, rather than a single taxon, and that action should be taken to also address the social and cultural drivers of conflict, rather than merely focusing upon reducing wildlife damage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Agricultural development accelerates the loss of habitat for many wildlife species and brings humans and animals in close proximity, resulting in increased human-wildlife conflict. In Africa, such conflicts contribute to carnivore population declines in the form of human retaliation for livestock depredation. However, little knowledge exists about when and where carnivores attack livestock. Given this need, our objectives were to (1) understand the spatial and temporal variation of human-carnivore conflict and (2) identify conflict-prone areas. We addressed these objectives in 18 Tanzanian villages of the Maasai Steppe using livestock depredation data on lions (Panthera leo), spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta) and leopards (Panthera pardus) from 2004 to 2007. Over the 4-year period, 1,042 carnivore attacks occurred on livestock, with >50% due to hyenas; shoats (goats and sheep) were the most commonly depredated livestock. Livestock depredation was unevenly distributed across villages. About 39% of all recorded attacks occurred in Selela, followed by Emboreet (16%), and Loiborsoit (11%), while Esilalei, Oltukai, and Engaruka all had >5% of all attacks. Villages with <1% of all attacks on livestock included Losirwa, Terat, Naiti, and Minjingu. Spotted hyenas attacked livestock more during the night and when livestock were in bomas (enclosures where livestock is kept, especially at night), while lions and leopards depredated at similar rates by time of day and location. Livestock depredation was highest during the wet season. Carnivore attacks on livestock could be reduced both by avoiding wildlife migration and dispersal areas during the wet season and by building stronger bomas. Because large carnivore populations are declining, our findings identify possible alternatives to reduce human-carnivore conflicts, thus, facilitating large carnivore conservation efforts in landscapes where large carnivores and livestock co-exist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]