Explore the vast range of titles available.

As human pressures on the environment continue to spread and intensify, effective conservation interventions are direly needed to prevent threats, reduce conflicts, and recover populations and landscapes in a liaison between science and conservation. It is practically important to discriminate between true and false (or misperceived) effectiveness of interventions as false perceptions may shape a wrong conservation agenda and lead to inappropriate decisions and management actions. This study used the false positive risk (FPR) to estimate the rates of misperceived effectiveness of electric fences (overstated if reported as effective but actually ineffective based on FPR; understated otherwise), explain their causes and propose recommendations on how to improve the representation of true effectiveness. Electric fences are widely applied to reduce damage to fenced assets, such as livestock and beehives, or increase survival of fenced populations. The analysis of 109 cases from 50 publications has shown that the effectiveness of electric fences was overstated in at least one-third of cases, from 31.8% at FPR = 0.2 (20% risk) to 51.1% at FPR = 0.05 (5% risk, true effectiveness). In contrast, understatement reduced from 23.8% to 9.5% at these thresholds of FPR. This means that truly effective applications of electric fences were only 48.9% of all cases reported as effective, but truly ineffective cases were 90.5%, implying that the effectiveness of electric fences was heavily overstated. The main reasons of this bias were the lack of statistical testing or improper reporting of test results (63.3% of cases) and interpretation of marginally significant results (p < 0.05, p < 0.1 and p around 0.05) as indicators of effectiveness (10.1%). In conclusion, FPR is an important tool for estimating true effectiveness of conservation interventions and its application is highly recommended to disentangle true and false effectiveness for planning appropriate conservation actions. Researchers are encouraged to calculate FPR, publish its constituent statistics (especially treatment and control sample sizes) and explicitly provide test results with p values. It is suggested to call the effectiveness “true” if FPR < 0.05, “suggestive” if 0.05 ≤ FPR < 0.2 and “false” if FPR ≥ 0.2.

Evidence-based conservation is urgently needed to identify, apply and promote effective interventions for mitigation of threats and recovery of the natural environment. Estimation of intervention effectiveness is subject to robust study design and statistical analysis, and much progress is documented in these fields. In contrast, little is understood about the accuracy and biases (underestimation and overestimation) of different effectiveness metrics and how they are affected by sample size. In this study, a dataset ( = 500 cases) consisting of random, positive, integer numbers was simulated to produce frequency input data for the 2 × 2 contingency table. For each case, three metrics of the relative risk, odds ratio and the magnitude of change were calculated, their disparity was estimated and the characteristics of treatment (with intervention) and control (without intervention) samples significantly affecting this disparity were studied by means of linear regression. Further, four case studies from different conservation interventions are provided to support the results. The study has shown that the relative risk and the magnitude of change produce identical estimates of intervention effectiveness only when treatment and control samples are equal, or when the number of target outcomes (e.g., number of livestock killed by predators) in treatment sample reaches zero. In other situations, the magnitude of change gives overestimates or underestimates, depending on relationships between treatment and control sample sizes. The table summarizing the conditions of equalities and biases between these two metrics is provided. These conditions are valid for both reduction-aimed interventions reducing negative target outcomes (e.g., livestock protection to reduce livestock losses to predators) and for addition-aimed interventions increasing positive target outcomes (e.g., establishment of protected areas to increase species presence). No significant effects on the odds ratio were found. Researchers should set equal treatment and control sample sizes so that to produce identical estimates of intervention effectiveness by the relative risk and the magnitude of change. Otherwise, these estimates are biased if produced by the magnitude of change and the relative risk should be used instead. As setting equal treatment and control samples can be impractical, I encourage researchers and practitioners to use the relative risk in estimation of intervention effectiveness. This will not take additional efforts as both metrics are calculated from the same contingency table. Treatment and control sample sizes, along with their sub-samples affected and not by an intervention, should be explicitly reported by researchers to allow independent evaluation of intervention effectiveness. This approach can help obtain more accurate information on intervention effectiveness for making better decisions in conservation actions.

Randomized, controlled trials (RCT) are seen as the strongest basis for causal inference, but their strengths of inference and error rates relative to other study designs have never been quantified for interventions designed to prevent wildlife damage to property and game. We simulate common study designs from simple correlation to RCT with crossover design. We report rates of false positive, false negative, and over-estimation of treatment effects for five common study designs under various confounding interactions and effect sizes. We find non-randomized study designs mostly unreliable and that randomized designs with suitable safeguards against biases have much lower error rates. One implication is that virtually all studies of lethal interventions against predatory wildlife appear unreliable. Generally, applied fields can benefit from more robust designs against the common confounding effects we simulated.

Rapid population declines of wild cats (family Felidae) are often related to widespread conflicts with people over the livestock depredation they are causing. In spite of increasing literature on wild felids, there is no overview on the evidence‐based effectiveness of livestock protection interventions in reducing depredation inflicted by these animals. We collected and analyzed 92 cases from 57 publications describing the percentage of damage reduction from the application of 11 interventions to 10 felid species. We found that the effectiveness of interventions differed significantly between species. Interventions tested for cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus), Iberian lynx (Lynx pardinus) and snow leopards (Panthera uncia) were very effective, reducing damage by 70–100% due to species shyness, good fit of interventions to these species and local conditions, and strong social involvement. The most variable and often the lowest effectiveness of interventions was found for leopard (Panthera pardus), puma (Puma concolor) and caracal (Caracal caracal), which are more common and tolerant to humans. In other felids, interventions were generally effective, but some of them reportedly failed because of local contexts and intervention performance. Much more effort is required to invigorate the research of intervention effectiveness in little studied species and regions.

Poaching is cryptically but rapidly driving many species towards extinction. Knowledge of population trends of exploited species and incentives for poaching is necessary to inform appropriate conservation measures. We estimated the abundance of four ungulate species in Golestan National Park, Iran, the country's oldest protected area, where poaching of ungulates is widespread. We used line transect surveys (186 km), camera trapping (2,777 camera-nights), point counts (64 scans) and dung counts (along 38 km), and compared population estimates with those from earlier records. We also investigated the incentives for poaching, using a semi-structured interview survey. Population estimates for 2011–2014 indicated a 66–89% decline in three ungulate species (bezoar goat Capra aegagrus, red deer Cervus elaphus and urial Ovis vignei) compared to 1970–1978. Only wild boar Sus scrofa showed a population increase (of 58%) during the same period, possibly facilitated by religious restrictions regarding the consumption of this species. The incentives for poaching were categorized (in a non-ordinal manner) as subsistence, pleasure, tradition, trade of wild meat, and conflict with conservation regulations and bodies. The decline in hunted ungulates in this Park appears to be the result of rampant poaching, and a similar trend is evident in other protected areas in the country. We suggest the adoption of participatory conservation strategies, improvement of law enforcement practices and cooperation with international experts to reduce poaching in these protected areas. Taking into account the incentives for poaching, a combination of economic and non-economic strategies should be considered.

Livestock is represented in big cat diets throughout the world. Husbandry approaches aim to reduce depredation, which may influence patterns of prey choice, but whether felids have a preference for livestock or not often remains unclear as most studies ignore livestock availability. We assessed prey choice of the endangered Persian leopard (Panthera pardus saxicolor) in Golestan National Park, Iran, where conflict over livestock depredation occurs. We analyzed leopard diet (77 scats) and assessed wild and domestic prey abundance by line transect sampling (186 km), camera-trapping (2777 camera days), double-observer point-counts (64 scans) and questionnaire surveys (136 respondents). Based on interviews with 18 shepherds, we estimated monthly grazing time outside six villages with 96 conflict cases to obtain a small livestock (domestic sheep and goat) availability coefficient. Using this coefficient, which ranged between 0.40 and 0.63 for different villages, we estimated the numbers of sheep and goats available to leopard depredation. Leopard diet consisted mainly of wild boar (Sus scrofa) (50.2% biomass consumed), but bezoar goat (Capra aegagrus) was the most preferred prey species (Ij = 0.73), whereas sheep and goats were avoided (Ij = -0.54). When absolute sheep and goat numbers (~11250) were used instead of the corrected ones (~6392), avoidance of small livestock appeared to be even stronger (Ij = -0.71). We suggest that future assessments of livestock choice by felids should incorporate such case-specific corrections for spatiotemporal patterns of availability, which may vary with husbandry methods. Such an approach increases our understanding of human-felid conflict dynamics and the role of livestock in felid diets.

Human‐wildlife conflicts are widespread, particularly with big cats which can kill domestic livestock and create a counteraction between conservation and local livelihoods, especially near protected areas. Minimisation of livestock losses caused by big cats and other predators is essential to mitigate conflicts and promote socially acceptable conservation. As big cats usually kill by throat bites, protective collars represent a potentially effective non‐lethal intervention to prevent livestock depredation, yet the application and effectiveness estimation of these tools are very limited. In this study, for the first time we measured the effectiveness of studded leather collars in protecting cattle from leopard (Panthera pardus) attacks. We conducted a randomised controlled experiment during 14 months to collar 202 heads and leave uncollared 258 heads grazing in forests and belonging to 27 owners from eight villages near three protected areas in Mazandaran Province, northern Iran. Our results show that none of collared cattle and nine uncollared cattle were lost to leopard depredation, meaning that collars caused a zero relative risk of damage and a perfect 100% damage reduction. Most losses occurred in summer and autumn due to lush vegetation attracting more cattle, long daytime allowing movements deep into leopard habitats and dense cover favouring leopard hunts from ambush. Losses were recorded in only six owners and four villages, suggesting local rarity and patchy distribution of leopards. We suggest that collars can be successfully applied to cattle freely grazing in habitats of leopards or other felids for a long time and thus remaining persistently exposed to depredation. As grazing cattle are usually not supervised by shepherds or dogs, collars can be the only practical protection tool. Production and sales of collars can become a sustainable small‐scale business for farmers to further boost conservation and rural livelihoods. This first‐ever study describes the application of studded leather collars and estimates their effectiveness in protecting cattle from leopard attacks in the Hyrcanian forest of northern Iran. A randomised controlled experiment using treatment and control samples has shown that these collars were 100% effective and reduced cattle losses to zero. These protective collars can be an affordable and practical tool to promote the balance between wildlife conservation and local livelihoods, particularly near protected areas.

Human-bear conflicts triggered by nuisance behaviour in public places and damage to livestock, crops, beehives and trees are among the main threats to bear populations globally. The effectiveness of interventions used to minimize bear-caused damage is insufficiently known and comparative reviews are lacking. We conducted a meta-analysis of 77 cases from 48 publications and used the relative risk of damage to compare the effectiveness of non-invasive interventions, invasive management (translocations) and lethal control (shooting) against bears. We show that the most effective interventions are electric fences (95% confidence interval = 79.2–100% reduction in damage), calving control (100%) and livestock replacement (99.8%), but the latter two approaches were applied in only one case each and need more testing. Deterrents varied widely in their effectiveness (13.7–79.5%) and we recommend applying these during the peak periods of damage infliction. We found shooting (− 34.2 to 100%) to have a short-term positive effect with its effectiveness decreasing significantly and linearly over time. We did not find relationships between bear density and intervention effectiveness, possibly due to differences in spatial scales at which they were measured (large scales for densities and local fine scales for effectiveness). We appeal for more effectiveness studies and their scientific publishing in regard to under-represented conflict species and regions.

Human-carnivore conflicts challenge biodiversity conservation and local livelihoods, but the role of diseases of domestic animals in their predation by carnivores is poorly understood. We conducted a human-leopard (Panthera pardus) conflict study throughout all 34 villages around Golestan National Park, Iran in order to find the most important conflict determinants and to use them in predicting the probabilities of conflict and killing of cattle, sheep and goats, and dogs. We found that the more villagers were dissatisfied with veterinary services, the more likely they were to lose livestock and dogs to leopard predation. Dissatisfaction occurred when vaccination crews failed to visit villages at all or, in most cases, arrived too late to prevent diseases from spreading. We suggest that increased morbidity of livestock makes them particularly vulnerable to leopard attacks. Moreover, conflicts and dog killing were higher in villages located closer to the boundaries of the protected area than in distant villages. Therefore, we appeal for improved enforcement and coordination of veterinary services in our study area, and propose several priority research topics such as veterinarian studies, role of wild prey in diseases of domestic animals, and further analysis of potential conflict predictors.

Human-carnivore conflicts over livestock depredation are increasingly common, yet little is understood about the role of husbandry in conflict mitigation. As shepherds and guarding dogs are most commonly used to curb carnivore attacks on grazing livestock, evaluation and improvement of these practices becomes an important task. We addressed this issue by studying individual leopard ( Panthera pardus ) attacks on sheep and goats in 34 villages near Golestan National Park, Iran. We obtained and analyzed data on 39 attacks, which included a total loss of 31 sheep and 36 goats in 17 villages. We applied non-parametric testing, Poisson Generalized Linear Modelling (GLM) and model selection to assess how numbers of sheep and goats killed per attack are associated with the presence and absence of shepherds and dogs during attacks, depredation in previous years, villages, seasons, ethnic groups, numbers of sheep and goats kept in villages, and distances from villages to the nearest protected areas. We found that 95.5% of losses were inflicted in forests when sheep and goats were accompanied by shepherds (92.5% of losses) and dogs (77.6%). Leopards tended to kill more sheep and goats per attack (surplus killing) when dogs were absent in villages distant from protected areas, but still inflicted most losses when dogs were present, mainly in villages near protected areas. No other variables affected numbers of sheep and goats killed per attack. These results indicate that local husbandry practices are ineffectual and the mere presence of shepherds and guarding dogs is not enough to secure protection. Shepherds witnessed leopard attacks, but could not deter them while dogs did not exhibit guarding behavior and were sometimes killed by leopards. In an attempt to make practical, low-cost and socially acceptable improvements in local husbandry, we suggest that dogs are raised to create a strong social bond with livestock, shepherds use only best available dogs, small flocks are aggregated into larger ones and available shepherds herd these larger flocks together. Use of deterrents and avoidance of areas close to Golestan and in central, core areas of neighboring protected areas is also essential to keep losses down.