An official website of the United States government
Abstract Conflict with humans, particularly over livestock predation, poses a severe and continuing threat to the conservation of large carnivores, particularly in reserve‐adjacent and unprotected areas. Such conflict also inflicts substantial costs on people living alongside large carnivores. Though conflict is complex, attacks upon livestock are one of the factors that drive immediate hostility toward carnivores, inflict economic damage upon livestock‐keepers, and can lead to retaliatory and preventative carnivore killing. Many conflict mitigation and livestock protection approaches exist, but it is crucial to examine their effectiveness. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of fortified livestock enclosures in reducing predation of livestock in an area surrounding Ruaha National Park in southern Tanzania. These fortified enclosures are built with chain‐link fences and are aimed to replace the traditional enclosures built with acacia thorn branches. We implemented a before‐after‐control‐impact (BACI) design to test the short‐term impacts of the fortified enclosure intervention. We then conducted a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) based on costs of construction of fortified enclosures and benefits accruing as prevented livestock depredation. Finally, we tested the hypothesis that fortified enclosures would diminish in effectiveness over time as carnivores become habituated, the fortification deteriorates due to lack of maintenance, and/or predation risk would increase. For the long‐term analysis, we used monthly data from 758 livestock‐keeping households from 2010 to 2016. Across both short‐ and long‐term analyses, fortified enclosures were effective at reducing the odds of experiencing predation of livestock by carnivores by 94% and 60%, respectively. Based on mean predation rates (c. 0.10 livestock month) and observed reductions, the benefit/cost ratios over 5 years of construction of a fortified enclosure with metal or wooden poles are 3.36 and 7.89, respectively, when subsidized. Our study contributes actionable evidence on the impact of an intervention to inform conservation strategies supporting human–carnivore coexistence.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on March 1, 2026
Beneficial Spillover Effects of Antipredation Interventions Support Human–Carnivore Coexistence
ABSTRACT Reducing human–wildlife conflict is critical for global biodiversity conservation and supporting livelihoods in landscapes where people and wildlife co‐occur. Interventions intended to reduce conflicts and their negative outcomes are diverse and widespread, yet there is often a dearth of empirical evidence regarding effectiveness, particularly at appropriate spatiotemporal scales. We investigate an underappreciated question relevant to large carnivore–livestock systems globally regarding spillover effects of anti‐conflict interventions: Do fortified livestock enclosures modify carnivore predation on livestock for neighbors who lack such interventions? We use ca. 25,000 monthly reports from agropastoralists in an East African landscape critical for large carnivore conservation. Results from Bayesian multilevel statistical models demonstrate robust effects of fortified livestock enclosures in reducing reported predation not only in target households, but also in neighboring households that lack such fortification—a beneficial spillover effect. Results provide empirical evidence for policy and practice regarding tools to reduce large carnivore conflicts while pointing to the important role of complex‐systems processes in determining coexistence outcomes.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2049858
- PAR ID:
- 10611087
- Publisher / Repository:
- Conservation Letters
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Conservation Letters
- Volume:
- 18
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 1755-263X
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
null (Ed.)Research on the ecology of fear has highlighted the importance of perceived risk from predators and humans in shaping animal behavior and physiology, with potential demographic and ecosystem-wide consequences. Despite recent conceptual advances and potential management implications of the ecology of fear, theory and conservation practices have rarely been linked. Many challenges in animal conservation may be alleviated by actively harnessing or compensating for risk perception and risk avoidance behavior in wild animal populations. Integration of the ecology of fear into conservation and management practice can contribute to the recovery of threatened populations, human–wildlife conflict mitigation, invasive species management, maintenance of sustainable harvest and species reintroduction plans. Here, we present an applied framework that links conservation interventions to desired outcomes by manipulating ecology of fear dynamics. We discuss how to reduce or amplify fear in wild animals by manipulating habitat structure, sensory stimuli, animal experience (previous exposure to risk) and food safety trade-offs to achieve management objectives. Changing the optimal decision-making of individuals in managed populations can then further conservation goals by shaping the spatiotemporal distribution of animals, changing predation rates and altering risk effects that scale up to demographic consequences. We also outline future directions for applied research on fear ecology that will better inform conservation practices. Our framework can help scientists and practitioners anticipate and mitigate unintended consequences of management decisions, and highlight new levers for multi-species conservation strategies that promote human–wildlife coexistence.more » « less
-
COVID-19 is the latest zoonotic RNA virus epidemic of concern. Learning how it began and spread will help to determine how to reduce the risk of future events. We review major RNA virus outbreaks since 1967 to identify common features and opportunities to prevent emergence, including ancestral viral origins in birds, bats, and other mammals; animal reservoirs and intermediate hosts; and pathways for zoonotic spillover and community spread, leading to local, regional, or international outbreaks. The increasing scientific evidence concerning the origins of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is most consistent with a zoonotic origin and a spillover pathway from wildlife to people via wildlife farming and the wildlife trade. We apply what we know about these outbreaks to identify relevant, feasible, and implementable interventions. We identify three primary targets for pandemic prevention and preparedness: first, smart surveillance coupled with epidemiological risk assessment across wildlife–livestock–human (One Health) spillover interfaces; second, research to enhance pandemic preparedness and expedite development of vaccines and therapeutics; and third, strategies to reduce underlying drivers of spillover risk and spread and reduce the influence of misinformation. For all three, continued efforts to improve and integrate biosafety and biosecurity with the implementation of a One Health approach are essential. We discuss new models to address the challenges of creating an inclusive and effective governance structure, with the necessary stable funding for cross-disciplinary collaborative research. Finally, we offer recommendations for feasible actions to close the knowledge gaps across the One Health continuum and improve preparedness and response in the future.more » « less
-
Abstract Spillover effects are considered important in evaluating the impacts of food, energy and water (FEW) conservation behaviors for limiting global greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. Failure to account for all possible spillovers, or indirect and unintended results of an intervention, not only obscures valuable information pertaining to the dynamic interactions across domains but also results in biased estimates. In this study, we first systematically reviewed articles that investigate the idea that the performance of one pro-environmental behavior influences the conduct of subsequent behaviors(s) from the FEW domains. From our review of 48 studies in the last decade, we note that a big part of the discussion on spillover concerns the nature and direction of causal relationships between individual FEW conservation behaviors. We identify a critical gap in the literature regarding the distinction between spillover effects caused by the interventions as distinct from those caused by the primary behaviors. Next, we conducted a quantitative meta-analysis of the reviewed empirical studies to find a modest but overall positive spillover effect. Finally, we reviewed the theoretical and methodological plurality in the FEW spillover literature using a systemic thinking lens to summarize what is already known and identify future challenges and research opportunities with significant policy implications.more » « less
-
Abstract Substantial global attention is focused on how to reduce the risk of future pandemics. Reducing this risk requires investment in prevention, preparedness, and response. Although preparedness and response have received significant focus, prevention, especially the prevention of zoonotic spillover, remains largely absent from global conversations. This oversight is due in part to the lack of a clear definition of prevention and lack of guidance on how to achieve it. To address this gap, we elucidate the mechanisms linking environmental change and zoonotic spillover using spillover of viruses from bats as a case study. We identify ecological interventions that can disrupt these spillover mechanisms and propose policy frameworks for their implementation. Recognizing that pandemics originate in ecological systems, we advocate for integrating ecological approaches alongside biomedical approaches in a comprehensive and balanced pandemic prevention strategy.more » « less
