Abstract
Human-carnivore coexistence is an oft-stated goal but assumptions about what constitutes coexistence can lead to goal misalignment and undermine policy and program efficacy. Questions about how to define coexistence remain and specific goals and methods for reaching coexistence require refining. Co-adaptation, where humans adapt to carnivores and vice versa, is a novel socioecological framework for operationalizing coexistence but has yet to be comprehensively examined. We explored co-adaptation and two additional coexistence criteria through analysis of three case studies involving large carnivores in the American West, each addressing differing approaches on how and what it means to coexist with carnivores: Mexican gray wolves (Canis lupus baileyi) in Arizona and New Mexico, grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and coyotes (Canis latrans) throughout the American West. We used a multiple case study design that analyzed within and across cases to understand coexistence broadly. For each case, we asked (1) are landscapes shared in space and/or time, (2) is co-adaptation occurring and (3) do stakeholders consider risks tolerable? To identify whether coexistence criteria are met, we investigated peer-reviewed published articles and news media and conducted key informant interviews. We found clear evidence to support land-sharing between humans and coyotes and limited spatial overlap between humans and grizzly bears and Mexican gray wolves. Coadaptation was variable for wolves, possible with bears and clearly evident with coyotes. Tolerable risk levels are likely achievable for bears and coyotes based on the available literature assessing risk perceptions and tolerance. But disagreement regarding risk management is a driver of conflict over wolves and persistent barrier to achieving coexistence among diverse stakeholders. Patterns in coexistence criteria did not emerge based on taxonomy or geography but may be influenced by body size and behavioral plasticity. The common key to coexistence with each considered carnivore may be in more equitable distribution of costs and benefits among highly diverse stakeholders. Better understanding of these three coexistence criteria and innovative tools to achieve them will improve coexistence capacity with controversial carnivores on public and private lands in diverse American West contexts and beyond.
Highlights
Human-wildlife coexistence is an oft-stated goal but implicit assumptions about what constitutes coexistence can lead to goal misalignment and undermine policy and program efficacy (Fischer et al, 2014)
We focus on the American West because the region consists of a mosaic of land-cover types, with large amounts of public land under varying degrees of protection, use, and ownership
Coyotes are found in every habitat from Yellowstone National Park to Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport, having expanded their original Southwestern range to include most of the contiguous United States (Gehrt et al, 2010)
Summary
Human-wildlife coexistence is an oft-stated goal but implicit assumptions about what constitutes coexistence can lead to goal misalignment and undermine policy and program efficacy (Fischer et al, 2014). Some conservationists envision coexistence as land sharing with wildlife (i.e., humans and wildlife occupying the same areas; Johansson et al, 2016; Crespin and Simonetti, 2019). Others consider land sparing (e.g., conserving wildlife in protected areas and discouraging them from human-dominated landscapes) a more realistic version of human-wildlife coexistence (Vucetich and Macdonald, 2017). Electrified fencing to spatially separate wildlife from human-occupied areas would be considered an appropriate conservation action from advocates of land-sparing but not for land-sharing. Questions about how to define coexistence remain and require answers while specific goals and methods for reaching coexistence still need refining
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.