Special Issue "Human-Wildlife Conflicts"

A special issue of Diversity (ISSN 1424-2818). This special issue belongs to the section "Biodiversity Conservation".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 December 2023 | Viewed by 989

Special Issue Editors

Institute for Ecology and Environmental Resources, Chongqing Academy of Social Sciences, Chongqing 400020, China
Interests: human–wildlife conflicts; conservation biology; protected area management; climate change; landscape ecology; ecological modeling; ecological security
Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Key Laboratory of Biological Conservation of State Forestry Administration, Beijing 100091, China
Interests: human–wildlife conflicts; conservation biology; protected area management; landscape genetics; conservation genetics
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
The Snow Leopard Conservancy, Sonoma, CA 95476, USA
Interests: human–wildlife conflict; international wildlife policy; illegal wildlife trade; conservation genetics
Ecology and Nature Conservation Institute, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Key Laboratory of Biodiversity Conservation, State Forestry and Grassland Administration, Beijing 100091, China
Interests: conservation biology; human–wildlife conflict; desert animals diversity; protected areas’ planning; wildlife monitoring

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Personal injury and property loss caused by wildlife often deteriorates the relationship between humans and animals, prompting retaliatory killings that threaten species survival. Large carnivores are of great significance for maintaining the health and stability of local ecosystems. In recent years, conflicts between humans and large carnivores in many countries have increased dramatically, seriously affecting community enthusiasm for carnivores and the conservation of other species, as well as encouraging retaliatory killings. Understanding the current status of these conflicts, people’s knowledge and attitudes and identifying the risk areas and conflict driving mechanisms are crucial to formulate and implement effective mitigation and bear conservation measures.

This Special Issue aims to bring together studies analyzing the human–wildlife conflicts across different countries in an effort to better understand the drivers, patterns and outcomes of human–wildlife conflicts. We are particularly interested in:

  • The current status, characteristics and human cognition of human–wildlife conflicts;
  • Identifying the drivers leading to increased human–wildlife conflicts;
  • The mitigation strategies for human–wildlife conflicts;
  • The risk assessment for human–wildlife conflicts;
  • Conservation policies, laws and ecological compensation for large carnivores.

Dr. Yunchuan Dai
Prof. Dr. Yuguang Zhang
Dr. Charlotte Hacker
Dr. Yadong Xue
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Diversity is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • human–wildlife conflicts
  • risk assessment
  • conflict driving mechanisms
  • mitigation strategies
  • wildlife conservation management
  • ecological compensation
  • community economic development in protected areas
  • ecological modeling
  • application of 3S technology in wildlife protection

Published Papers (1 paper)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Article
Responses of GPS-Tagged Territorial Golden Eagles Aquila chrysaetos to Wind Turbines in Scotland
Diversity 2023, 15(8), 917; https://doi.org/10.3390/d15080917 - 08 Aug 2023
Viewed by 588
Abstract
Research on potentially adverse effects of wind farms is an expanding field of study and often focuses on large raptors, such as golden eagles, largely because of their life history traits and extensive habitat requirements. These features render them sensitive to either fatality [...] Read more.
Research on potentially adverse effects of wind farms is an expanding field of study and often focuses on large raptors, such as golden eagles, largely because of their life history traits and extensive habitat requirements. These features render them sensitive to either fatality (collision with turbine blades) or functional habitat loss (avoidance through wariness of turbines). Simplistically, avoidance is antagonistic to collision; although, the two processes are not necessarily mutually exclusive in risk. A bird that does not enter a wind farm or avoids flying close to turbines cannot collide with a blade and be killed. In the USA, collision fatality is implicated as the typical adverse effect. In Scotland, avoidance of functional habitat loss appears more likely, but this depends in part on the habitat suitability of turbine locations. Previous Scottish studies have largely concentrated on the responses of GPS-tagged non-territorial golden eagles during dispersal. Several arguments predict that territorial eagles may have lower avoidance (be less wary) of turbines than non-territorial birds. Hence, we contrasted the responses of GPS-tagged non-territorial (intruding) and territorial eagles to the same turbines at 11 operational Scottish wind farms. We show that territorial eagles rarely approached turbines, but, as in previous Scottish studies of non-territorial birds, the spatial extent of avoidance depended on the habitat suitability of both turbine locations and their wider surroundings. Unexpectedly, we found that territorial eagles were apparently as wary as intruding non-territorial conspecifics of the same turbines. Our results show that regardless of age or territorial status, Scottish golden eagles largely avoided wind turbine locations, but this avoidance was conditional, in part, on where those turbines were located. Responses to turbines were also strongly dependent on birds’ identities and different wind farms. We speculate on how widespread our findings of avoidance of turbines by golden eagles are elsewhere in Europe, where there appear to be no published studies showing the level of collision fatalities documented in the USA. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human-Wildlife Conflicts)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop