How long do anti-predator interventions remain effective? Patterns, thresholds and uncertainty

Predator in proximity: how does a large carnivore respond to anthropogenic pressures at fine-scales? Implications for interface area management

Background

Driven by habitat loss and fragmentation, large carnivores are increasingly navigating human-dominated landscapes, where their activity is restricted and their behaviour altered. This movement, however, raises significant concerns and costs for people living nearby. While intricately linked, studies often isolate human and carnivore impacts, hindering effective management efforts. Hence, in this study, we brought these two into a common framework, focusing on an interface area between the critical tiger habitat and the human-dominated multiple-use buffer area of a central Indian protected area.

Methods

We employed a fine-scale camera trap survey complemented by GPS-collar movement data to understand spatio-temporal activity patterns and adjustments of tigers in response to anthropogenic pressures. We used an occupancy framework to evaluate space use, Bayesian circular GLMs to model temporal activity, and home range and step length analyses to assess the movement patterns of tigers. Further, we used predation-risk models to understand conflict patterns as a function of tiger presence and other habitat variables.

Results

Despite disturbance, a high proportion of the sampled area was occupied by 17 unique tigers (ψ = 0.76; CI [0.73-0.92]). The distance to villages (β ± SE = 0.63 ± 0.21) and the relative abundance of large-bodied wild prey (β ± SE = 0.72 ± 0.37) emerged as key predictors of tiger space use probability, indicating a preference for wild prey by tigers, while human influences constrained their habitat utilisation. Distance to villages was also identified as the most significant predictor of the tigers' temporal activity (μ ± σ = 3.03 ± 0.06 rad) that exhibited higher nocturnality near villages. A total of 11% of tiger home ranges were within village boundaries, accompanied by faster movement in these areas (displacement 40-82% higher). Livestock depredation probability by tigers increased with proximity to villages (P = 0.002) and highway (P = 0.003). Although tiger space use probability (P = 0.056) and wild prey abundance (P = 0.134) were non-significant at the 0.05 threshold, their presence in the best-fit predation-risk model suggests their contextual relevance for understanding conflict risk. The results highlight the importance of appropriately managing livestock near human infrastructures to effectively mitigate conflict.

Conclusions

Shared space of carnivores and humans requires dynamic site-specific actions grounded in evidence-based decision-making. This study emphasises the importance of concurrently addressing the intricate interactions between humans and large carnivores, particularly the latter's behavioural adaptations and role in conflict dynamics. Such an integrated approach is essential to unravel cause-effect relationships and promote effective interface management in human-dominated landscapes.

Integrating robotics into wildlife conservation: testing improvements to predator deterrents through movement

Background

Agricultural and pastoral landscapes can provide important habitat for wildlife conservation, but sharing these landscapes with wildlife can create conflict that is costly and requires managing. Livestock predation is a good example of the challenges involving coexistence with wildlife across shared landscapes. Integrating new technology into agricultural practices could help minimize human-wildlife conflict. In this study, we used concepts from the fields of robotics (i.e., automated movement and adaptiveness) and agricultural practices (i.e., managing livestock risk to predation) to explore how integration of these concepts could aid the development of more effective predator deterrents.

Methods

We used a colony of captive coyotes as a model system, and simulated predation events with meat baits inside and outside of protected zones. Inside the protected zones we used a remote-controlled vehicle with a state-of-the art, commercially available predator deterrent (i.e., Foxlight) mounted on the top and used this to test three treatments: (1) light only (i.e., without movement or adaptiveness), (2) predetermined movement (i.e., with movement and without adaptiveness), and (3) adaptive movement (i.e., with both movement and adaptiveness). We measured the time it took for coyotes to eat the baits and analyzed the data with a time-to-event survival strategy.

Results

Survival of baits was consistently higher inside the protected zone, and the three movement treatments incrementally increased survival time over baseline except for the light only treatment in the nonprotected zone. Incorporating predetermined movement essentially doubled the efficacy of the light only treatment both inside and outside the protected zone. Incorporating adaptive movement exponentially increased survival time both inside and outside the protected zone. Our findings provide compelling evidence that incorporating existing robotics capabilities (predetermined and adaptive movement) could greatly enhance protection of agricultural resources and aid in the development of nonlethal tools for managing wildlife. Our findings also demonstrate the importance of marrying agricultural practices (e.g., spatial management of livestock at night) with new technology to improve the efficacy of wildlife deterrents.

The current state of carnivore cognition

The field of animal cognition has advanced rapidly in the last 25 years. Through careful and creative studies of animals in captivity and in the wild, we have gained critical insights into the evolution of intelligence, the cognitive capacities of a diverse array of taxa, and the importance of ecological and social environments, as well as individual variation, in the expression of cognitive abilities. The field of animal cognition, however, is still being influenced by some historical tendencies. For example, primates and birds are still the majority of study species in the field of animal cognition. Studies of diverse taxa improve the generalizability of our results, are critical for testing evolutionary hypotheses, and open new paths for understanding cognition in species with vastly different morphologies. In this paper, we review the current state of knowledge of cognition in mammalian carnivores. We discuss the advantages of studying cognition in Carnivorans and the immense progress that has been made across many cognitive domains in both lab and field studies of carnivores. We also discuss the current constraints that are associated with studying carnivores. Finally, we explore new directions for future research in studies of carnivore cognition.

Chicken's best friend? Livestock guardian dog bonding with free-ranging chickens

Growth in the free-range and pastured egg industries has increased globally, necessitating improvements in predator control. Some egg producers are turning to the use of livestock guardian dogs (LGD; Canis familiaris) to protect hens from predation. We worked on a property where pastured layer hens were protected by two Maremma LGDs that were released from their chicken enclosure for 2-3 nights a week. GPS tracking showed that the dogs were more strongly bonded to people than the chickens, spending most of their time at night (96.1% of location data) close to the farmhouse and only 0.09% near their chicken paddock. Despite this lack of attendance, we found no change in the paddock space use by chickens with or without the dogs present (P = 0.999). Furthermore, camera trapping revealed 40 red fox (Vulpes vulpes) events over the 46-d monitoring period, with less fox activity on nights when the LGDs were allowed to roam the property and motion-activated spotlights were also deployed (P = 0.048). An online survey of 59 poultry producers found strong belief in the effectiveness of LGDs, although half the respondents (52%) indicated that they were still experiencing predation issues. There was no association with the reported degree of human bonding of their LGDs, but respondents were more likely to report current issues with predators if they owned 100 or more chickens (P = 0.031). The present case study as well as the farmer survey have identified that LGDs can be strongly bonded to people. Although there was no evidence of subsequently increased risk of predation, bonding with people could draw LGDs away from the animals they should be defending, with predation risk for poultry likely to depend on how far away LGDs move from their livestock.

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.

Effectiveness of interventions for managing human-large carnivore conflicts worldwide: Scare them off, don't remove them

Human-wildlife conflicts are associated with a threat to large carnivores, as well as with economic and social costs, thus challenging conservation management around the world. In this study, we explored the effectiveness of common management interventions used worldwide for the purpose of conflict reduction using an evidence-based framework combining expert assessment of intervention effectiveness, impact and uncertainty of assessment. We first conducted a literature review of human-large carnivore conflicts across the world. Based on this review, we identified three main types of management interventions (non-lethal, translocations, and lethal management) and we assessed their effectiveness. Our review indicates that, although the characteristics of conflicts with large carnivores are heavily influenced by the local context and the species, the main issues are depredation on livestock, space-sharing, and attacks on humans. Non-lethal interventions are more likely to reduce conflict, whereas translocations and lethal interventions are mostly ineffective and/or harmful to carnivore populations, without fostering successful long-term coexistence. The literature on conflict management is often imprecise and lacks consistency between studies or situations, which generally makes comparisons difficult. Our protocol allows for the reliable comparison of experiments characterized by heterogeneous standards, response variables, protocols, and quality of evidence. Nevertheless, we encourage the use of systematic protocols with common good standards in order to provide more reliable empirical evidence. This would clarify the relative effectiveness of conflict management strategies and contribute to the global reduction in the occurrence of human-large carnivore conflicts across the world.

Defining practical and robust study designs for interventions targeted at terrestrial mammalian predators

Conflicts between humans and mammalian predators are globally widespread and increasing, creating a long-lasting challenge for conservation and local livelihoods. Protection interventions, which are essential to conflict mitigation, should be based on solid evidence of effectiveness produced by robust study designs. Yet, it is unclear what study designs have been used in predator-targeted interventions and how they can be improved to provide best practices for replications. I examined how applications of five study designs (before-after, before-after-control-impact, control-impact, crossover [i.e., the same randomly assigned study units acting as treatments and controls during alternating trials], and randomized controlled trial) have changed over time and how these changes are related to authors, predator species, countries, and intervention types (aversion, husbandry, mixed interventions, invasive management, lethal control, and noninvasive management). I applied multinomial regression modeling to 434 cases (28 predator species and 45 countries) from 244 studies published from 1955 to 2020. Study design was related only to intervention type. Less reliable before-after and control-impact studies were the most common (47.7% and 38.2% of cases, respectively), and their use increased over years as did all interventions. The contribution of the most robust before-after-control-impact (7.4%), randomized controlled trial (5.3%), and crossover designs (1.4%) remained minor over time. Crossover is suitable for aversion, most husbandry techniques, and a few other interventions, but crossover interventions also have the most limitations in terms of applicability. Randomized controlled trial is generally applicable, but impractical or inappropriate for some interventions, and before-after-control-impact appears to be the most widely applicable study design for predator-targeted interventions.

Setting Statistical Thresholds Is Useful to Define Truly Effective Conservation Interventions

Effective interventions are needed to solve conflicts between humans and predators over livestock killing, nuisance behavior, and attacks on pets and humans. Progress in quantification of evidence-based effectiveness and selection of the best interventions raises new questions, such as the existence of thresholds to identify truly effective interventions. Current classification of more and less effective interventions is subjective and statistically unjustified. This study describes a novel method to differentiate true and untrue effectiveness on a basis of false positive risk (FPR). I have collected 152 cases of applications of damage-reducing interventions from 102 scientific publications, 26 countries, 22 predator species, and 6 categories of interventions. The analysis has shown that the 95% confidence interval of the relative risk of predator-caused damage was 0.10–0.25 for true effectiveness (FPR < 0.05) and 0.35–0.56 for untrue effectiveness (FPR ≥ 0.05). This means that damage was reduced by 75–90% for truly effective interventions and by 44–65% for interventions of untrue effectiveness. Based on this, it was specified that truly effective interventions have the relative risk ≤ 0.25 (damage reduction ≥ 75%) and the effectiveness of interventions with the relative risk > 0.25 (damage reduction < 75%) is untrue. This threshold is statistically well-justified, stable, easy to remember, and practical to use in anti-predator interventions. More research is essential to know how this threshold holds true for other conservation interventions aiming to reduce negative outcomes (e.g., poaching rates) or increase positive outcomes (e.g., species richness).

Dealing with false positive risk as an indicator of misperceived effectiveness of conservation interventions

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.

Use of European Funds and Ex Post Evaluation of Prevention Measures against Wolf Attacks (Canis lupus italicus) in the Emilia-Romagna Region (Italy)

INTRODUCTION

Compensation programs are an important tool for mitigating conflicts between farmers and large predators. However, they present significant weaknesses and faults. For years, the EU has been prioritizing programs for the prevention of damage caused by large carnivores, rather than compensation programs, introducing compulsory compensation for the purposes of decision EC (2019) 772 of 29/01/19. This manuscript reports the experience with the wolf damage prevention programs in an Italian region, Emilia-Romagna, which implemented a pilot project, adopting a new method to interface with the farmers involved in the prevention programs.

METHODS

Starting in 2014, a project aimed at spreading prevention measures was financed through regional and European resources, accompanied by resources sharing and technical assistance with breeders from the regional body. In detail, (i) standardized types of intervention were defined and technical assistance was structured; (ii) ex post, the effectiveness of the interventions carried out was assessed; and (iii) the difficulties encountered in using the various financing instruments were analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, 298 farms were analyzed, of which 166 applied for regional calls and 132 applied for European funds. The mitigation measures produced a reduction in predatory phenomena of 93.4%, i.e., from 528 to 35 predations over a period of 4-6 years. This study shows that more than one-third of the farmers were forced to abandon the two tenders, mainly due to the lack of liquidity in anticipating the prevention measures.

CONCLUSION

In the years examined by this study, the prevention programs in the Emilia-Romagna region, due to the technical support offered, proved to be a functional and effective tool, capable of significantly reducing the wolf predation on livestock. However, this work highlights the high percentage of denials of mitigation measures by farmers interested in adopting these tools, stressing the need for regional agencies to focus on new policies that can provide advance economic resources to farmers and solve the authorization problems related to the various bodies with which the participant in the tenders must interface.

Cost of Coexisting with a Relict Large Carnivore Population: Impact of Apennine Brown Bears, 2005-2015

Human-carnivore conflicts are a major conservation issue. As bears are expanding their range in Europe's human-modified landscapes, it is increasingly important to understand, prevent, and address human-bear conflicts and evaluate mitigation strategies in areas of historical coexistence. Based on verified claims, we assessed costs, patterns, and drivers of bear damages in the relict Apennine brown bear population in the Abruzzo Lazio and Molise National Park (PNALM), central Italy. During 2005-2015, 203 ± 71 (SD) damage events were verified annually, equivalent to 75,987 ± 30,038 €/year paid for compensation. Most damages occurred in summer and fall, with livestock depredation, especially sheep and cattle calves, prevailing over other types of damages, with apiaries ranking second in costs of compensation. Transhumant livestock owners were less impacted than residential ones, and farms that adopted prevention measures loaned from the PNALM were less susceptible to bear damages. Livestock farms chronically damaged by bears represented 8 ± 3% of those annually impacted, corresponding to 24 ± 6% of compensation costs. Further improvements in the conflict mitigation policy adopted by the PNALM include integrated prevention, conditional compensation, and participatory processes. We discuss the implications of our study for Human-bear coexistence in broader contexts.

The canid pest ejector challenge: controlling urban foxes while keeping domestic dogs safe

Abstract ContextIt is widely recognised that red foxes (Vulpes vulpes) are abundant within urban areas; however, it is difficult to apply lethal control measures using poison baits in cities because of concerns about the safety of domestic pets, particularly dogs (Canis familiaris). AimsWe tested canid pest ejectors (CPEs) as a potential method of fox control by measuring visitation and activation behaviour of foxes and other wildlife while assessing non-target risk to domestic dogs. MethodsWe compared eight urban and eight peri-urban sites in Sydney, with half of the sites having restricted access for domestic dogs. We allocated five camera traps and ejectors per site. Through generalised linear mixed models, we compared the probability of ejector activation between foxes and dogs. We also assessed the relationship between dog visitation and distance to habitation and dog restrictions as measures of dog safety. Key resultsBoth species of canids were equally likely to pull the ejector (P=0.26). As expected, dog visitation was significantly lower in sites with dog restrictions (P&lt;0.001). However, it was not related to distance from habitation. Only two non-canid species were recorded pulling the ejector, suggesting high target-specificity for canids. ConclusionsIn sites with dog restrictions, the risk of dog casualties from CPEs is minimal. However, distance from habitation does not increase dog safety, at least within 250m. The ejector is highly specific for canids. ImplicationsWe provide specific recommendations for the design of a potential fox control program using CPEs in urban and peri-urban areas. The ejector may be a safe method for fox control in cities when deployed at places without domestic dogs.

A comparison of common metrics used to quantify the effectiveness of conservation interventions

Background

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.

Methods

In this study, a dataset (n = 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.

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.

Conclusion

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.

Variation and conservation implications of the effectiveness of anti-bear interventions

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.

The Fox and the Crow. A need to update pest control strategies

The recent discovery that cats and mustelids can be infected by SARS-CoV-2 may raise the question of monitoring domestic, feral and wild populations of such animals, as an adjunct to the elimination of COVID-19 in humans. Emergency solutions might consider large scale control of these animals in the wild. However, looking at science recently published on native vertebrate pest control reveals first that usual controls do not succeed in reducing animal numbers and associated damages, second that controlling can be counter-productive in increasing the infectious risks for humans and livestock. The examples of red fox and corvids are detailed in a European context, illustrating the urgent need for an ethical evaluation of ecological and economic costs and benefits of pest control strategies. A complete scientific evaluation process must be implemented and up-dated regularly, to be organized in four major steps, once the aim of the control strategy has been defined: (1) evaluating damages/risks caused by the animals, to be balanced with the ecosystem services they may provide, also in terms of economic costs; (2) unravelling spatial and temporal population dynamics of target animals to identify, if any, optimal control scenarios - which could be done within an adaptive management framework; (3) estimating the economic costs of implementing those optimal control scenarios, to be compared to the economic costs of damages/diseases; (4) finally evaluating how the control strategy reached its aims. A modern fable of the Fox and the Crow should deliver a timely moral for an ethical, ecological and economical appraisal of pest control strategies in Europe.