page_title: Human–wildlife conflict
section_title: Mitigation Strategies
hierarchical_section_title: Human–wildlife conflict / Mitigation Strategies
caption_attribution_description: a traditional livestock coral surrounded by a predator proof coral in South Gobi desert in Mongolia. these coral protect the livestock from predators like snow leopards and wolf
context_page_description: Human–wildlife conflict refers to the interaction between wild animals and humans, and the resultant negative impact on people, animals, resources, and habitats. It occurs when growing human populations overlap with established wildlife territory, creating competition for space and resources. Conflict takes many forms including but not limited to: loss of life or injury to humans and wild animals, depredation of livestock, and degradation of habitat. Human–wildlife conflict is a global issue present in urban and rural landscapes alike.
  Previously, conflict mitigation strategies utilized lethal control, translocation, population size regulation, and endangered species preservation. Recent management now uses an interdisciplinary set of approaches to solving conflicts. These include applying scientific research, sociological studies, and the arts to reducing conflicts. As human-wildlife conflict inflicts direct and indirect consequences on people and animals, its mitigation is an important priority for the management of biodiversity and protected areas.
context_section_description: Mitigation strategies for managing human-wildlife conflict vary significantly depending on location and type of conflict. The preference is always for passive, non-intrusive prevention measures but often active intervention is required to be carried out in conjunction. Regardless of approach, the most successful solutions are those that include local communities in the planning, implementation, and maintenance. Resolving conflicts, therefore, often requires a regional plan of attack with a response tailored to the specific crisis. Still, there are a variety of management techniques that are frequently employed to mitigate conflicts. Examples include:
  Translocation of problematic animals: Relocating so-called "problem" animals from a site of conflict to a new place is a mitigation technique used in the past, although recent research has shown that this approach can have detrimental impacts on species and is largely ineffective. Translocation can decrease survival rates and lead to extreme dispersal movements for a species, and often "problem" animals will resume conflict behaviors in their new location.
  Erection of fences or other barriers: Building barriers around cattle bomas, creating distinct wildlife corridors, and erecting beehive fences around farms to deter elephants have all demonstrated the ability to be successful and cost-effective strategies for mitigating human-wildlife conflict.
  Improving community education and perception of animals: Various cultures have myriad views and values associated with the natural world, and how wildlife is perceived can play a role in exacerbating or alleviating human-wildlife conflict. In one Masaai community where young men once obtained status by killing lions, conservationists worked with community leaders to shift perceptions and allow those young men to achieve the same social status by protecting lions instead.
  Effective land use planning: altering land use practices can help mitigate conflict between humans and crop-raiding animals. For example in Mozambique, communities started to grow more chili pepper plants after making the discovery that elephants dislike and avoid plants containing capsaicin. This creative and effective method discourages elephants from trampling community farmers' fields as well as protects the species.
  Compensation: Compensation: in some cases, governmental systems have been established to offer monetary compensation for losses sustained due to human-wildlife conflict. These systems hope to deter the need for retaliatory killings of animals, and to financially incentivize the co-existing of humans and wildlife. Compensation strategies have been employed in India, Italy, and South Africa, to name a few. The success of compensation in managing human-wildlife conflict has varied greatly due to under-compensation, a lack of local participation, or a failure by the government to provide timely payments.
  Spatial analyses and mapping conflict hotspots: mapping interactions and creating spatial models has been successful in mitigating human-carnivore conflict and human-elephant conflict, among others. In Kenya, for example, using grid-based geographical information systems in collaboration with simple statistical analyses allowed conservationists to establish an effective predictor for human-elephant conflict.
  Predator-deterring guard dogs: The use of guard dogs to protect livestock from depredation has been effective in mitigating human-carnivore conflict around the globe. A recent review found that 15.4% of study cases researching human-carnivore conflict used livestock-guarding dogs as a management technique, with animal losses on average 60 times lower than the norm.
caption: A traditional livestock corral surrounded by a predator-proof corral in South Gobi desert, Mongolia, to protect livestock from predators like snow leopard and wolf.
exif: {}