Miroslav Kutal, Martin Duľa, Alisa Royer Selivanova, José Vicente López-Bao
{"title":"Testing a conservation compromise: No evidence that public wolf hunting in Slovakia reduced livestock losses","authors":"Miroslav Kutal, Martin Duľa, Alisa Royer Selivanova, José Vicente López-Bao","doi":"10.1111/conl.12994","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Variation in the legal status and management of wolves (<i>Canis lupus</i>) across EU Member States provides a good opportunity to test the effectiveness of different practices to reduce livestock losses. This opportunity for testing is particularly useful for lethal interventions, as they are among the most controversial actions within the large carnivore management toolbox. We aimed to test a conservation compromise adopted in Slovakia, based on a public wolf-hunting scheme and annual hunting quotas between 2014 and 2019, and partially justified to reduce livestock losses. We assessed whether this hunting scheme influenced livestock depredation levels (at the district level). Wolves in the area fed mainly on wild ungulates (98.9% of consumed biomass). While domestic sheep comprised only 0.5% of the diet, they were dominant among the reported livestock killed by wolves (91.1%). Using two different approaches, we did not observe a relationship between the number of killed wolves and livestock losses. Alternatively, a negative relationship between wild prey biomass and livestock losses was found. Since 2021, public wolf hunting has not been conducted in Slovakia, and there is no merit in the previous justification for this conservation compromise to reduce livestock losses.</p>","PeriodicalId":157,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Letters","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/conl.12994","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Letters","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.12994","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Variation in the legal status and management of wolves (Canis lupus) across EU Member States provides a good opportunity to test the effectiveness of different practices to reduce livestock losses. This opportunity for testing is particularly useful for lethal interventions, as they are among the most controversial actions within the large carnivore management toolbox. We aimed to test a conservation compromise adopted in Slovakia, based on a public wolf-hunting scheme and annual hunting quotas between 2014 and 2019, and partially justified to reduce livestock losses. We assessed whether this hunting scheme influenced livestock depredation levels (at the district level). Wolves in the area fed mainly on wild ungulates (98.9% of consumed biomass). While domestic sheep comprised only 0.5% of the diet, they were dominant among the reported livestock killed by wolves (91.1%). Using two different approaches, we did not observe a relationship between the number of killed wolves and livestock losses. Alternatively, a negative relationship between wild prey biomass and livestock losses was found. Since 2021, public wolf hunting has not been conducted in Slovakia, and there is no merit in the previous justification for this conservation compromise to reduce livestock losses.
期刊介绍:
Conservation Letters is a reputable scientific journal that is devoted to the publication of both empirical and theoretical research that has important implications for the conservation of biological diversity. The journal warmly invites submissions from various disciplines within the biological and social sciences, with a particular interest in interdisciplinary work. The primary aim is to advance both pragmatic conservation objectives and scientific knowledge. Manuscripts are subject to a rapid communication schedule, therefore they should address current and relevant topics. Research articles should effectively communicate the significance of their findings in relation to conservation policy and practice.