Exploring Carnivore Coexistence in the American West

Human-wildlife coexistence is an oft-stated goal but implicit assumptions among conservationists about what constitutes coexistence can lead to goal misalignment and undermine policy and program efficacy. For example, some... [ view full abstract ]

Human-wildlife coexistence is an oft-stated goal but implicit assumptions among conservationists about what constitutes coexistence can lead to goal misalignment and undermine policy and program efficacy. For example, some conservationists envision coexistence as land sharing with carnivores (i.e., humans and wildlife coexisting in shared landscapes). Others consider land sparing (e.g., conserving wildlife in protected areas and discouraging them from human-dominated landscapes) a more realistic version of human-carnivore coexistence. Although diverse perspectives and debate are important for progressing policy, conflicting goals and a lack of census regarding how and where to conserve carnivores may divert or waste limited resources. Thus, questions about how to define coexistence remain and require answers; specific goals and methods for reaching coexistence still need refining. Can competing interests and diverse stakeholders be adequately satisfied through participatory processes? How can progressive policies and practices be preserved in the long-term? Can we find a level of risk acceptable to involved parties? We explored these and related questions through analysis of legal and practical case studies involving carnivore conservation throughout the American West. Each case study addresses differing approaches and perspectives on how and what it means to coexist with wildlife. Case studies include Mexican gray wolves in Arizona and New Mexico, grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and coyotes in California. Case studies were analyzed by the extent to which 1) coexistence was motivated by legal, moral, practical and/or economic arguments; 2) local interests were represented or stakeholders were involved; 3) objectives and methods evolved through implementation; and 4) outcomes matched objectives. Lessons from case studies are then synthesized into next steps for future research and recommendations for improving coexistence best practices in diverse American West contexts. Better understanding of the outcomes of various coexistence goals will improve capacity to effectively conserve wildlife, particularly controversial carnivore species on public and private lands.