Search for: All records

Abstract Human–wildlife interactions (HWIs) influence the health of humans and wildlife but a unifying framework is needed to understand the causes of HWIs to anticipate health-associated outcomes. In this article, we present a novel conceptual framework that positions wildlife and human health as outcomes of HWIs, human health risks and benefits as motivating factors to manage wildlife and HWIs, and wildlife and environmental health as drivers of future HWIs. We discuss policy implications, including centering wildlife health in preventing harmful HWIs and the wildlife health impacts of management actions to promote or prevent HWIs. We pose guiding questions for advancing health equity that explore who disproportionately experiences health risks and benefits arising from HWIs and who has the capacity to engage with management. Recognizing the integrated relationships between health and HWIs enables scientists and managers to collaboratively mitigate negative HWIs and promote favorable outcomes while protecting the health of people and wildlife. 

Reduced human activity to mitigate the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic was accompanied by reports of unusual wildlife sightings in highly developed areas. Such experiences with urban nature may have helped residents cope with the stress of the pandemic and increased public interest in urban wildlife; however, this may depend on the species residents encountered. In this study, we surveyed Chicago, Illinois, USA residents during a stay-at-home order to understand if residents in more affluent or greener neighborhoods saw more wildlife species. We also evaluated whether encounters with pest and non-pest species were associated with residents’ values about wildlife. Of 593 responses included in our analyses, respondents in higher-income and greener neighborhoods were more likely to perceive increased wildlife sightings and respondents in higher-income areas reported observing a higher number common birds and mammals. Support for seeing wildlife in residential areas was associated with seeing passerine birds and not seeing rats during the stay-at-home order. Our results suggest that perceived increases in wildlife sightings were common during a stay-at-home order, especially for affluent residents, and that residents’ perceptions depended on the species encountered. Understanding how changes in human behavior modifies human-wildlife interactions can help mitigate human-wildlife conflict and foster positive engagement with local wildlife.