Wolves make roadways safer, generating large economic returns to predator conservation

White-tailed deer population dynamics in a multipredator landscape shaped by humans

Large terrestrial mammals increasingly rely on human-modified landscapes as anthropogenic footprints expand. Land management activities such as timber harvest, agriculture, and roads can influence prey population dynamics by altering forage resources and predation risk via changes in habitat, but these effects are not well understood in regions with diverse and changing predator guilds. In northeastern Washington state, USA, white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) are vulnerable to multiple carnivores, including recently returned gray wolves (Canis lupus), within a highly human-modified landscape. To understand the factors governing predator-prey dynamics in a human context, we radio-collared 280 white-tailed deer, 33 bobcats (Lynx rufus), 50 cougars (Puma concolor), 28 coyotes (C. latrans), and 14 wolves between 2016 and 2021. We first estimated deer vital rates and used a stage-structured matrix model to estimate their population growth rate. During the study, we observed a stable to declining deer population (lambda = 0.97, 95% confidence interval: 0.88, 1.05), with 74% of Monte Carlo simulations indicating population decrease and 26% of simulations indicating population increase. We then fit Cox proportional hazard models to evaluate how predator exposure, use of human-modified landscapes, and winter severity influenced deer survival and used these relationships to evaluate impacts on overall population growth. We found that the population growth rate was dually influenced by a negative direct effect of apex predators and a positive effect of timber harvest and agricultural areas. Cougars had a stronger effect on deer population dynamics than wolves, and mesopredators had little influence on the deer population growth rate. Areas of recent timber harvest had 55% more forage biomass than older forests, but horizontal visibility did not differ, suggesting that timber harvest did not influence predation risk. Although proximity to roads did not affect the overall population growth rate, vehicle collisions caused a substantial proportion of deer mortalities, and reducing these collisions could be a win-win for deer and humans. The influence of apex predators and forage indicates a dual limitation by top-down and bottom-up factors in this highly human-modified system, suggesting that a reduction in apex predators would intensify density-dependent regulation of the deer population owing to limited forage availability.

Mammal responses to global changes in human activity vary by trophic group and landscape

Wildlife must adapt to human presence to survive in the Anthropocene, so it is critical to understand species responses to humans in different contexts. We used camera trapping as a lens to view mammal responses to changes in human activity during the COVID-19 pandemic. Across 163 species sampled in 102 projects around the world, changes in the amount and timing of animal activity varied widely. Under higher human activity, mammals were less active in undeveloped areas but unexpectedly more active in developed areas while exhibiting greater nocturnality. Carnivores were most sensitive, showing the strongest decreases in activity and greatest increases in nocturnality. Wildlife managers must consider how habituation and uneven sensitivity across species may cause fundamental differences in human-wildlife interactions along gradients of human influence.

A phenology of fear: Investigating scale and seasonality in predator-prey games between wolves and white-tailed deer

Predators and prey engage in games where each player must counter the moves of the other, and these games include multiple phases operating at different spatiotemporal scales. Recent work has highlighted potential issues related to scale-sensitive inferences in predator-prey interactions, and there is growing appreciation that these may exhibit pronounced but predictable dynamics. Motivated by previous assertions about effects arising from foraging games between white-tailed deer and canid predators (coyotes and wolves), we used a large and year-round network of trail cameras to characterize deer and predator foraging games, with a particular focus on clarifying its temporal scale and seasonal variation. Linear features were strongly associated with predator detection rates, suggesting these play a central role in canid foraging tactics by expediting movement. Consistent with expectations for prey contending with highly mobile predators, deer responses were more sensitive to proximal risk metrics at finer spatiotemporal scales, suggesting that coarser but more commonly used scales of analysis may miss useful insights into prey risk-response. Time allocation appears to be a key tactic for deer risk management and was more strongly moderated by factors associated with forage or evasion heterogeneity (forest cover, snow and plant phenology) than factors associated with the likelihood of predator encounter (linear features). Trade-offs between food and safety appeared to vary as much seasonally as spatially, with snow and vegetation phenology giving rise to a "phenology of fear." Deer appear free to counter predators during milder times of year, but a combination of poor foraging state, reduced forage availability, greater movements costs, and reproductive state dampen responsiveness during winter. Pronounced intra-annual variation in predator-prey interactions may be common in seasonal environments.

The unequal burden of human-wildlife conflict

Human-wildlife conflict is one of the most pressing sustainable development challenges globally. This is particularly the case where ecologically and economically important wildlife impact the livelihoods of humans. Large carnivores are one such group and their co-occurrence with low-income rural communities often results in real or perceived livestock losses that place increased costs on already impoverished households. Here we show the disparities associated with the vulnerability to conflict arising from large carnivores on cattle (Bos taurus) globally. Across the distribution of 18 large carnivores, we find that the economic vulnerability to predation losses (as measured by impacts to annual per capita income) is between two and eight times higher for households in transitioning and developing economies when compared to developed ones. This potential burden is exacerbated further in developing economies because cattle keepers in these areas produce on average 31% less cattle meat per animal than in developed economies. In the lowest-income areas, our estimates suggest that the loss of a single cow or bull equates to nearly a year and a half of lost calories consumed by a child. Finally, our results show that 82% of carnivore range falls outside protected areas, and five threatened carnivores have over one third of their range located in the most economically sensitive conflict areas. This unequal burden of human-carnivore conflict sheds light on the importance of grappling with multiple and conflicting sustainable development goals: protecting life on land and eliminating poverty and hunger.

Patterns of livestock loss associated with a recolonizing wolf population in Germany

Predation on livestock presents a daunting challenge for human–carnivore coexistence in agricultural landscapes. In Germany, the recolonization of wolves is ongoing and its consequences are insufficiently understood. Knowledge about which livestock species are susceptible to wolf predation, which farm types are predisposed to attacks by wolves, and when predation on livestock occurs is valuable for mitigating stakeholder conflicts. To this end, we analyzed 14 years of monitoring data and assessed the livestock prey spectrum, identified correlates between predation on livestock, farm type and livestock category, and described temporal patterns of livestock loss caused by a recolonizing wolf population in the state of Brandenburg (Germany). Among a total of 1387 recorded cases, 42% were unequivocally attributed to wolves (SCALP criteria C1 and C2) and 12% of cases were not caused by wolves. The number of head of livestock killed during a single wolf attack was mediated by farm type and livestock species; losses per event were greater in full-time farms vs. other farm types and greater in sheep, farmed deer and other livestock species, compared to cattle. While sheep were the most commonly killed livestock species, the increase in wolf territories over the investigation period was associated with a widening of the domestic prey species spectrum. Count regression models provided evidence for the increasing frequency of predation events over the 14-year period, along with an exponential increase in wolf territories. Predation on livestock occurred throughout the year, yet seasonality of events was evident and differed across livestock categories. Predation on sheep peaked in the fall, coinciding with the post-weaning period of wolf offspring. Predation on cattle peaked in the spring, coinciding with the cattle calving period. These results call for renewed investment in the implementation of prevention methods for all susceptible domestic species, particularly during times of elevated predation risk.

Permanent daylight saving time would reduce deer-vehicle collisions

Overlap between wildlife and human activity is key to causing wildlife-vehicle collisions, a globally pervasive and growing source of wildlife mortality.^1,2 Policies regarding clock time often involve abrupt seasonal shifts in human activity, potentially influencing rates of human-wildlife conflict. Here, we harness the biannual shift between standard and daylight saving time as a natural experiment to reveal how the timing of human activity influences deer-vehicle collisions. Based on 1,012,465 deer-vehicle collisions and 96 million hourly traffic observations across the United States, we show that collisions are 14 times more frequent 2 hours after sunset than before sunset, highlighting the importance of traffic during dark hours as a key determinant of deer-vehicle collision risk. The switch from daylight saving to standard time in autumn causes peak traffic volumes to shift from before sunset to after sunset, leading to a 16% spike in deer-vehicle collisions. By reducing traffic after dark, our model predicts that year-round daylight saving time would prevent 36,550 deer (Odocoileus sp.) deaths, 33 human deaths, 2,054 human injuries, and US$1.19 billion in collision costs annually. In contrast, permanent standard time is predicted to increase collisions by an even larger magnitude, incurring an additional US$2.39 billion in costs. By targeting the temporal dimension of wildlife-vehicle collisions, strategies such as year-round daylight saving time that reduce traffic during dark hours, especially during the breeding season of abundant ungulates, would yield substantial benefits for wildlife conservation and reduce the social and economic costs of deer-vehicle collisions.

Myths, Wishful Thinking, and Accountability in Predator Conservation and Management in the United States

Large predators are thought of as ecological keystone species, posterchildren of conservation campaigns, and sought-after targets of tourists and photographers. At the same time, predators kill livestock and huntable animals, and occasionally people, triggering fears and antipathy among those living alongside them. Until the 1960’s government-sponsored eradication and persecution campaigns in the United States prioritized interests of livestock producers and recreational hunters, leading to eradication of wolves and bears over much of their range. Without large predators, subsidized by changes in agricultural practices and milder winters, ungulate populations erupted, triggering negative ecological impacts, economic damage, and human health crises (such as tick-borne diseases). Shifting societal preferences have ushered in more predator-friendly, but controversial wildlife policies, from passively allowing range expansion to purposeful reintroductions (such as release of wolves in Yellowstone National Park). Attempts to restore wolves or mountain lions in the U.S. and protecting coyotes appear to enjoy strong public support, but many state wildlife agencies charged with managing wildlife, and recreational hunters continue to oppose such efforts, because they perceive predators as competitors for huntable animals. There may be compelling reasons for restoring predators or allowing them to recolonize their former ranges. But if range expansion or intentional releases of large predators do not result in ecosystem recovery, reduced deer populations, or Lyme disease reductions, conservationists who have put their reputation on the line and assured decision makers and the public of the important functional role of large predators may lose public standing and trust. Exaggerated predictions by ranchers and recreational hunters of greatly reduced ungulate populations and rampant livestock killing by large carnivores may lead to poaching and illegal killing threatening recovery of predator populations. How the return of large carnivores may affect vegetation and successional change, ungulate population size, other biota, livestock and human attitudes in different landscapes has not been appropriately assessed. Societal support and acceptance of living alongside predators as they expand their range and increase in abundance requires development and monitoring of social, ecological and economic indicators to assess how return of large predators affects human and animal and plant livelihoods.

Ojibwe Perspectives Toward Proper Wolf Stewardship and Wisconsin’s February 2021 Wolf Hunting Season

In February 2021, the Wisconsin DNR implemented a wolf season in which > 20% of the population was killed in 63 h. Wisconsin’s Ojibwe tribes had a visceral reaction to this killing. This paper provides a perspective for this reaction by reviewing the Ojibwe relationship with Ma’iingan. This relationship maintains that Ma’iingan and Ojibwe are to be considered relatives whose fates are intertwined. Ma’iingan and Ojibwe have lived parallel histories, suffering from the effects of colonization, the decimation of wolf populations and decline of tribal culture. The Ojibwe tribes ceded vast territories in treaties with the United States while retaining common use rights, including the right to hunt and fish. These rights were reaffirmed just as wolves were reestablishing themselves in Wisconsin. The tribes continue to strengthen their culture, while wolf populations continue to recover. By examining these comparative histories, it becomes apparent that “whatever happens to one happens to the other.” Unfortunately, Ma’iingan were not adjudicated during the Wisconsin treaty case, creating uncertainty over how the relationship between the Ojibwe and Ma’iingan is to be respected by the state. The tribes believe their treaty right includes protection for wolves, so that wolves can fulfill their cultural and ecological purposes. Tribes maintain that Ma’iingan should determine their own population levels, in order to provide ecological and cultural benefits. A respectful and appreciative relationship with Ma’iingan should be maintained so that the future well-being of both Ma’iingan and the Ojibwe will be assured.