Combining two non-lethal methods in crossover design randomized experiments.

Abstract

Abstract Wildlife control is the subfield pertaining to preventing threats to human property or safety from wild animals. Various research fields interact within wildlife control from animal behavior to agricultural management and other social sciences. We review understanding of the effectiveness of interventions using nighttime lights and fladry, both visual deterrents, to prevent carnivores from approaching livestock on working farms. We describe successes and failures in randomized. Controlled trials (RCT) with crossover design and the limits to inference and generalizability of their results. We present quantitative and qualitative evidence -- from two unpublished RCTs with crossover designs -- as a heuristic device to organize knowledge and highlight associated gaps. We focus on the sustainability of scientific wildlife control and collaborative research with farmers, material interventions, wildlife coexistence with livestock and people, and science communication. We conclude that small-scale field experiments will rarely achieve the statistical power to confidently generalize recommendations to use or avoid tested methods. Therefore, cautious experimental scientists who wish to avoid false discoveries or exaggerated claims may routinely experience constraints on promoting methods for wildlife control. The same constraints may not be felt by farmers or their allies, creating a tension in the science-policy interface between personal testimonials and scientific generalizations. We recommend steps that may fortify the science and enhance the sustainability of robust experimental designs under field conditions.