A “landscape of fear” (LOF) is a map that describes continuous spatial variation in an animal's perception of predation risk. The relief on this map reflects, for example, places that an animal avoids to minimize risk. Although the LOF concept is a potentially unifying theme in ecology that is often invoked to explain the ecological and conservation significance of fear, little is known about the daily dynamics of an LOF. Despite theory and data to the contrary, investigators often assume, implicitly or explicitly, that an LOF is a static consequence of a predator's mere presence within an ecosystem. We tested the prediction that an LOF in a large‐scale, free‐living system is a highly dynamic map with “peaks” and “valleys” that alternate across the diel (24‐h) cycle in response to daily lulls in predator activity. We did so with extensive data from the case study of Yellowstone elk (Cervus elaphus) and wolves (Canis lupus) that was the original basis for the LOF concept. We quantified the elk LOF, defined here as spatial allocation of time away from risky places and times, across nearly 1,000‐km2 of northern Yellowstone National Park and found that it fluctuated with the crepuscular activity pattern of wolves, enabling elk to use risky places during wolf downtimes. This may help explain evidence that wolf predation risk has no effect on elk stress levels, body condition, pregnancy, or herbivory. The ability of free‐living animals to adaptively allocate habitat use across periods of high and low predator activity within the diel cycle is an underappreciated aspect of animal behavior that helps explain why strong antipredator responses may trigger weak ecological effects, and why an LOF may have less conceptual and practical importance than direct killing.

Injury and death from wildlife attacks often result in people feeling violent resentment and hostility against the wildlife involved and, therefore, may undermine public support for conservation. Although Nepal, with rich biodiversity, is doing well in its conservation efforts, human-wildlife conflicts have been a major challenge in recent years. The lack of detailed information on the spatial and temporal patterns of human-wildlife conflicts at the national level impedes the development of effective conflict mitigation plans. We examined patterns of human injury and death caused by large mammals using data from attack events and their spatiotemporal dimensions collected from a national survey of data available in Nepal over five years (2010–2014). Data were analyzed using logistic regression and chi-square or Fisher's exact tests. The results show that Asiatic elephants and common leopards are most commonly involved in attacks on people in terms of attack frequency and fatalities. Although one-horned rhinoceros and bears had a higher frequency of attacks than Bengal tigers, tigers caused more fatalities than each of these two species. Attacks by elephants peaked in winter and most frequently occurred outside protected areas in human settlements. Leopard attacks occurred almost entirely outside protected areas, and a significantly greater number of attacks occurred in human settlements. Attacks by one-horned rhinoceros and tigers were higher in the winter, mainly in forests inside protected areas; similarly, attacks by bears occurred mostly within protected areas. We found that human settlements are increasingly becoming conflict hotspots, with burgeoning incidents involving elephants and leopards. We conclude that species-specific conservation strategies are urgently needed, particularly for leopards and elephants. The implications of our findings for minimizing conflicts and conserving these imperiled species are discussed.

Focus on minority experiences in STEM, not just numbers

No abstract

Many ecosystems contain sympatric predator species that hunt in different places and times. We tested whether this provides vacant hunting domains, places and times where and when predators are least active, that prey use to minimize threats from multiple predators simultaneously. We measured how northern Yellowstone elk (Cervus elaphus) responded to wolves (Canis lupus) and cougars (Puma concolor), and found that elk selected for areas outside the high‐risk domains of both predators consistent with the vacant domain hypothesis. This enabled elk to avoid one predator without necessarily increasing its exposure to the other. Our results demonstrate how the diel cycle can serve as a key axis of the predator hunting domain that prey exploit to manage predation risk from multiple sources. We argue that a multi‐predator, spatiotemporal framework is vital to understand the causes and consequences of prey spatial response to predation risk in environments with more than one predator.

No abstract

Historically, the plains bison (Bison bison Linnaeus) was the most numerous and influential grazer on the Great Plains. Today 500 000 bison occupy North America among more than 100 000 000 cattle. In an attempt to restore their historical ecological role, bison are translocated onto landscapes previously manipulated for cattle use through water and fence development. We hypothesized that bison would use these landscapes similarly to cattle, thus maintaining homogenous grazing and reducing the restoration potential of bison at a landscape scale. We quantified differences between bison populations at different locations and spatial scales

Research on the ecology of fear has highlighted the importance of perceived risk from predators and humans in shaping animal behavior and physiology, with potential demographic and ecosystem-wide consequences. Despite recent conceptual advances and potential management implications of the ecology of fear, theory and conservation practices have rarely been linked. Many challenges in animal conservation may be alleviated by actively harnessing or compensating for risk perception and risk avoidance behavior in wild animal populations. Integration of the ecology of fear into conservation and management practice can contribute to the recovery of threatened populations, human-wildlife conflict mitigation, invasive species management, maintenance of sustainable harvest and species reintroduction plans. Here, we present an applied framework that links conservation interventions to desired outcomes by manipulating ecology of fear dynamics. We discuss how to reduce or amplify fear in wild animals by manipulating habitat structure, sensory stimuli, animal experience (previous exposure to risk) and food safety trade-offs to achieve management objectives. Changing the optimal decision-making of individuals in managed populations can then further conservation goals by shaping the spatiotemporal distribution of animals, changing predation rates and altering risk effects that scale up to demographic consequences. We also outline future directions for applied research on fear ecology that will better inform conservation practices. Our framework can help scientists and practitioners anticipate and mitigate unintended consequences of management decisions, and highlight new levers for multi-species conservation strategies that promote human-wildlife coexistence. An applied ecology of fear framework Scientists and practitioners recognize the importance of considering animal behavior when designing conservation strategies for wild animal populations (Burt, 1943; Martin, 1998). Knowledge of habitat selection, mating systems and sociality, for example, have informed habitat and population management strategies (Festa-Bianchet & Apollonio, 2003; Blumstein & Fern andez-Juricic, 2010). Behaviors related to risk avoidance have also received some attention in the management arena, generally in the context of deterrents that aim to instill fear and flight responses in pest species to reduce undesired behaviors (Miller et al., 2016). However, proactive risk Animal Conservation (2020)ª 2020 The Zoological Society of London 1 Animal Conservation.