Many wildlife species face imminent extinction because of human impacts, and therefore, a prevailing belief is that some wildlife species, particularly large carnivores and ungulates, cannot coexist with people at fine spatial scales (i.e., cannot regularly use the exact same point locations). This belief provides rationale for various conservation programs, such as resettling human communities outside protected areas. However, quantitative information on the capacity and mechanisms for wildlife to coexist with humans at fine spatial scales is scarce. Such information is vital, because the world is becoming increasingly crowded. Here, we provide empirical information about the capacity and mechanisms for tigers (a globally endangered species) to coexist with humans at fine spatial scales inside and outside Nepal's Chitwan National Park, a flagship protected area for imperiled wildlife. Information obtained from field cameras in 2010 and 2011 indicated that human presence (i.e., people on foot and vehicles) was ubiquitous and abundant throughout the study site; however, tiger density was also high. Surprisingly, even at a fine spatial scale (i.e., camera locations), tigers spatially overlapped with people on foot and vehicles in both years. However, in both years, tigers offset their temporal activity patterns to be much less active during the day when human activity peaked. In addition to temporal displacement, tiger-human coexistence was likely enhanced by abundant tiger prey and low levels of tiger poaching. Incorporating fine-scale spatial and temporal activity patterns into conservation plans can help address a major global challenge-meeting human needs while sustaining wildlife.adaptation | coupled human and natural systems | ecosystem services | overlap | sustainability

In an unprecedented response to the rapid decline in wild tiger populations, the Heads of Government of the 13 tiger range countries endorsed the St. Petersburg Declaration in November 2010, pledging to double the wild tiger population. We conducted a landscape analysis of tiger habitat to determine if a recovery of such magnitude is possible. The reserves in 20 priority tiger landscapes can potentially support >10,000 tigers, almost thrice the current estimate. However, most core reserves where tigers breed are small and land-use change in rapidly developing Asia threatens to increase reserve and population isolation. Maintaining population viability and resilience will depend upon a landscape approach to manage tigers as metapopulations. Thus, both site-level protection and landscape-scale interventions to secure habitat corridors are simultaneous imperatives. Co-benefits, such as payment schemes for carbon and other ecosystem services, should be employed as strategies to mainstream landscape conservation in tiger habitat into development processes.

Human–elephant conflict is one of the main threats to the long-term survival of the Asian elephant Elephas maximus. We studied the nature and extent of human–elephant interactions in the buffer zones of Chitwan National Park and Parsa Wildlife Reserve in Nepal, through household questionnaire surveys, key informant interviews, site observations, and analysis of the reported cases of damage during January 2008–December 2012. During this 5-year period 290 incidents of damage by elephants were reported, with a high concentration of incidents in a few locations. Property damage (53%) was the most common type of damage reported. Crop damage was reported less often but household surveys revealed it to be the most frequent form of conflict. There were also human casualties, including 21 deaths and four serious injuries. More than 90% of the human casualties occurred during 2010–2012. More than two thirds of the respondents (70%) perceived that human–elephant conflict had increased substantially during the previous 5 years. Despite the increase in incidents of human–elephant conflict in the area, 37% of respondents had positive attitudes towards elephant conservation. Our findings suggest that public awareness and compensation for losses could reduce conflict and contribute to ensuring coexistence of people and elephants in this human-dominated landscape.

Tigers are globally endangered and continue to decline due to poaching, prey depletion and habitat loss. In Nepal, tiger populations are fragmented and found mainly in four protected areas (PAs). To establish the use of standard methods, to assess the importance of prey availability and human disturbance on tiger presence and to assess tiger occupancy both inside and outside PAs, we conducted a tiger occupancy survey throughout the Terai Arc Landscape of Nepal. Our model‐average estimate of the probability of tiger site occupancy was 0.366 [standard error (se) = 0.02, a 7% increase from the naive estimate] and the probability of detection estimate was 0.65 (se = 0.08) per 1 km searched. Modeled tiger site occupancy ranged from 0.04 (se = 0.05) in areas with a relatively lower prey base and higher human disturbance to 1 (se = 0 and 0.14) in areas with a higher prey base and lower human disturbance. We estimated tigers occupied just 5049 (se = 3) km2 (36%) of 13 915 km2 potential tiger habitat (forests and grasslands), and we detected sign in four of five key corridors linking PAs across Nepal and India, respectively indicating significant unoccupied areas likely suitable for tigers and substantial potential for tiger dispersal. To increase tiger populations and to promote long‐term persistence in Nepal, otherwise suitable areas should be managed to increase prey and minimize human disturbance especially in critical corridors linking core tiger populations.

We studied the diets of low‐density but increasing populations of sympatric Asian elephants Elephas maximus and greater one‐horned rhinoceros Rhinoceros unicornis in the Bardia National Park in lowland Nepal. A microhistological technique based on faecal material was used to estimate the seasonal diet composition of the two megaherbivores. Rhinos ate more grass than browse in all seasons, and their grass/browse ratio was significantly higher than that of elephants. Both species ate more browse in the dry season, with bark constituting an estimated 73% of the elephant diet in the cool part of that season. Diet overlap was high in the resource‐rich monsoon season and lower in the resource‐poor dry season, indicating partitioning of food between the two species in the period of resource limitation. Both species consumed large amounts of the floodplain grass Saccharum spontaneum, particularly during the monsoon season. As the numbers of both species increase, intraspecific and interspecific competition for S. spontaneum in the limited floodplains is likely to occur. Owing to their higher grass diet and more restricted all‐year home ranges within the floodplain habitat complex, rhinos are then expected to be affected more than elephants.