Skip to main content
Dryad logo

Data from: Variation and conservation implications of the effectiveness of anti-bear interventions

Citation

Khorozyan, Igor; Waltert, Matthias (2020), Data from: Variation and conservation implications of the effectiveness of anti-bear interventions , Dryad, Dataset, https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.2jm63xsmq

Abstract

Human-bear conflicts triggered by nuisance behaviour in public places and damage to livestock, crops, beehives and trees are among the main threats to bear populations globally. The effectiveness of interventions used to minimize bear-caused damage is insufficiently known and comparative reviews are lacking. We conducted a meta-analysis of 77 cases from 48 publications and used the relative risk of damage to compare the effectiveness of non-invasive interventions, invasive management (translocations) and lethal control (shooting) against bears. We show that the most effective interventions are electric fences (95% confidence interval = 79.2-100% reduction in damage), calving control (100%) and livestock replacement (99.8%), but the latter two approaches were applied in only one case each and need more testing. Deterrents varied widely in their effectiveness (13.7-79.5%) and we recommend applying these during the peak periods of damage infliction. We found shooting (-34.2 to 100%) to have a short-term positive effect with its effectiveness decreasing significantly and linearly over time. We did not find relationships between bear density and intervention effectiveness, possibly due to differences in spatial scales at which they were measured (large scales for densities and local fine scales for effectiveness). We appeal for more effectiveness studies and their scientific publishing in regard to under-represented conflict species and regions.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Award: WA 2153/5-1