Leopards provide public health benefits in Mumbai, India

Populations of large carnivores are often suppressed in human-dominated landscapes because they can kill or injure people and domestic animals. However, carnivores can also provide beneficial services to human societies, even in urban environments. We examined the services provided by leopards (Panthera pardus) to the residents of Mumbai, India, one of the world's largest cities. We suggest that by preying on stray dogs, leopards reduce the number of people bitten by dogs, the risk of rabies transmission, and the costs associated with dog sterilization and management. Under one set of assumptions, the presence of leopards in this highly urbanized area could save up to 90 human lives per year. A further indirect benefit of leopard presence may be an increase in local abundance of other wildlife species that would otherwise be predated by dogs. The effective conservation of carnivores in human-dominated landscapes involves difficult trade-offs between human safety and conservation concerns. Quantitative assessments of how large carnivores negatively and positively affect urban ecosystems are critical, along with improved education of local communities about large carnivores and their impacts

The unequal burden of human-wildlife conflict

The costs of human-wildlife conflict are measurably more impactful in areas of the developing world where the loss of cattle can mean the entire livelihood of a family being erased.Human-wildlife conflict is one of the most pressing sustainable development challenges globally. This is particularly the case where ecologically and economically important wildlife impact the livelihoods of humans. Large carnivores are one such group and their co-occurrence with low-income rural communities often results in real or perceived livestock losses that place increased costs on already impoverished households. Here we show the disparities associated with the vulnerability to conflict arising from large carnivores on cattle (Bos taurus) globally. Across the distribution of 18 large carnivores, we find that the economic vulnerability to predation losses (as measured by impacts to annual per capita income) is between two and eight times higher for households in transitioning and developing economies when compared to developed ones. This potential burden is exacerbated further in developing economies because cattle keepers in these areas produce on average 31% less cattle meat per animal than in developed economies. In the lowest-income areas, our estimates suggest that the loss of a single cow or bull equates to nearly a year and a half of lost calories consumed by a child. Finally, our results show that 82% of carnivore range falls outside protected areas, and five threatened carnivores have over one third of their range located in the most economically sensitive conflict areas. This unequal burden of human-carnivore conflict sheds light on the importance of grappling with multiple and conflicting sustainable development goals: protecting life on land and eliminating poverty and hunger

The contribution of predators and scavengers to human well-being

Predators and scavengers are frequently persecuted for their negative effects on property, livestock and human life. Research has shown that these species play important regulatory roles in intact ecosystems including regulating herbivore and mesopredator populations that in turn affect floral, soil and hydrological systems. Yet predators and scavengers receive surprisingly little recognition for their benefits to humans in the landscapes they share. We review these benefits, highlighting the most recent studies that have documented their positive effects across a range of environments. Indeed, the benefits of predators and scavengers can be far reaching, affecting human health and well-being through disease mitigation, agricultural production and waste-disposal services. As many predators and scavengers are in a state of rapid decline, we argue that researchers must work in concert with the media, managers and policymakers to highlight benefits of these species and the need to ensure their long-term conservation. Furthermore, instead of assessing the costs of predators and scavengers only in economic terms, it is critical to recognize their beneficial contributions to human health and well-being. Given the ever-expanding human footprint, it is essential that we construct conservation solutions that allow a wide variety of species to persist in shared landscapes. Identifying, evaluating and communicating the benefits provided by species that are often considered problem animals is an important step for establishing tolerance in these shared spaces

Marketing products with wildlife : how to make it benefit conservation

CITATION: Braczkowski, A. et al. 2021. Marketing products with wildlife : how to make it benefit conservation. Frontiers in Conservation Science, 2:649686, doi:10.3389/fcosc.2021.649686.The original publication is available at https://www.frontiersin.orgA key obstacle to wildlife conservation is a scarcity of funding. A recent paper [Courchamp, F., Jaric, I., Albert, C., Meinard, Y., Ripple, W. J., and Chapron, G. (2018). The paradoxical extinction of the most charismatic animals. PLoS Biol. 16:e2003997. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2003997] illustrates how for-profit businesses’ widespread use of threatened wildlife imagery could create complacency in the public about their conservation. A wildlife imagery royalty, whereby businesses that use threatened wildlife in their marketing pay a small percentage of their sales to the conservation of those species could be revolutionary for conservation funding. However, businesses are not currently compelled to support the protection of the species espoused in their products. We build upon the arguments presented by recent publications [Good, C., Burnham, D., and Macdonald, D. W. (2017). A cultural conscience for conservation. Animals 7:52. doi: 10.3390/ani7070052; Courchamp, F., Jaric, I., Albert, C., Meinard, Y., Ripple, W. J., and Chapron, G. (2018). The paradoxical extinction of the most charismatic animals. PLoS Biol. 16:e2003997. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.2003997] to explore limitations and a number of key pathways that may help bring a wildlife imagery royalty to fruition.Publisher's versio

Author correction: The contribution of predators and scavengers to human well-being

In the version of this review originally published, there were a number of errors that the authors wish to correct

Rosettes, remingtons and reputation: establishing potential determinants of leopard (Panthera pardus) trophy prices across Africa

In a number of African countries, the trophy hunting of large felids is an important revenue generator for landholders, governments and in some cases communities. The hunting of large felids is especially profitable but they are sensitive to harvest, as the killing of prime-aged, dominant males can lead to infanticide and lowered reproductive success. In an attempt to limit the negative impacts of trophy hunting on large felids, the scientific community has proposed a number of interventions, including age restrictions on the animals that may be hunted. Such interventions are theoretically complementary to trophy hunting, as hunters typically seek large trophies, and older animals are normally larger than younger ones in large felids. If trophy size results in an increase in trophy price, then interventions that improve average trophy size could confer elevated earnings. This is particularly true if such interventions increased the number of failed hunts such that the same tag can be sold more than once. However, if trophy size is not one of the most important factors determining the desirability of a hunt (which we judge by the price paid for a trophy hunt package), it may be more difficult to implement such schemes. It is therefore important to evaluate potential determinants of trophy hunt package price; and we examine that here for leopards (Panthera pardus) in Africa, at both the country and outfitter level. We show that Tanzania and Botswana have the most expensive package prices while South Africa has the cheapest packages. At the country level, we found no statistical relationships between package price and leopard trophy size (either through advertised website or Safari Club International (SCI) leopard trophy size), country GDP, relative hunt success, or quota size. Contrastingly, the number of charismatic species offered within a package and an index of outfitter reputation (as measured by total SCI trophy records) were positively associated with package price. Interestingly, SCI leopard trophy size was inversely correlated with package price. Our results suggest that hunters do not value leopard trophy size above other factors, which could hinder the implementation of more sustainable, age-based leopard hunting regulations