Wildlife damage to human property threatens human-wildlife coexistence. Conflicts arising from wildlife damage in intensively managed landscapes often undermine conservation efforts, making damage mitigation and compensation of special concern for wildlife conservation. However, the mechanisms underlying the occurrence of damage and claims at large scales are still poorly understood. Here, we investigated the patterns of damage caused by brown bears Ursus arctos and its ecological and socio-economic correlates at a continental scale. We compiled information about compensation schemes across 26 countries in Europe in 2005-2012 and analysed the variation in the number of compensated claims in relation to (i) bear abundance, (ii) forest availability, (iii) human land use, (iv) management practices and (v) indicators of economic wealth. Most European countries have a posteriori compensation schemes based on damage verification, which, in many cases, have operated for more than 30 years. On average, over 3200 claims of bear damage were compensated annually in Europe. The majority of claims were for damage to livestock (59%), distributed throughout the bear range, followed by damage to apiaries (21%) and agriculture (17%), mainly in Mediterranean and eastern European countries. The mean number of compensated claims per bear and year ranged from 0·1 in Estonia to 8·5 in Norway. This variation was not only due to the differences in compensation schemes; damage claims were less numerous in areas with supplementary feeding and with a high proportion of agricultural land. However, observed variation in compensated damage was not related to bear abundance. Synthesis and applications. Compensation schemes, management practices and human land use influence the number of claims for brown bear damage, while bear abundance does not. Policies that ignore this complexity and focus on a single factor, such as bear population size, may not be effective in reducing claims. To be effective, policies should be based on integrative schemes that prioritize damage prevention and make it a condition of payment of compensation that preventive measures are applied. Such integrative schemes should focus mitigation efforts in areas or populations where damage claims are more likely to occur. Similar studies using different species and continents might further improve our understanding of conflicts arising from wildlife damage

No abstract

Context Adjustments in habitat use by large carnivores can be a key factor facilitating their coexistence with people in shared landscapes. Landscape composition might be a key factor determining how large carnivores can adapt to occurring alongside humans, yet broad-scale analyses investigating adjustments of habitat use across large gradients of human pressure and landscape composition are lacking. Objectives Here, we investigate adjustments in habitat use by Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) in response to varying availability of refuge habitats (i.e., forests and rugged terrain) and human landscape modification. Methods Using a large tracking dataset including 434 individuals from seven populations, we assess functional responses in lynx habitat use across two spatial scales, testing for variation by sex, daytime, and season. Results We found that lynx use refuge habitats more intensively with increasing landscape modification across spatial scales, selecting forests most strongly in otherwise open landscapes and rugged terrain in mountainous regions. Moreover, higher forest availability enabled lynx to place their home ranges in more human-modified landscapes. Human pressure and refuge habitat availability also shaped temporal patterns of lynx habitat use, with lynx increasing refuge habitat use and reducing their use of human-modified areas during periods of high exposure (daytime) or high vulnerability (postnatal period) to human pressure. Conclusions Our findings suggest a remarkable adaptive capacity of lynx towards human pressure and underline the importance of refuge habitats across scales for enabling coexistence between large carnivores and people. More broadly, we highlight that the composition of landscapes determines how large carnivores can adapt to human pressure and thus play an important role shaping large carnivore habitat use and distributions.

ContextBehavioral adjustments by large carnivores can be a key factor facilitating their coexistence with people in shared landscapes. Landscape composition might be a key factor determining how large carnivores can adapt to occurring alongside humans, yet broad-scale analyses investigating adjustments of habitat use across large gradients of human pressure and landscape composition are lacking.ObjectivesHere, we investigate adjustments in habitat use by Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) in response to varying availability of refuge habitats (i.e., forests and rugged terrain) and human landscape modification.MethodsWe used a large tracking dataset including 434 individuals from seven populations to analyze variation in lynx’ use of refuge habitats and landscape modification at a continental scale.ResultsWe found that lynx use refuge habitats more intensively with increasing landscape modification, selecting forests most strongly in otherwise open landscapes and rugged terrain in mountainous regions. Higher forest availability enabled lynx to place their home ranges in more human-modified landscapes. Human pressure and refuge habitat availability also shaped temporal patterns of lynx habitat use, affecting daytime-nighttime differences in refuge habitat use, as well as females’ association with human-modified habitats during the first months after kittens are born.ConclusionsOur findings suggest a remarkable adaptive capacity of lynx towards human pressure and underline the importance of refuge habitats for enabling coexistence between large carnivores and people. More broadly, we highlight that the composition of landscapes determines how large carnivores can adapt to human pressure, and that both factors interact in shaping large carnivore habitat use and distributions at broad scales.

A fundamental problem of sustainability is how to reduce the double complexity of ecological and social systems into simple operational terms. We highlight that the conservation concept of focal species (selected species sensitive to a set of anthropogenic threats to their habitat) links multiple issues of ecological sustainability, and their habitat models can provide a practical tool for solving these issues. A review of the literature shows that most spatial modeling of focal species focuses on vertebrates, lacks the aspect of aquatic and soil habitats, and has been slow in the uptake by actual management planning. We elaborate on a deductive modeling approach that first generalizes the main influential dimensions of habitat change (threats), which are then parameterized as habitat quality estimates for focal species. If built on theoretical understanding and properly scaled, the maps produced with such models can cost-effectively describe the dynamics of ecological qualities across forest landscapes, help set conservation priorities, and reflect on management plans and practices. The models also serve as ecological hypotheses on biodiversity and landscape function. We illustrate this approach based on recent additions to the forest reserve network in Estonia, which addressed the insufficient protection of productive forest types. For this purpose, mostly former production forests that may require restoration were set aside. We distinguished seven major habitat dimensions and their representative taxa in these forests and depicted each dimension as a practical stand-scale decision tree of habitat quality. The model outcomes implied that popular stand-structural targets of active forest restoration would recover passively in reasonable time in these areas, while a critically degraded condition (loss of old trees of characteristic species) required management beyond reserve borders. Another hidden issue revealed was that only a few stands of consistently low habitat quality concentrated in the landscape to allow cost-efficient restoration planning. We conclude that useful habitat models for sustainable forest management have to balance single-species realism with stakeholder expectations of meaningful targets and scales. Addressing such social aspects through the focal species concept could accelerate the adoption of biodiversity distribution modeling in forestry.