Search

While wildlife and cultural preservation goals can be either complimentary or counteractive, the goals of large carnivore conservation and traditional pastoralist lifestyles are often at odds. Livestock depredation can negatively impact the economies of livestock herders, while subsequent lethal removals contribute to local carnivore population declines. Here, we collaborated with two Sámi reindeer herding communities (2010–2016) situated in Sweden's boreal forest to evaluate the efficacy and economic feasibility of three brown bear predation mitigation measures: corralling pregnant reindeer during parturition, lethal bear management removals, and public bear‐license hunting. Calving corrals increased survival for reindeer calves born to average‐sized females by 7%–15%, and by 14%–30% for calves born to small females. However, the realized cost of implementing calving corrals outweighed the financial gain for both our study areas (net losses ranged between €1111 and €6210 per calf saved from bear predation per year when using the updated 2021 calf value; 1€ [Euro] = US$1.1), as well as for almost every theoretical scenario we explored (net losses €234 and €13,995 per calf saved from bear predation). The exception was the theoretical scenario where small herding communities overlapped large bear populations, which crossed the breakeven efficacy bear/reindeer ratio of 13.5 bears/100 reindeer and had a potential net gain of €36 per saved calf. Similarly, the cost of lethal management removals of bears outweighed the potential financial gain from saved calves, with net losses between €75 and €239 per calf. License hunting, where the hunters voluntarily incur the monetary costs of removing bears, is in most cases the only economically viable mitigation measure where the cost of mitigation did not outweigh the financial gain from increased reindeer survival. While the annual public license hunt was the most cost‐effective mitigation measure, it may be less biologically effective, that is, bear hunting occurs in the fall and reindeer parturition the following spring which leaves time for the empty niche of harvested bears to be filled by survivors. Economically and biologically effective predation mitigation measures are key for promoting coexistence, and we suggest that potential mitigation measures should be studied in collaboration with local people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Acta Silvae et Ligni is the property of Biotechnical Faculty, Slovenian Forestry Institute and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract Several large carnivore populations are increasing in human-dominated landscapes, but this good conservation news includes management challenges. Because of existing fear and negative human attitudes towards carnivores and potential carnivore habituation to people, better knowledge on carnivore behavior is needed to favor human-carnivore coexistence. We performed up to 8 experimental, repeated approaches on 29 radio-collared brown bears (Ursus arctos) in Sweden (195 approaches) to test if bears always avoided people or showed sign of habituation or sensitization. Bears consistently avoided the approaching humans. The proportion of bears that stayed or moved away from their initial site and their flight initiation distances did not increase or decrease with increasing number of encounters, and the bears' daily movement pattern changed consistently after each approach. Bears that moved away did so immediately, followed by a reduced movement afterwards. Bears moved less during daytime for the next three days after an approach, compared to their movement pattern before the approaches started. The initial reaction was consistent after consecutive approaches, whereas the decrease in movement in the following hours and middays was less clear after the first three consecutive approaches. The number of carnivore-human encounters may increase in human-dominated landscapes when carnivore numbers increase, but our results suggest that this should not be interpreted as an increased risk of aggressive behavior. We detected no change in the natural response of the bears, i.e., avoiding people, at the level of disturbance we created. This is a positive message for humans, but altered daily activity patterns can have negative effects on the disturbed animals, which also deserves attention. Highlights • We repeatedly approached 29 radio-collared brown bears in Sweden to study habituation. • The proportion of bears that stayed or moved after repeated approaches did not change. • Flight initiation distance of bears did not change after consecutive approaches. • Daily movement patterns of bears changed consistently after repeated approaches. • The natural response of bears, avoiding people, was consistent after all approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In previous centuries, wolves were extirpated across much of their range worldwide, but they started to recover in Europe since the end of last century. A general pattern of this recovery is the expansion of the range occupied by local populations. The Iberian wolf population, shared by Portugal and Spain, reached its lowest extent and abundance around the middle of the twentieth century. Unlike other populations in Europe, its range recovery and pack counts seem to have stalled since the first Spanish country-wide census of 1986-1988. The population shows low effective population size and remains isolated from other European wolves. This is unexpected given the protection offered by European legislation, i.e., the Habitats Directive, and the apparent availability of habitat outside its present range. We compiled records of wolves killed legally in Spain, reviewed the legislative and management framework for the Iberian wolf population, and discussed potential implications of a policy of lethal management for the ecology, genetics and conservation status of wolves in the Iberian Peninsula. Wolves are strictly protected in Portugal. Meanwhile, they are subject to culling and hunting in Spain. No wolf was legally removed by culling or hunting during the study period in Portugal, whereas 623 wolves were legally killed in Spain between 2008 and 2013. Twenty-nine of those wolves were killed in areas under strict protection according to European legislation. Despite the transboundary nature of this wolf population, we are not aware of coordinated conservation plans. Management is further fragmented at the sub-national level in Spain, both due to the authority of Spanish autonomous regions over their wildlife, and because wolves were listed in multiple annexes of the Habitats Directive. Fragmentation of management was apparent in the uneven adherence to the obligations of the Habitats Directive among Spanish regions. A similar situation is found for other large predator populations in Europe. We suggest that lethal management as carried out in Spain is a hindrance to transit and settlement of wolves, both within and beyond the Iberian wolf population. Reducing the pressure of lethal management appears a feasible policy change to improve the conservation status of the population and foster transboundary connectivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Evolutionary traps, and their derivative, ecological traps, occur when animals make maladaptive decisions based on seemingly reliable environmental cues, and are important mechanistic explanations for declines in animal populations. Despite the interest in large carnivore conservation in human‐modified landscapes, the emergence of traps and their potential effects on the conservation of large carnivore populations has frequently been overlooked. The brown bear Ursus arctos typifies the challenges facing large carnivore conservation and recent research has reported that this species can show maladaptive behaviours in human‐modified landscapes. Here we review, describe and discuss scenarios recognised as evolutionary or ecological traps for brown bears, and propose possible trap scenarios and mechanisms that have the potential to affect the dynamics and viability of brown bear populations. Six potential trap scenarios have been detected for brown bears in human‐modified landscapes: 1) food resources close to human settlements; 2) agricultural landscapes; 3) roads; 4) artificial feeding sites; 5) hunting by humans; and 6) other human activities. Because these traps are likely to be of contrasting relevance for different demographic segments of bear populations, we highlight the importance of evaluations of the relative demographic consequences of different trap types for wildlife management. We also suggest that traps may be behind the decreases in brown bear and other large carnivore populations in human‐modified landscapes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human persecution and habitat loss have endangered large carnivore populations worldwide, but some are recovering, exacerbating old conflicts. Carnivores can injure and kill people; the most dramatic form of wildlife-human conflict. In Scandinavia, the brown bear (Ursus arctos) population increased from ~500 bears in 1977 to ~3300 in 2008, with an increase in injuries, fatalities, and public fear of bear attacks. We reviewed media coverage and interviewed victims to explore how bear population trends, hunter education, and other factors may have influenced the number of injuries and fatalities in Scandinavia from 1977 to 2016. We found 42 incidents with 42 injuries and 2 fatalities; 42 were adult men, one was an adult woman conducting forestry work, and one was a boy skiing off-piste. Thirty-three adult men were hunting bears, moose, or small game, often with a hunting dog, and 26 had shot at the bear at 8±11 m before injury. Eleven nonhunters were conducting forestry work, inspecting a hunting area, picking berries, tending livestock, hiking, harassing a denned bear, and one person was killed outside his house at night. Eight of the 11 incidents of nonhunters involved female bears with cubs; three of these family groups were in dens and two were on carcasses. The annual number of hunters injured/killed was mostly influenced by the increase in the bear population size. The pattern was similar regarding injuries/fatalities to other outdoor users, but the relation with the bear population size was weaker than for hunters, and the null model was equally supported. Bear physiology at denning may make encounters with bears more risky in the fall, when bears show prehibernation behavior. Awareness and education efforts, especially among hunters, seem important to ensure human safety. Recreationists and forestry workers should avoid dense vegetation or make noise to warn bears of their presence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Humans are important agents of wildlife mortality, and understanding such mortality is paramount for effective population management and conservation. However, the spatial mechanisms behind wildlife mortality are often assumed rather than tested, which can result in unsubstantiated caveats in ecological research (e.g. fear ecology assumptions) and wildlife conservation and/or management (e.g. ignoring ecological traps). We investigated spatial patterns in human-caused mortality based on 30 years of brown bear Ursus arctos mortality data from a Swedish population. We contrasted mortality data with random locations and global positioning system relocations of live bears, as well as between sex, age and management classes ('problem' versus 'no problem' bear, before and after changing hunting regulations), and we used resource selection functions to identify potential ecological sinks (i.e. avoided habitat with high mortality risk) and traps (i.e. selected habitat with high mortality risk). We found that human-caused mortality and mortality risk were positively associated with human presence and access. Bears removed as a management measure were killed in closer proximity to humans than hunter-killed bears, and supplementary feeding of bears did not alter the spatial structure of human-caused bear mortality. We identified areas close to human presence as potential sink habitat and agricultural fields (oat fields in particular) as potential ecological traps in our study area. We emphasize that human-caused mortality in bears and maybe in wildlife generally can show a very local spatial structure, which may have far-reaching population effects. We encourage researchers and managers to systematically collect and geo-reference wildlife mortality data, in order to verify general ecological assumptions and to inform wildlife managers about critical habitat types. The latter is especially important for vulnerable or threatened populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large carnivores inhabiting human-dominated landscapes often interact with people and their properties, leading to conflict scenarios that can mislead carnivore management and, ultimately, jeopardize conservation. In northwest Spain, brown bears Ursus arctos are strictly protected, whereas sympatric wolves Canis lupus are subject to lethal control. We explored ecological, economic and societal components of conflict scenarios involving large carnivores and damages to human properties. We analyzed the relation between complaints of depredations by bears and wolves on beehives and livestock, respectively, and bear and wolf abundance, livestock heads, number of culled wolves, amount of paid compensations, and media coverage. We also evaluated the efficiency of wolf culling to reduce depredations on livestock. Bear damages to beehives correlated positively to the number of female bears with cubs of the year. Complaints of wolf predation on livestock were unrelated to livestock numbers; instead, they correlated positively to the number of wild ungulates harvested during the previous season, the number of wolf packs, and to wolves culled during the previous season. Compensations for wolf complaints were fivefold higher than for bears, but media coverage of wolf damages was thirtyfold higher. Media coverage of wolf damages was unrelated to the actual costs of wolf damages, but the amount of news correlated positively to wolf culling. However, wolf culling was followed by an increase in compensated damages. Our results show that culling of the wolf population failed in its goal of reducing damages, and suggest that management decisions are at least partly mediated by press coverage. We suggest that our results provide insight to similar scenarios, where several species of large carnivores share the landscape with humans, and management may be reactive to perceived conflicts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]