A societal shift toward plant dominant diets and a reduction in livestock rearing could have broad social, environmental and conservation benefits. Livestock husbandry, however, has a wealthy cultural history, strong support and high consumer demand. It is therefore likely to continue as a major land use and conservation issue for predators. From a producer’s perspective, the primary goals of livestock protection are maximising, or at least maintaining, production by minimising losses and mitigating detriment to stock welfare. Lethal removal of predators remains a commonplace solution. Such management measures are questionable as they raise animal welfare and conservation concerns, risk inhibiting ecological processes, are often expensive, and in some circumstances, exacerbate livestock predation problems. Non-lethal alternatives can facilitate co-existence between livestock farmers and predators, ideally reducing the ecological impact of pastoralism and achieving conservation goals. The need for rigorous study of non-lethal approaches has however been recently highlighted. Tools and methods involved in livestock protection, as well as the theoretical basis of how we perceive and manage the problem, require deeper consideration. Non-lethal approaches require knowledgeable implementation and an effective decision making system is a prerequisite for successful practice. Livestock predation and its prevention are fundamentally influenced by the underlying principles of foraging ecology and risk theory. We propose that manipulating elements of Brown’s (1988) quitting harvest rate model provides a useful conceptual framework for reducing livestock predation and encouraging coexistence.
显示更多 [+] 显示较少 [-]
AGRIS - 国际农业科技情报系统
Share
其它主题
Harvest rate; Human-carnivore conflict; Wolf predation; Depredation; Guardian dogs; Non-lethal; Patch use; Mesopredator release; Protect livestock
语言
英语
许可
© 2019 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved. Notice : this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal for Nature Conservation. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal for Nature Conservation, vol. 49, pp. 69-75, 2019, doi : 10.1016/j.jnc.2019.03.004.
ISSN
1617-1381 (print), 1618-1093 (online)
类型
Journal Article; Journal Part
2025-05-29
2026-02-03
MODS