Drivers of human-wildlife conflicts in Iran's Hyrcanian forests

Human-wildlife conflicts are a growing problem in Iran and pose a notable challenge to conservation efforts in its Hyrcanian forest region – an important biodiversity hotspot of West Eurasia. Knowing about socio-economic and... [ view full abstract ]

Human-wildlife conflicts are a growing problem in Iran and pose a notable challenge to conservation efforts in its Hyrcanian forest region – an important biodiversity hotspot of West Eurasia. Knowing about socio-economic and ecological factors, that may influence conflicts, and biological traits of conflict species helps to identify core conservation challenges and key solutions in this landscape. We surveyed 162 households in 45 villages in six study sites across the Hyrcanian forests to understand drivers of human-wildlife conflicts, people’s perceptions and attitudes to these conflicts, and to suggest appropriate conflict mitigation measures. By using generalized linear and generalized linear mixed models, we analysed socio-economic and ecological variables to find key determinants of the main conflict types around seven species of mammals. Wild boar (Sus scrofa) and grey wolf (Canis lupus) were found to be the primary conflict species in regard to reported levels of severity; and crop loss by wild boars was reported by 97% of households. Analysis shows these conflicts were positively influenced by the variety of cultivated crop species and the size of land under cultivation. Human-wild boar conflicts increased in areas with lower human density, vegetation cover and distance to protected areas. Wolf conflicts were most frequently in the form of sheep attacks (81%) compared to goat (11%) and cattle (8%) attacks. Data shows that the attacks were positively influenced by village and landscape elevation and increased in areas with lower prey richness and those located closer to, or inside, protected areas. Our results show that negative encounters with these species may result in irreplaceable crop and livestock losses across a large-scale landscape. We found that public support to reduce wildlife conflicts as well as compensation payments are lacking and the majority of respondents urgently demanded on governmental assistance to mitigate wildlife conflicts. Mitigation measures applied by farmers, such as physical barriers, are limited in their success and need revision. To properly resolve and manage human-wildlife conflicts on the ground we propose several cost-effective, integrative and adaptive mitigation measures. These include avoiding planting of palatable seasonal crops near protected areas and establishing physical barriers around crop fields to lower large-scale crop damage by wild boars. To reduce livestock predation by wolf, it will be essential to address the restoration of the wild prey community and efficiency of animal husbandry practices. Conflict mitigation approaches should primarily focus on non-lethal control methods as they can offer a proactive and “green” tool to allow the co-existence of farming activities and wildlife. Direct and indirect implications should be used complementarily and require knowledge on species-specific biological traits, stakeholder commitment, capacity building, appropriate law enforcement, operated conservation policies and mutual benefits between conservationists and local farmers.