One of the most pressing and intractable issues for conservation is the mitigation of conflict around the management of carnivores. Large carnivores can have negative impacts on human activities, but their conservation is a priority, given their roles within ecosystems and, often, small and vulnerable populations. Approaches used to handle carnivore conflict management include assessment of what have been called ‘conflict hot-spots’, by producing spatially explicit models that correlate landscapes attributes with the occurrence of livestock depredation and then map the risks of impacts on humans. However, the use of the term ‘conflict’ here is misleading, as conflict surrounding carnivore conservation is distinct from typical ecological parameters (e.g. animal behavior, population dynamics, or species richness) in that it is as much a social phenomenon as it is an ecological phenomenon. Missing from this ‘conflict hot-spot’ approach is a measure of the social aspects of conflict, most notably the attitudes and perceptions of people. Differing beliefs and attitudes towards wildlife and the actions of wildlife held by individuals will influence their perceptions of what is or is not deemed conflict. Fear of carnivores could be an important predictor of the tendency of people to retaliate after a predation event. Here I propose to associate the notion of ‘fear’ with two measures, tolerance and perception of risk, which are anticipated to vary between individuals. In fact, although the real risk of predation events may be high and frequent, if local actors have a low perception of risk and a high tolerance towards a species, it is unlikely that they will retaliate and come into conflict with the organisations responsible for wildlife management. On the other hand, in communities where the actual risk of predation is low, but the perception of risk is high and the tolerance low, local actors may be inclined to retaliate after a single event of predation. I propose here to redefine what has been called conflict hot-spots. By exploring the meanings of tolerance and perceptions of risk, as well as multiple ways to measure them, I suggest a new approach to include these aspects in spatially explicit models to illustrate a more realistic conflict landscape. This will allow us to prioritize potential conflict zones and guide appropriate conservation management actions. Whilst a high real risk of predation requires the implementation of mitigation measures such as electric fences to protect herds, a high level of fear (high-risk perception and low tolerance) requires more collaborative approaches that address social aspects. In such cases, we need to work with local actors to understand their perceptions and sources of tolerance, enabling us to develop dialogue, educational programs and other tools as appropriate.
Topics: Management of Human-Wildlife Conflicts: Large Carnivores in Europe
