Methods to mitigate human–wildlife conflicts involving common mesopredators: a meta‐analysis.

Conflicts between humans and mesopredators are frequent and widespread. Over the last decades, conflicts have led to the development and application of different mitigation methods to diminish the costs and damage caused by such conflicts. We conducted a systematic literature search and meta‐analysis to assess the influence of different mitigation methods on 3 common nuisance species: raccoons (Procyon lotor), red foxes (Vulpes vulpes), and striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis). A majority of the studies, from 1963‒2022, were conducted in North America, followed by Australia and Europe. The predation of wildlife species of conservation concern by nuisance species is the main reported source of conflict in the published literature. Lethal control is the most commonly tested method and is generally effective at reducing conflicts based on the calculated effect size. Barriers have mixed effects, with electric fences and nest exclosures both being effective, whereas conventional fences seem to be less effective. Repellents mimicking predators (e.g., guard animal, predator smell) are also effective. Conditioned taste aversion is a promising approach, but no precise product or chemical has proven to be effective. Many interventions suffered from a lack of validation through experimental approach. Research on human–mesopredator conflict mitigation would benefit from repeated studies using the same methods in similar contexts, thus reducing heterogeneity in the results, and by testing new and innovative methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]