Explore the vast range of titles available.

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.

Large carnivores are persecuted globally because they threaten human industries and livelihoods. How this conflict is managed has consequencesfor the conservation of large carnivores and biodiversity more broadly. Mitigating human-predator conflict should be evidence-based and accommodate people's values while protecting carnivores. Despite much research into human and large-carnivore coexistence strategies, there have been few attempts to document the success of conflict-mitigation strategies on a global scale. We conducted a meta-analysis of global research on conflict mitigation related to large carnivores and humans. We focused on conflicts that arise from the threat large carnivores pose to livestock. We first used structured and unstructured searching to identify replicated studies that used before-after or control-impact design to measure change in livestock loss as a result of implementing a management intervention. We then extracted relevant data from these studies to calculate an overall effect sizefor each intervention type. Research effort and focus varied among continents and aligned with the histories and cultures that shaped livestock production and attitudes toward carnivores. Livestock guardian animals most effectively reduced livestock losses. Lethal control was the second most effective control, although its success varied the most, and guardian animals and lethal control did not differ significantly. Financial incentives have promoted tolerance of large carnivores in some settings and reduced retaliatory killings. We suggest coexistence strategies be locationspecific, incorporate cultural values and environmental conditions, and be designed such that return on financial investment can be evaluated. Improved monitoring of mitigation measures is urgently required to promote effective evidence-based policy. Los carnívoros grandes son perseguidos en todo el mundo porque amenazan el sustento y las industrias humanas. En general, la forma en que se maneja este conflicto tiene consecuencias para la conservación de los grandes carnívoros y la biodiversidad. La mitigación del conflicto humano - fauna debería tener bases en las evidencias y debería acomodarse a los valores de las personas mientras protege a los carnívoros. A pesar de la amplia investigación sobre las estrategias de coexistencia entre humanos y carnívoros grandes, ha habido pocos intentos por documentar el éxito de las estrategias mitigantes del conflicto en una escala global. Realizamos un meta-análisis de la investigación global sobre la mitigación de conflictos relacionados con los carnívoros grandes y los humanos. Nos enfocamos en los conflictos que surgen de la amenaza que los carnívoros grandes presentan para el ganado. Primero utilizamos búsquedas estructuradas y no-estructuradas para identificar los estudios replicados que utilizaron el diseño antes - después o control - impacto para medir el cambio en la pérdida del ganado como resultado de la implementación de una intervención de manejo. Después extrajimos los datos relevantes de estos estudios para calcular un tamaño general de efecto para cada tipo de intervención. El esfuerzo y el enfoque de la investigación variaron entre los continentes y se alinearon con las historias y culturas que dieron forma a la producción ganadera y a las actitudes hacia los carnívoros. Los animales guardianes del ganado fueron los que redujeron con mayor eficiencia las pérdidas del ganado. El control letal fue el segundo control más efectivo, aunque su éxito fue el que más varió, y los animales guardianes y el control letal no difirieron significativamente. Los incentivos económicos han promovido la tolerancia de los carnívoros grandes en algunas localidades y han reducido las muertes por represalia. Sugerimos que las estrategias de coexistencia sean específicas de la localidad, incorporen los valores culturales y las condiciones ambientales, y estén diseñadas de tal forma que el retorno de una inversión financiera pueda ser evaluado. El monitoreo mejorado de las medidas de mitigación es requerido urgentemente para promover la política efectiva basada en evidencias.

Dingo classification and management is complicated by hybridisation with domestic dogs. Northern Australia is a relatively high-risk zone for a rabies incursion, and in the event of an incursion, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who reside in this region would prioritise the protection of dingoes. Therefore, the classification of dingoes in this context is important. Twelve pictures of canids with features associated with both dingoes and domestic dogs from camera traps in the Northern Peninsula Area (NPA), northern Queensland, were shown to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rangers (n = 3), biosecurity officers (n = 2), environmental health workers (n = 2), and residents (n = 39) in the NPA. Nearly all pictures (10/12) were classified as dingo or domestic dog (none as hybrid) and two were inconclusive (no overall agreement). Dingoes were consistently identified as medium to large-framed dogs, with a long nose, pointed ears, narrow abdomen, a bushy or feathered tail, and smooth coats of a single base colour. Some hybrid features were acceptable, including sable coats, lack of white tail tip or feet, and curled tail. These findings are a preliminary guide for identifying canids in the NPA region for whom management might be controversial. Building on this approach via further consultation with residents is needed to inform rabies response policy. Our approach using locally acquired camera trap pictures could also be extended to other regions in which dingoes have value but their management is controversial.

A reduction in the loss and waste of human food is a global issue for addressing poverty and hunger in poorer nations, and for reducing the environmental footprint of the agriculture sector. An emerging issue, however, is that food wasted by humans is often accessible to wildlife, affecting wildlife ecology and behaviour, as well as ecological processes and community dynamics. Here we highlight the extent of such impacts, drawing on examples from mammalian predators and other taxonomic groups. We then develop two conceptual models. The first shows how wildlife access to food waste can exacerbate human-wildlife conflicts. The second highlights that when food waste is removed, the effects on wildlife and ecosystem processes should be monitored. The conceptual models are important when considering that large quantities of food waste are intentionally and unintentionally provided to wildlife around the world. We conclude there is an urgent need to change the way people currently manage the food we produce.

Over the last century, changing public attitudes about the value of wildlife have triggered substantial changes in species management that have both benefited and hindered conservation efforts. Understanding and integrating contemporary public values is therefore critical for effective conservation outcomes. Using historic and contemporary examples, we highlight how public attitudes—expressed through the media and campaigns—are shaping the management of introduced and native species, as values shift towards animal welfare and mutualism. We focus on the issue of deliberate human-caused killing of wildlife, because protests against such management have disrupted traditional political and management structures that favoured eradication of wildlife across many jurisdictions and ecological contexts. In doing so, we show that it is essential to work with multiple stakeholder interest groups to ensure that wildlife management is informed by science, while also supported by public values. Achieving this hinges on appropriate science communication to build a better-informed public because management decisions are becoming increasingly democratised.

Controversial wildlife conservation and management, such as that involving gray wolves (Canis lupus), can be symbolic of broader social conflicts. We conducted an online survey (N = 420) to determine factors shaping public attitudes toward wolf management among residents of Washington state, United States. We used 12 Likert‐type statements to form a single latent construct that represented attitudes toward wolf management in a multi‐use landscape and fit a simple structural equation model to identify demographic predictor variables. The strongest predictors were that voters self‐identifying as Democrats were more likely to hold positive attitudes toward wolves and management to conserve them than those identifying with other political parties (standardized latent variable coefficient = 0.585) and women were more likely than men to hold negative attitudes (−0.459). Older respondents were also more likely to hold negative attitudes (−0.015) and respondents who tried to stay informed about wolf issues were more likely to hold positive attitudes (0.172). Perceived links between wildlife management issues and political ideology may exacerbate community disagreements, hindering coexistence between rural livelihoods and wolves. We recommend appropriate framing and messengers to account for this linkage and improve communication of policy and promote science‐based decision‐making.

Free‐roaming domestic cats pose risks to wildlife, domestic animals, humans, and importantly, the cats themselves. Behavior change campaigns that seek to minimize these risks by increasing cat containment require an understanding of the factors that predict cat owners' containment behaviors. We conducted an online survey in Victoria, Australia (N = 1,024) to identify cat owners' (N = 220) behaviors in containing their cats, explore beliefs and attitudes that predict containment behavior, and compare attitudes about cat containment with respondents that do not own cats (N = 804). We found that 53% of cat owning respondents do not allow any roaming. These respondents were more likely to hold concerns about risks to cats' safety while roaming and less likely to perceive that cats have a right to roam. Concern about impacts to wildlife was not a significant predictor of containment behavior. Expectations that cat owners should manage cats' roaming behavior was a social norm among cat owners and other respondents, and cat containers were more likely to indicate that they would try to change behaviors of their peers that they perceived to be harmful to the environment. Cat containment campaigns could be improved by appealing to owners' concerns about cat well‐being, engaging respected messengers that align with these concerns, including owners who already contain their cats.

That dogs can live and breed as free-living animals contributes to public health risks including zoonotic transmission, dog bites, and compromising people’s sense of safety in public spaces. In Australia, free-living dog populations are comprised of domestic dogs, dingoes, and dog–dingo hybrids, and are described using various terms (for example, stray or community), depending on social or geographic context. Urban expansion and regional migration mean that risks associated with contact between humans and free-living dogs are increasing. Public health authorities, local governments, and community organisations have called for transdisciplinary partnerships to address dog-related health risks with a sustainable long-term approach. Values pluralism and a lack of sustained community engagement in affected areas have meant that the outcome of such efforts to date has been mixed. To identify ideas in public circulation about the impact of unrestrained and free-living dogs on human health and well-being, and understand the framework through which these animals are problematised and solutions are proposed in public discourse, we systematically examined coverage of these issues in print media. Our analyses indicate that reporting in Australian newspapers tends to frame the public health impacts of free-living dogs as problems of public order requiring direct government action to re-establish control. The public health impacts of free-living dog populations in Australia have complex causes that intersect at the nexus between human and canine behaviour, agricultural and land management practices, local bylaws, and efforts to conserve ecological systems. Placing responsibility on governments limits opportunities for greater community involvement in developing integrated One Health approaches. Better-quality evidence of the impacts of dog populations on community health and well-being, and broad community support are needed to reshape public debates on animal control, which, ultimately, will promote more effective approaches to mitigate dog-related public health risks at the human–animal–environment interface.

Expert elicitation can be valuable for informing decision‐makers on conservation and wildlife management issues. To date, studies eliciting expert opinions have primarily focused on identifying and building consensus on key issues. Nonetheless, there are drawbacks of a strict focus on consensus, and it is important to understand and emphasize dissent, too. This study adopts a dissensus‐based Delphi to understand conflict among dingo experts. Twenty‐eight experts participated in three rounds of investigation. We highlight disagreement on most of the issues explored. In particular, we find that disagreement is underpinned by what we call “conflict over values” and “conflict over evidence.” We also note the broader role played by distrust in influencing such conflicts. Understanding and recognizing the different elements shaping disagreement is critical for informing and improving decision‐making and can also enable critique of dominant paradigms in current practices. We encourage greater reflexivity and open deliberation on these aspects and hope our study will inform similar investigations in other contexts. This study entails a social investigation into why experts may disagree about conservation and wildlife management issues, stressing the importance of understanding and emphasizing dissent in current practices. In particular, we outline “conflict over values” and “conflict over evidence” as two aspects shaping experts' disagreement, and discuss the role of distrust in influencing such conflicts.