Summary1. There is a growing theoretical basis for the role of predation risk as a driver of trophic interactions, conceptualized as the 'ecology of fear'. However, current ungulate management ignores the role of nonlethal risk effects of predation. 2. We introduce the concept of 'hunting for fear' as an extension of the more classical 'hunting to kill' that is typically used in large herbivore management. Hunting for fear aims to induce a behavioural response in ungulates, for example, as a way of diverting them from areas where their impact is undesired. 3. Synthesis and applications. Hunting for fear asks for novel, potentially controversial, ways of hunting to induce strong enough risk effects, including more hunting on foot and with dogs, extended hunting seasons (ideally year-round) and increased hunting of calves. Hunting for fear may offer novel opportunities to help manage the growing human-wildlife conflicts that we experience globally.

No abstract

Aim We aimed to describe the large-scale patterns in population density of roe deer Caprelous capreolus in Europe and to determine the factors shaping variation in their abundance. Location Europe.Methods We collated data on roe deer population density from 72 localities spanning 25°latitude and 48°longitude and analysed them in relation to a range of environmental factors: vegetation productivity (approximated by the fraction of photosynthetically active radiation) and forest cover as proxies for food supply, winter severity, summer drought and presence or absence of large predators (wolf, Canis lupus, and Eurasian lynx, Lynx lynx), hunter harvest and a competitor (red deer, Cervus elaphus). ResultsRoe deer abundance increased with the overall productivity of vegetation cover and with lower forest cover (sparser forest cover means that a higher proportion of overall plant productivity is allocated to ground vegetation and thus is available to roe deer). The effect of large predators was relatively weak in highly productive environments and in regions with mild climate, but increased markedly in regions with low vegetation productivity and harsh winters. Other potentially limiting factors (hunting, summer drought and competition with red deer) had no significant impact on roe deer abundance. Main conclusionsThe analyses revealed the combined effect of bottom-up and top-down control on roe deer: on a biogeographical scale, population abundance of roe deer has been shaped by food-related factors and large predators, with additive effects of the two species of predators. The results have implications for management of roe deer populations in Europe. First, an increase in roe deer abundance can be expected as environmental productivity increases due to climate change. Secondly, recovery plans for large carnivores should take environmental productivity and winter severity into account when predicting their impact on prey.