Society for Conservation Biology 16th Annual Meeting July 14-July 19 2002
co-hosted by DICE and the British Ecological Society


Abstracts for Symposium Ten

Human-carnivore conflict: local solutions with global applications

Keynes Lecture Theatre 1
Wednesday 17th July: 13.30 - 17.30



Conference Home Page | Symposia Details


(BLOCK CAPITALS indicate the presenting author)


13.30 - 13.45
KARANTH, K. ULLAS. Wildlife Conservation Society (International Programs), Bronx, New York 10460-1099, USA <karanth@blr.vsnl.net.in>.

HUMAN-CARNIVORE CONFLICT: STRATEGIES FOR MITIGATION AND PREVENTION

Carnivores readily come into conflict with humans because of their protein-rich diet, high fecundity, predatory behavior and social organization patterns. Such conflicts result in losses of human lives, livestock, fisheries or crops, thereby leading to elimination of carnivores through retaliatory killings. Increasing population growth, urbanization and economic development - in combination with sporadic successes in conservation efforts – are now increasing the extent of interface between human populations and those of wild carnivores. Conservationists must resolve the ensuing conflicts in a context characterized by fragmented landscapes and changing cultures. They can rely on two broad approaches: reacting to conflicts through mitigation measures or preventing conflicts through spatial separation of humans and carnivores. Conflict mitigation can occur through modification of human behavior towards carnivores as a result of economic compensation, community education, cultural tolerance and innovative crop and animal husbandry practices. Mitigation can also occur by forcing carnivores to change their behaviors using physical barriers, repellents, guarding, or, by removing or killing them. In addition, conflict prevention through voluntary, incentive-driven relocation of people away from core conservation areas is also emerging as an increasingly attractive future option for protecting viable populations of some wild carnivore species.



13.45 - 14.00
Wydeven, Adrian P. and LISA C. NAUGHTON. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Box 220, Park Falls, WI 54552, USA. (AW), Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA, <naughton@geography.wisc.edu> (LN).

PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARD MANAGING PROBLEM WOLVES.

Compensation programs are intended to improve rural citizens' tolerance for large carnivores. I surveyed tolerance for wolves among 533 livestock producers, bear hunters and other citizens living in areas of Wisconsin recently colonized by wolves. While there was general support for wolf recovery, most respondents wanted wolf numbers capped or reduced. Bear hunters were the least tolerant of the surveyed groups. I found no difference in tolerance for wolves between compensated and non-compensated individuals. Rather, respondents‚ identity as a bear hunter or livestock producer proved most predictive. Education, gender, and size of childhood community were also significant predictors. The Wisconsin compensation program does not seem to improve individual tolerance for large carnivores but may be critical to building broader political support for wolf conservation. I also discuss public opinion of lethal and non-lethal control methods.



14.00 - 14.15
ANDERSONE, ZANETE, John D.C. Linnell, and Henrik Brøseth. Kemeri National Park, "Meza maja", Kemeri-Jurmala, LV-2012, Latvia, <zanete@kemeri.apollo.lv> (ZA), Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Tungasletta-2, 7485 Trondheim, Norway (JDCL, HB).

INVOLVING BALTIC AND SCANDINAVIAN HUNTERS IN LARGE CARNIVORE RESEARCH AND MANAGEMENT

In northern and eastern Europe, large carnivores are conserved through harvest management rather than protection. Species eradication campaigns are in the past in most of the countries, and sustainable hunting has a positive effect on large carnivore conservation. Because hunters are numerous (1.4% of the Latvian and 6% of the Norwegian populations) and directly manage wildlife, conservationists should consider this interest group and, if possible, involve them in conservation activities. Nordic countries have long involved hunters in carnivore monitoring and research (snow-tracking, searching for dens, etc.) and have established a system of carcass delivery to researchers. Baltic countries have also recently started involving hunters in conservation work. Since 1997, Latvian hunters have provided carcasses of hunted wolves and lynxes for further examination, and collected genetic samples. They have also been involved in a country-wide morphometrical study measuring harvested wolves according to a specially designed questionnaire, obtaining data on about 500 individuals, which would otherwise be impossible. Hunters are also involved in decision-making about wildlife management. Hunters can be effectively recruited for research and management of large carnivores, including collection of morphological data provided that measurements to be taken are simple.



14.15 - 14.30
Woodroffe, Rosie and JOSHUA R. GINSBERG. Department of Wildlife, Fish & Conservation Biology, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA (RW), Wildlife Conservation Society, 2300 Southern Bvd, Bronx, NY 10460-1099, USA <jginsberg@wcs.org> (JRG).

HUMAN-WILDLIFE CONFLICT AS A CAUSE OF GLOBAL CARNIVORE DECLINE

Virtually all large carnivores are undergoing global decline, often despite legal protection inside and outside reserves. Three empirical measures of vulnerability to extinction – the area needed for a population to persist, extinction date relative to sympatric species, and red book status – all indicate that wide-ranging carnivore species are particularly extinction-prone. The available data suggest that ranging widely leads to high mortality because it brings animals into contact – and, hence, conflict – with people and human activity. The endangered African wild dog (Lycaon pictus) follows this pattern precisely, having extremely large home ranges and being threatened principally by conflict with people. However, new data suggest that wild dogs may range preferentially in areas of comparatively high human density, potentially accentuating conflict. This behaviour appears to be a response to the distribution of lions, wild dogs’ principal natural enemy. This raises new challenges for the conservation of wild dogs and other large carnivores suffering predation from still larger competitors.



14.30 - 14.45
LINNELL, JOHN D. C., Philippe Stahl, J. M. Vandal John Odden, Pål F. Moa, Ivar Herfindal, Reidar Andersen and Tor Kvam. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Tungasletta 2, N-7485 Trondheim, Norway, <john.linnell@ninatrd.ninaniku.no> (JL, JO), Office National de la Chasse et de la Faune Sauvage, Monfort, F-01 330 Birieux, France (PS), Nord-Trøndelag College, PO Box 145, N-7701 Steinkjer, Norway (PM, TK), Department of Zoology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway (IH, RA).

LIVESTOCK HUSBANDRY AND PROBLEM INDIVIDUALS' STUDIES OF EURASIAN LYNX IN NORWAY AND FRANCE

We studied the predation of radio-collared lynx (Lynx lynx) on domestic sheep in Norway and France. In Norway, sheep are unguarded and dispersed throughout the forest. Predation rates were high (ca. 20 sheep / 100 nights / lynx), all flocks experienced predation annually, surplus killing was widespread, and adult males had consistently higher predation rates on sheep than other classes of lynx. Male lynx move more and therefore encounter more sheep, but also kill more sheep per encounter than do females. We found no evidence for the existence of individuals that killed more sheep per encounter. Sheep flocks in habitats favoured by lynx suffered higher losses. In France, sheep graze on meadows dispersed throughout a forest landscape. Predation rates were 10% of those in Norway, <25% of flocks experienced predation annually, and some individual lynx clearly killed more sheep than others. In both Norway and France, sheep grazing in sites favoured by lynx suffered higher rates of predation, but lynx did not select for sheep grazing areas in particular. It appears that sheep are unimportant in lynx diet, sheep are usually killed simply because they are encountered, and husbandry affects the development of problem individuals.



14.45 - 15.00
Discussion



15.30 - 15.45
OGADA, MORDECAI, Laurence G. Frank, Nicholas O. Oguge, and Rosie Woodroffe. Mpala Research Centre, P.O. Box 555 Nanyuki, Kenya <mogada@mpala.org> (MO), Museum of Vertebrate Zoology University of California, Berkeley CA 94720, USA (LGF), Dept. of Zoology, Kenyatta University, P.O. Box 43844 Nairobi, Kenya (NOO), Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation, University of California, Davis CA 95616, USA (RW).

LARGE CARNIVORE PREDATION ON LIVESTOCK VARIES WITH HUSBANDRY PRACTICES IN LAIKIPIA, KENYA

Livestock predation is a serious challenge to the conservation of carnivores outside protected areas in Kenya, and other parts of Africa. It also has an adverse impact on livestock production, particularly in Laikipia District, Kenya, where ranches lose up to US$ 12,600 annually. These losses are even more damaging to pastoralists with small herds. This study examined how effectively various stockade designs and management practices protected livestock from lions, leopards, and hyenas (both spotted and striped). We found that predator species and predation style varied by the type of livestock attacked, but that some stockades were particularly prone to attack by all predators. High levels of human activity around stockades (measured as the number of houses) were most effective in protecting cattle, sheep and goats from attack. Traditional solid stockades were more effective than wire enclosures in protecting livestock. We also investigated the effectiveness of two new designs. Effectiveness of watchdogs varied greatly in different situations. We identified optimal designs and management statistically and conclude that modification of livestock housing and management can reduce depredation. This reduction would serve both the causes of livestock production and wildlife conservation.



15.45 - 16.00
JHALA, YADVENDRADEV V. and Dinesh K. Sharma. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun 248001, India <jhalay@wii.gov.in>.

CAUSES OF WOLF ATTACK ON LIVESTOCK AND CHILDREN: IMPLICATIONS FOR INDIAN WOLF CONSERVATION

India’s endangered wolves primarily inhabit semi-arid agro-pastoral regions, in close proximity to people. Conflicts with human interests include predation on livestock, attacks on children, rabid wolf attacks, and damage to installations at an air base. Data on predation, food habits, ranging patterns, and wolf mortality were collected from four sites differing in wild prey abundance and species composition as well as socio-economic conditions. Wolf predation affects the economic survival of some pastoral communities. Herdsmen use guard dogs and thorn corrals, and keep stock in villages each night to mitigate predation. In areas where wolves subsist on wild prey wolf deaths were mostly natural, while in areas where wolves subsist on livestock, most of the observed wolf mortality was caused by humans. Current levels of wolf persecution, mostly limited to filling dens with smoke, are not likely to result in local extinction. However, the increasing use of poison needs to be checked. In Uttar-Pradesh in 1996, a wolf attacked 76 children (of which 50 were fatal). Our study suggests that wolves pose a threat to children in areas with high human density (> 600 per km2), high poverty, little wild prey, and livestock populations that are heavily guarded.



16.00 - 16.15
MISHRA, CHARUDUTT and Tom McCarthy. International Snow Leopard Trust, 4649, Sunnyside Avenue North, Suite 325, Seattle, Washington 98103, USA (CM, TMC), Centre for Ecological Research and Conservation, Nature Conservation Foundation, 3076/5 4th Cross Gokulam Park, Mysore 570002, Karnataka, India <charu@ncf-india.org> (CM).

THE ROLE OF INCENTIVE SCHEMES IN CONSERVING THE SNOW LEOPARD (UNCIA UNCIA)

Pastoralists and their livestock share much of the habitat of the snow leopard Uncia uncia across South and Central Asia. The levels of livestock predation by the snow leopard and other carnivores are high, and retaliatory killing by the herders is a direct threat to carnivore populations. Depletion of wild prey by poaching and out-competition by livestock also poses an indirect threat to the region’s carnivores. Conservationists working in these underdeveloped areas that face serious economic impacts from livestock losses have turned to incentive schemes to motivate local communities to protect carnivores. We describe a pilot incentive experiment in India that aims at enhancing wild prey density by creating livestock-free areas on common land. We also describe how income generation from handicrafts and tourism in Mongolia is helping to curtail poaching and retaliatory killing of snow leopards. However, initiatives that have tried to offset the costs of living with carnivores and to make conservation beneficial to the affected people have thus far been small, isolated, and heavily subsidized. Making these initiatives more comprehensive, expanding their coverage, and internalizing their costs are future challenges for conserving large carnivores like the snow leopard.



16.15 - 16.30
SHIVIK, JOHN A. National Wildlife Research Center, 4101 LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado 80521, USA, <John.Shivik@aphis.usda.gov>.

CONSERVATION BIOLOGY IN THE REAL WORLD: NON-LETHAL TECHNIQUES FOR MANAGING PREDATION

Conservation biology is not only a science of scarcity and diversity, but one of interface between theory and practice. It requires the development of practical tools and techniques to mitigate conflicts arising from human modification of ecosystems. I have applied behavioral theory to predator management by using aversive stimulus devices (electronic training collars) and disruptive stimulus devices (behavior-contingent audio and visual repellents) in bear (Ursus spp.) and wolf (Canis lupus) conflict situations in the United States. A program using aversive training collars and two packs of wild wolves was not successful after nearly two years of effort, and I conclude that temporarily holding wild wolves in captivity for aversive conditioning is unlikely to be an effective predation management technique. Newly developed disruptive stimulus devices, however, are a promising new management tool that have helped to encourage public acceptance of wolf populations. No livestock were killed by wolves wearing these devices (n=17) during 3 years of research in Idaho. Ongoing studies in Minnesota and Wisconsin indicate the need to understand variation in technology and animal behavior that may hinder the effectiveness and application of non-lethal management techniques, and thus affect local support for conservation efforts.



16.30 - 16.45
Volpi, Giulia, Luigi Boitani, Carolyn Callaghan, Charles Mamo, Livia Mattei, Elisabetta Visalberghi and MARCO MUSIANI. Department of Animal and Human Biology, University of Rome, Rome, Italy (GV, LB), Central Rockies Wolf Project, Canmore, Alberta, Canada (CC, CM), Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Pescara, Italy (LM), National Research Council, Rome, Italy (EV) ,The University of Calgary, Faculty of Environmental Design, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada <mmusiani@ucalgary.ca> (MM).

ANTI-WOLF BARRIERS TO MANAGE CAPTIVE AND WILD WOLVES AND PROTECT LIVESTOCK

Traditionally Russian hunters kill wolves at bottlenecks formed by flags hanging from ropes. We tested such anti-wolf barriers to impede wolves’ access to food, livestock and other wolves. We conducted 13 experiments in three enclosures containing six European and two Siberian wolves. Barriers were used for increasing time periods (45 min - 120 hours). In all cases, wolves did not cross the anti-wolf barrier. Barriers also allowed daily separation of two wolves to administer a food/contraceptive pills mixture to the female. In Canada, we set anti-wolf barriers around a 500 x 500 m enclosure containing 100 cows. During the 60-day experiment, we detected 17 wolf approaches to within 50 cm of the barriers, but no crossings and no killings. Instead, wolves killed livestock in neighboring ranches as wel as before and after the experiment in the tested ranch. Finally, anti-wolf barriers also impeded wild wolves’ access to baited sites during two one-month tests. Our results suggest that anti-wolf barriers are effective on captive and wild wolves for >5 and >60 days respectively, and that wild wolves might switch to alternative food sources. Anti-wolf barriers might offer a cost-effective solution to wolf predation on livestock and to exclude wolves from human areas.



16.45 - 17.00
MERTENS, ANNETTE, Christoph Promberger, and Paul Gheorghe. Carpathian Large Carnivore Project, Str. Dr. Ioan Senchea 612, 2223 Zarnesti, Romania, <annette@clcp.ro; nuschka@usa.net>.

THE EFFECT OF DAMAGE PREVENTION METHODS ON LARGE CARNIVORE-LIVESTOCK CONFLICTS IN ROMANIA

In Romania, 5,000 bears, 3,000 wolves and 2,000 lynx live on the same range with 4.5 million sheep and 1.5 million cattle. Livestock protection methods are still very well preserved in this country: animals are not left free on pastures, they are always penned over night, and always guarded by shepherds and dogs. We investigated the amount of damage caused by large carnivores and to what extent this damage can be reduced by the use of electric fences. Every grazing season (May to October) 1.5 % of all sheep are killed by wolves and bears, with an average of 7 animals per camp. In three of the four years of our analysis the number of killed sheep was strongly correlated with the relative amount of shepherds and of guard dogs in the flocks. The camps where we installed electric fences suffered only 2.59 % of the damage suffered by camps without fences. The fences are appreciated by the livestock raisers also because they are very easy to handle and fast to be set up. Such a fence is still an expensive item in Romania but it can be profitable for livestock camp organisers over the long term.



17.00 - 17.15
TREVES, ADRIAN. Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International, 1919 M Street, NW, Suite 600, Washington, D.C., 20036, USA, <adriantreves@hotmail.com>.

CONSERVING CARNIVORES IN HUMAN-MODIFIED ECOSYSTEMS: STRATEGIES FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM

All large carnivore species inhabit regions of multiple use wherein human-carnivore conflicts arise. Sociopolitical changes have allowed some carnivore populations to recover, but public tolerance erodes quickly when domestic animals or humans are threatened. Therefore, effective management of human-carnivore conflict is critical to long-term conservation of carnivores. I describe a goal of self-sustaining carnivore populations existing in minimal conflict with humans and managed with public input. This goal depends on managing both humans and carnivores in areas of repeated conflict. Within such areas, managers must use a mix of public participation in management, law enforcement, environmental education and incentive systems, coupled with the full range of non-lethal deterrents and removal techniques to minimize threats to lives and livelihoods. Researchers can advance this goal by identifying risk factors among all individuals involved in conflict, as well as the landscape attributes of sites of conflict. Together, managers and researchers must focus scarce time and resources in those areas facing the highest future risk. By preempting carnivore predation on humans and domestic animals, we may reduce non-selective, retaliatory killing of carnivores and improve public tolerance for conservation programs. Carnivore conservation therefore requires interdisciplinary collaboration among social scientists, biologists and managers.


17.15 - 17.30
Discussion

The SCB2002 pages are maintained by Christine Eagle
email: C.M.Eagle@ukc.ac.uk
Conference email: scb2002@ukc.ac.uk
Last updated: 30.06.02