Carnivore conservation needs evidence-based livestock protection

Lily M van Eeden; Ann Eklund; Jennifer R B Miller; José Vicente López-Bao; Guillaume Chapron; Mikael R Cejtin; Mathew S Crowther; Christopher R Dickman; Jens Frank; Miha Krofel; David W Macdonald; Jeannine McManus; Tara K Meyer; Arthur D Middleton; Thomas M Newsome; William J Ripple; Euan G Ritchie; Oswald J Schmitz; Kelly J Stoner; Mahdieh Tourani; Adrian Treves

doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.2005577

Carnivore conservation needs evidence-based livestock protection

PLoS Biol. 2018 Sep 18;16(9):e2005577. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2005577. eCollection 2018 Sep.

Authors

Lily M van Eeden¹, Ann Eklund², Jennifer R B Miller^{3

4}, José Vicente López-Bao⁵, Guillaume Chapron², Mikael R Cejtin^{6

7}, Mathew S Crowther¹, Christopher R Dickman¹, Jens Frank², Miha Krofel⁸, David W Macdonald⁹, Jeannine McManus^{10

11}, Tara K Meyer¹², Arthur D Middleton³, Thomas M Newsome^{1

13

14}, William J Ripple¹⁴, Euan G Ritchie¹⁵, Oswald J Schmitz¹², Kelly J Stoner¹⁶, Mahdieh Tourani¹⁷, Adrian Treves¹⁸

Affiliations

¹ Desert Ecology Research Group, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.
² Grimsö Wildlife Research Station, Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Riddarhyttan, Sweden.
³ Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California-Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America.
⁴ Center for Conservation Innovation, Defenders of Wildlife, Washington, DC, United States of America.
⁵ Research Unit of Biodiversity, Oviedo University, Gonzalo Gutiérrez Quirós, Mieres, Spain.
⁶ Department of Natural Sciences, Paul Smith's College, Paul Smiths, New York, United States of America.
⁷ Lake Placid Land Conservancy, Lake Placid, New York, United States of America.
⁸ Biotechnical Faculty, Department of Forestry, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
⁹ Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, The Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Tubney House, Tubney, Abingdon, United Kingdom.
¹⁰ Research Department, Landmark Foundation, Riversdale, South Africa.
¹¹ School of Animal, Plants and Environmental Sciences, University of Witwatersrand, Braamfontein, Johannesburg, South Africa.
¹² Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, New Haven, Connecticut, United States of America.
¹³ School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
¹⁴ Global Trophic Cascades Program, Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, United States of America.
¹⁵ Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia.
¹⁶ Wildlife Conservation Society Rocky Mountain Regional Program, Bozeman, Montana, United States of America.
¹⁷ Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Ås, Norway.
¹⁸ Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America.

Abstract

Carnivore predation on livestock often leads people to retaliate. Persecution by humans has contributed strongly to global endangerment of carnivores. Preventing livestock losses would help to achieve three goals common to many human societies: preserve nature, protect animal welfare, and safeguard human livelihoods. Between 2016 and 2018, four independent reviews evaluated >40 years of research on lethal and nonlethal interventions for reducing predation on livestock. From 114 studies, we find a striking conclusion: scarce quantitative comparisons of interventions and scarce comparisons against experimental controls preclude strong inference about the effectiveness of methods. For wise investment of public resources in protecting livestock and carnivores, evidence of effectiveness should be a prerequisite to policy making or large-scale funding of any method or, at a minimum, should be measured during implementation. An appropriate evidence base is needed, and we recommend a coalition of scientists and managers be formed to establish and encourage use of consistent standards in future experimental evaluations.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Animals
Carnivora / physiology*
Conflict, Psychological
Conservation of Natural Resources*
Geography
Livestock / physiology*
Predatory Behavior / physiology

Grants and funding

National Science Foundation Couple Human and Natural Systems (grant number 115057). Received by JRBM. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Ramon & Cajal research contract from the Spanish Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness (grant number RYC-2015-18932). Received by JVLB. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. National Geographic Society (Grant WW-100C-17), and the George B. Storer Foundation, received by ADM. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Derse Foundation and US Fulbright program in Sweden. Received by AT. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Carnegie Corporation of New York associated to the Global Change Institute to the University of Witwatersrand, Development Bank South Africa, Green Fund, United Nations Environment Program, and the Global Environment Facility. Received by JSM. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Swedish Research Council Formas. Received by AE, GC, JF, JVLB. The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.