File(s) under permanent embargo
Evaluating the efficacy of predator removal in a conflict-prone world
journal contributionposted on 2018-08-01, 00:00 authored by R J Lennox, A J Gallagher, Euan RitchieEuan Ritchie, S J Cooke
Predators shape ecosystem structure and function through their direct and indirect effects on prey, which permeate through ecological communities. Predators are often perceived as competitors or threats to human values or well-being. This conflict has persisted for centuries, often resulting in predator removal (i.e. killing) via targeted culling, trapping, poisoning, and/or public hunts. Predator removal persists as a management strategy but requires scientific evaluation to assess the impacts of these actions, and to develop a way forward in a world where human-predator conflict may intensify due to predator reintroduction and rewilding, alongside an expanding human population. We reviewed literature investigating predator removal and focused on identifying instances of successes and failures. We found that predator removal was generally intended to protect domestic animals from depredation, to preserve prey species, or to mitigate risks of direct human conflict, corresponding to being conducted in farmland, wild land, or urban areas. Because of the different motivations for predator removal, there was no consistent definition of what success entailed so we developed one with which to assess studies we reviewed. Research tended to be retrospective and correlative and there were few controlled experimental approaches that evaluated whether predator removal met our definition of success, making formal meta-analysis impossible. Predator removal appeared to only be effective for the short-term, failing in the absence of sustained predator suppression. This means predator removal was typically an ineffective and costly approach to conflicts between humans and predators. Management must consider the role of the predator within the ecosystem and the potential consequences of removal on competitors and prey. Simulations or models can be generated to predict responses prior to removing predators. We also suggest that alternatives to predator removal be further developed and researched. Ultimately, humans must coexist with predators and learning how best to do so may resolve many conflicts.
Pagination277 - 289
LocationAmsterdam, The Netherlands
Publication classificationC Journal article; C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Copyright notice2018, Elsevier Ltd.
CategoriesNo categories selected
Conservation and wildlife managementFisheries and agricultureHuman-wildlife conflictPredator-prey interactionsRewildingTrophic cascadeScience & TechnologyLife Sciences & BiomedicineBiodiversity ConservationEcologyEnvironmental SciencesBiodiversity & ConservationEnvironmental Sciences & EcologyHUMAN-CARNIVORE CONFLICTLIONS PANTHERA-LEODOG LYCAON-PICTUSLIVESTOCK PREDATIONMESOPREDATOR RELEASENESTING SUCCESSNATIONAL-PARKTURTLE NESTSHARBOR SEALSCANIS-LUPUS