Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Coexistence with Large Carnivores Supported by a Predator-Compensation Program

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Compensation programs are used globally to increase tolerance for and help offset economic loss caused by large carnivores. Compensation program funding comes from a variety of sources, and in Wyoming and Idaho, USA and Alberta, Canada this includes revenue from hunting and fishing license sales. We review the patterns of livestock depredation and compensation costs of Alberta’s predator-compensation program, and compare Alberta’s program to compensation programs in neighboring Canadian and American jurisdictions. Current compensation costs in Alberta are well below historic levels, but have been rapidly increasing in recent years due to an increase in depredation events coupled with increased cattle prices. That increase has caused push back from Alberta’s hunting and fishing community that finances the compensation program, although less than 3.6% of Alberta’s license levy dollars are used for predator compensation. Hunting effort in Alberta is highest on the same privately owned lands with livestock depredation problems, suggesting that private lands support habitats for hunted ungulate species as well as carnivores. Although compensation programs do not prevent depredation events themselves, compensation programs effectively can support the maintenance of wildlife habitats on private lands.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alberta Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan 2008-2013 (2008) Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, Fish and Wildlife Division, Alberta Species at Risk Recovery Plan No. 15. Edmonton, p 68

  • Anyango-Van Zwieten N, Van Der Duim R, Visseren-Hamakers IJ (2015) Compensating for livestock killed by lions: payment for environmental services as a policy arrangement. Environ Conserv 42:363–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger J, Cain SL (2014) Moving beyond science to protect a mammalian migration corridor. Conserv Biol 28:1142–1150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradley EH, Robinson HS, Bangs EE, Kunkel K, Jimenez MD, Gude JA, Grimm T (2015) Effects of wolf removal on livestock depredation recurrence and wolf recovery in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming. J Wildl Manag 79:1337–1346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunson MW, Huntsinger L (2008) Ranching as a conservation strategy: can old ranchers save the New West?. Rangel Ecol Manag 61:137–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bulte EH, Rondeau D (2005) Why compensating for wildlife damages may be bad for conservation. J Wildl Manag 69:14–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll C, Noss RF, Paquet PC (2001) Carnivores as focal species for conservation planning in the Rocky Mountain region. Ecol Appl 11:961–980

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapron G, Kaczensky P, Linnell JDC, von Arx M, Huber D, Andrén H, López-Bao JV, Adamec M, Álvares F, Anders O et al. (2014) Recovery of large carnivores in Europe’s modern human-dominated landscapes. Science 346:1517–1519

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dickman AJ, Macdonald EA, Macdonald DW (2011) A review of financial instruments to pay for predator conservation and encourage human-carnivore coexistence. Proc Natl Acad Sci 34:13937–13944

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dorrance MJ (1983) A philosophy of problem wildlife management. Wildl Soc B 11:319–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Estes JA, Terborgh J, Brashares JS, Power ME, Berger J, Bond WJ, Carpenter SR, Essington TE, Holt RD, JBC Jackson et al. (2011) Trophic downgrading of planet earth. Science 333:301–306

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fahrig L, Rytwinski T (2009) Effects of roads on animal abundance: an empirical review and synthesis. Ecol Soc 14:21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenson B (2016) Hunters still paying for predator compensation. Alta Outdoor 17(8):8

    Google Scholar 

  • Fish and Wildlife Historical Society (2005) Fish, fur, feathers: fish and wildlife conservation in Alberta 1905–2005. Fish and Wildlife Historical Society and Federation of Alberta Naturalists, Edmonton

  • Fontúrbel FE, Simonetti JA (2011) Translocations and human-carnivore conflicts: problem solving or problem creating? Wildl Biol 17:217–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garshelis DL, Baruch-Mordo S, Bryant A, Gunther KA, Jerina K (2017) Is diversionary feeding an effective tool for reducing human-bear conflicts? Case studies from North America and Europe. Ursus 28:31–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gosnell H, Travis WR (2005) Ranchland ownership dynamics in the Rocky Mountain West. Rangel Ecol Manag 58:191–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham A, Beckerman AP, Thirgood S (2005) Human-predator-prey conflicts: ecological correlates, prey losses, and patterns of management. Biol Conserv 122:159–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurba JB (1982) Compensation for vertebrate pest damage. In: Marsh, RE (ed), Proceedings of the 10th Vertebrate Pest Conference. University of California, Davis, pp 90–94

  • Herfindal I, Linnell JDC, Moa PF, Odden J, Austmo LB, Anderson R (2005) Does recreational hunting of lynx reduce depredation losses of domestic sheep? J Wildl Manag 69:1034–1042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmern T, Nyahongo J, Røskaft E (2007) Livestock loss caused by predators outside the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. Biol Conserv 135:518–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horstman LP, Gunson JR (1982) Black bear predation on livestock in Alberta. Wildl Soc B 10:34–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobsen KS, Linnell JD (2016) Perceptions of environmental justice and the conflict surrounding large carnivore management in Norway – Implications for carnivore management. Biol Conserv 203:197–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins CN, Van Houtan KS, Pimm SL, Sexton JO (2015) US protected lands mismatch biodiversity priorities. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112:5081–5086

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Knight RL (2007) Ranchers as a keystone species in a west that works. Rangelands 29:4–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knopff KH, Webb NF, Boyce MS (2014) Cougar population status and range expansion in Alberta during 1991-2010. Wildl Soc B 38:116–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee T, Good K, Jamieson W, Quinn M, Krishnamurthy A (2017) Cattle and carnivore coexistence in Alberta: the role of compensation programs. Rangelands 39:10–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnell JDC, Aanes R, Swenson JE, Odden J, Smith MF (1997) Translocation of carnivores as a method for managing problem animals: a review. Biodivers Conserv 6:1245–1257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnell JDC, Swenson JE, Andersen R (2001) Predators and people: conservation of large carnivores is possible at high human densities if management policy is favourable. Anim Conserv 4:345–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maestas JD, Knight RL, Gilgert WC (2002) Cows, condos, or neither: what’s best for rangeland ecosystems? Rangelands 24:36–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mealor RD, Meiman PJ, Hild AL, Taylor DT, Thompson JS (2011) New Rangeland residents in Wyoming? A survey of exurban landowners. Rangel Ecol Manag 64:479–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mech LD (2012) Is science in danger of sanctifying the wolf? Biol Conserv 150:143–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Messmer TA (2000) The emergence of human-wildlife conflict management: turning challenges into opportunities. Int Biodeter Biodegr 45:97–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morehouse AT, Boyce MS (2011) From venison to beef: seasonal changes in wolf diet composition in a livestock grazing landscape. Front Ecol Environ 9:440–445

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morehouse AT, Boyce MS (2016) Grizzly bears without borders: spatially explicit capture recapture in southwestern Alberta. J Wildl Manag 80:1152–1166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morehouse AT, Boyce MS (2017a) Male dominance interferes with intercept feeding of grizzly bears. Ursus 28:66–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morehouse AT, Boyce MS (2017b) Troublemaking carnivores: conflicts with humans in a diverse assemblage of large carnivores. Ecol Soc 22:4. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09415-220304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morehouse AT, Graves TA, Mikle N, Boyce MS (2016) Nature vs. nurture: evidence for social learning of conflict behaviour in grizzly bears. PLoS ONE 11:e0165425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muhly TB, Hebblewhite M, Paton D, Pitt JA, Boyce MS, Musiani M (2013) Humans strengthen bottom-up effects and weaken trophic cascades in a terrestrial food web. PLoS ONE 8:e64311

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Musiani M, Mamo C, Boitani L, Callaghan C, Gates CC, Mattei L, Visalberghi E, Breck S, Volpi G (2003) Wolf depredation trends and the use of fladry in western North America. Conserv Biol 17:1538–1547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen SE, Cranston J, Stenhouse GB (2009) Identification of priority areas for grizzly bear conservation and recovery in Alberta, Canada. J Conserv Plan 5:38–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Northrup JM, Whittemyer G (2013) Characterising the impacts of emerging energy development on wildlife, with an eye toward mitigation. Ecol Lett 16:112–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noss RF, Quigley HB, Hornocker MG, Merrill T, Paquet PC (1996) Conservation biology and carnivore conservation in the Rocky Mountains. Conserv Biol 10:949–963

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyhus PJ, Fisher H, Osofsky S, Madden F (2003) Taking the bite out of wildlife damange: the challenges of wildlife compensation schemes. Conserv Pract 4:37–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyhus PJ, Osofsky SA, Ferraro P, Madden F, Fischer H (2005) Bearing the costs of human-wildlife conflict: the challenges of compensation schemes. In: Woodroffe R, Thirgood S, Rabinowitz A. (eds), People and wildlife: Conflict or coexistence? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 107–121

  • Obbard ME, Howe EJ, Wall LL, Allison B, Black R, Davis P, Dix-Gibson L, Gatt M, Hall MN (2014) Relationships among food availability, harvest, and human-bear conflict at landscape scales in Ontario, Canada. Ursus 25:98–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parks M, Messmer T (2016) Participant perceptions of range rider programs operating to mitigate wolf-livestock conflicts in the western United States. Wildl Soc B 40:514–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paton DG, Ciuti S, Quinn M, Boyce MS (2017) Hunting exacerbates the response to human disturbance in large herbivores while migrating through a road network. Ecosphere 8:1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redpath SM, Young J, Evely A, Adams WM, Sutherland WJ, Whitehouse A, Amar A, Lambert RA, Linnell JDC, Watt A, Gutiérrez RJ (2013) Understanding and managing conservation conflicts. Trends Ecol Evol 28:100–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ripple WJ, Estes JA, Beschta RL, Wilmers CC, Ritchie EG, Hebblewhite M, Berger J, Elmhagen B, Letnic M, Nelson MP et al (2014) Status and ecological effects of the world’s largest carnivores. Science 343. https://doi.org/1241484

  • Sawyer H, Lindzay F, McWhirter D (2005) Mule deer and pronghorn migration in western Wyoming. Wildl Soc B 33:1266–1273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sagør JT, Swenson JE, Røskaft E (1997) Compatibility of brown bear (Ursus arctos) and free-ranging sheep in Norway. Biol Conserv 81:91–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayre NF, Carlisle L, Huntsinger L, Fisher G, Shattuck A (2012) The role of rangelands in diversified farming systems: innovations, obstacles, and opportunities in the USA. Ecol Soc 17:43–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shivik JA (2006) Tools for the edge: what’s new for conserving carnivores. BioScience 56:253–259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shivik JA, Martin DJ (2000) Aversive and disruptive stimulus applications for managing predation. Wildl Damage Manag Conf 9:111–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommers AP, Price CC, Urbigkit CD, Peterson EM (2010) Quantifying economic impacts of large-carnivore depredation on bovine calves. J Wildl Manag 74:1425–1434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stenhouse GB, Boulanger J, Efford M, Rovang S, McKay T, Sorensen A, Graham K (2015) Estimates of grizzly bear population size and density for the 2014 Alberta Yellowhead Population Unit (BMA3) and south Jasper National Park. FRI Research Grizzly Bear Program, Hinton, Alberta, Canada

  • Teichman KJ, Cristescu B, Dairmont CT (2016) Hunting as a management tool? Cougar-human conflict is positively related to trophy hunting. BMC Ecol 16:44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12898-016-0098-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torell LA, Bailey SA (2000) Is the profit motive an important determinant of grazing land use and the rancher motive? Western Agr Econ Assoc Annual Meeting, Vancouver, B.C. http://purl.umn.edu/36451

  • Treves A, Jurewicz RL, Naughton-Treves L, Wilcove DS (2009) The prices of tolerance: wolf damage payments after recovery. Biodivers Conserv 18:4003–4021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treves A, Krofel M, McManus J (2016) Predator control should not be a shot in the dark. Front Ecol Environ 14:380–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Bommel L, Johnson CN (2012) Good dog! Using livestock guardian dogs to protect livestock from predators in Australia’s extensive grazing systems. Wildl Res 39:220–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner KK, Scmidt RH, Conover MR (1997) Compensation programs for widlife damage in North America. Wildl Soc B 25:312–319

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters C (1986) Adaptive management of revewable resources. MacMillan Publishing Company, New York

  • Wang SW, Macdonald DW (2006) Livestock predation by carnivores in Jigme Singye Wangchuck National Park, Bhutan. Biol Conserv 129:558–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wielgus RB, Peebles KA (2014) Effects of wolf mortality on livestock depredations. PLoS ONE 9:e113505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson SM, Madel MJ, Mattson DJ, Graham JM, Burchfield JA, Belsky JM (2005) Natural landscape features, human-related attractants, and conflict hotspots: a spatial analysis of human–grizzly bear conflicts. Ursus 16:117–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodroffe R (2000) Predators and people: using human densities to interpret declines of large carnivores. Anim Conserv 3:165–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the Alberta Conservation Association for access to the predator compensation data. Thanks to the Alberta Government for access to hunting effort data as well as background shapefiles used to make the maps. A. Morehouse was supported by a grant from Shell Canada. M. Boyce acknowledges continuing support from the Alberta Conservation Association and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. We thank Todd Zimmerling, Adam Ford, and an anonymous reviewer who provided helpful feedback earlier versions of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biological Sciences, University of Alberta, CW405, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2E9, Canada

    Andrea T. Morehouse & Mark S. Boyce

  2. Explor, Calgary, AB, T2P 0S8, Canada

    Jesse Tigner

Authors
  1. Andrea T. Morehouse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jesse Tigner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mark S. Boyce
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea T. Morehouse.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Morehouse, A.T., Tigner, J. & Boyce, M.S. Coexistence with Large Carnivores Supported by a Predator-Compensation Program. Environmental Management 61, 719–731 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0994-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0994-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation