Where can wolves live and how can we live with them?

Mech, L. David

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2017.04.029

Cited by 100 publications

(127 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

120

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This may lead to carnivore population declines and loss of community support for conservation (Treves & Karanth, 2003). However, a congruence of carnivore resilience (Chapron et al, 2014;Mech, 2017), conservation policy (Swenson, Linnell, Swenson, & Andersen, 2015;Treves & Karanth, 2003), and local acceptance of carnivores (Carter & Linnell, 2016) has enabled carnivores to persist in "shared spaces" in many countries (Lindenmayer et al, 2008). While Europe and North America are witnessing recolonization of large carnivores in human-modified landscapes following their mass persecution (Chapron et al, 2014;Smith, Nielsen, & Hellgren, 2016), countries like Australia (Newsome et al, 2014), Ethiopia (Yirga et al, 2017), Brazil (Vynne et al, 2011), Iran (Hosseini-Zavarei, Farhadinia, Beheshti-Zavareh, & Abdoli, 2013), India (Athreya, Odden, Linnell, Krishnaswamy, & Karanth, 2013), Kenya (Van Cleave et al, 2018), and Israel (Barocas, Hefner, Ucko, Merkle, & Geffen, 2018) have also recorded large carnivore presence in mix-use landscapes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Land‐sharing potential of large carnivores in human‐modified landscapes of western India

Majgaonkar

Vaidyanathan²,

Srivathsa

et al. 2019

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current protected area (PA) network is not sufficient to ensure long‐term persistence of wide‐ranging carnivore populations. Within India, this is particularly the case for species that inhabit nonforested areas since PAs disproportionately over‐represent forested ecosystems. With growing consideration of human‐use landscapes as potential habitats for adaptable large carnivores, India provides a model for studying them in densely populated landscapes, where there is little understanding about human‐carnivore interactions in shared spaces. Using key informant interviews and an occupancy modeling framework, we assessed the distribution of three large carnivore species, the leopard Panthera pardus, Indian grey Wolf Canis lupus pallipes, and striped hyena Hyaena hyaena, across a ~89,000 km2 semiarid multiuse landscape in western India, and quantified ecological drivers of their presence. The three species occupied 57% (leopard), 64% (wolf), and 75% (hyena) of the landscape of which only 2.6% area is protected as national parks or wildlife sanctuaries. The presence of the three carnivores was differentially favored by certain types of agriculture, while populations of domestic livestock supported them in this landscape with low densities of large wild prey. Our results demonstrate the adaptability of large carnivores in human‐modified landscapes, and we call for an expansion of the current conservation narratives that currently focus on forested PAs, to include the high potential that anthropogenic landscapes offer as habitats where people and predators can co‐adapt and persist.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Land‐sharing potential of large carnivores in human‐modified landscapes of western India

Majgaonkar

Vaidyanathan²,

Srivathsa

et al. 2019

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Plans to conserve critical habitat for each range that were due from each province in October 2017 have yet to be finalized, and development continues in critical caribou habitat (Hebblewhite & Fortin 2017). Contentious wolf control, occurring across North America and Europe (Mech 2017), is a primary conservation strategy in Canada, where caribou populations are in drastic decline (Hervieux et al 2014). However, this strategy neglects the important roles of complex predator-prey and apparent competition relationships.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The importance of considering multiple interacting species for conservation of species at risk

Burgar

Burton

Fisher

2018

Conservation Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation of species at risk of extinction is complex and multifaceted. However, mitigation strategies are typically narrow in scope, an artifact of conservation research that is often limited to a single species or stressor. Knowledge of an entire community of strongly interacting species would greatly enhance the comprehensiveness and effectiveness of conservation decisions. We investigated how camera trapping and spatial count models, an extension of spatial‐recapture models for unmarked populations, can accomplish this through a case study of threatened boreal woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou). Population declines in caribou are precipitous and well documented, but recovery strategies focus heavily on control of wolves (Canis lupus) and pay less attention to other known predators and apparent competitors. Obtaining necessary data on multispecies densities has been difficult. We used spatial count models to concurrently estimate densities of caribou, their predators (wolf, black bear [Ursus americanus], and coyote [Canis latrans]), and alternative prey (moose [Alces alces] and white‐tailed deer [Odocoileus virginianus]) from a camera‐trap array in a highly disturbed landscape within northern Alberta's Oil Sands Region. Median densities were 0.22 caribous (95% Bayesian credible interval [BCI] = 0.08–0.65), 0.77 wolves (95% BCI = 0.26–2.67), 2.39 moose (95% BCI = 0.56–7.00), 2.64 coyotes (95% BCI = 0.45–6.68), and 3.63 black bears (95% BCI = 1.25–8.52) per 100 km2. (The white‐tailed deer model did not converge.) Although wolf densities were higher than densities recommended for caribou conservation, we suggest the markedly higher black bear and coyote densities may be of greater concern, especially if government wolf control further releases these species. Caribou conservation with a singular focus on wolf control may leave caribou vulnerable to other predators. We recommend a broader focus on the interacting species within a community when conserving species.

show abstract

“…they value their natural environment for its potential to provide aesthetic/recreational services. In addition, several respondents commented about wolves' role in the ecosystem in terms of controlling prey populations -although this was not quantitatively assessed -which is also a common trend in human-wolf relations (Mech 2017). In summary, extremely negative and irrational feelings and fear is uncommon amongst our sample, and local wolf conservation has sufficient moral foundations -in parallel with European and North American tendencies -of increasing cultural support of large carnivore conservation (Linnell 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…In general, wolves generate strong feelings that vary widely among different cultural groups, producing both passionate supporters and enemies (Boitani 1995, Primm & Clark 1996, Linnell 2013). On one hand, the conservation of wolves has increasing cultural support, due to their aesthetic and cultural value (Sillero-Zubiri et al 2004, Mech & Boitani 2010, Linnell 2013, as well as their increasingly appreciated role as apex predators (Mech 2017), although this has purportedly often been exaggerated and lacks ample evidence (Allen et al 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The wolves are back! Local attitudes towards the recently re-populated grey wolf and wolf management in Bükk National Park, Hungary

Anthony

Tarr

2019

Acta Zool Acad Sci H

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parallel to trends in North America and elsewhere in Europe, the number of large carnivores is slowly increasing in Hungary, including within the Bükk National Park (BNP). After almost a century of absence, the wolf (Canis lupus) re-entered the BNP in 2010, and human-wolf conflicts of livestock depredation and competition for wild game immediately followed. Local acceptance is a key factor in successful large carnivore conservation and coexistence. Utilizing a household questionnaire administered in 3 local villages and semistructured interviews with key stakeholders, in this exploratory study we assessed local attitudes and the suite of demographic, socio-economic, and cultural variables which shape them, and their implications towards wolf management in BNP. Our results are similar to global trends, namely attitudes are varied towards institutions responsible for wolf management, and towards wolves themselves with Wolf Attitude Index values ranging from -20 to 22 (M = 0.59, SD = 10.874, n = 51) reflecting positive, neutral and negative sentiments. We demonstrate that attitudes towards wolves are largely determined by communication channels concerning wolf knowledge and hunting orientation. These factors are discussed, along with recommendations towards expanded research and enhanced coexistence.

show abstract

Where can wolves live and how can we live with them?

Cited by 100 publications

References 55 publications

Land‐sharing potential of large carnivores in human‐modified landscapes of western India

Land‐sharing potential of large carnivores in human‐modified landscapes of western India

The importance of considering multiple interacting species for conservation of species at risk

The wolves are back! Local attitudes towards the recently re-populated grey wolf and wolf management in Bükk National Park, Hungary

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About