Management of Human–Bear Conflict

Abstract

On Oshima Peninsula, Hokkaido, Japan, recent trends concerning the intrusions of the brown bear into crop fields and a subsequent increase in agricultural damage have highlighted the need for new and more effective population management strategies. To devise such strategies, we constructed a population dynamics model for adult females, based on bear aggressiveness and human-bear interactions. The results of the analysis indicate that an adaptive management strategy successfully reduces the risk of management failure. In Shiretoko World Heritage site, also Hokkaido, wild bears become a nuisance by interacting with photographers who visit the area. Through such interactions, bears get used to the presence of people, and due to a lack of fear, may eventually exhibit aggressive behavior. Managing bear populations, therefore, also demands managing people. To further exacerbate the situation, the human–wildlife conflict has spilled from national parks to metropolitan areas. Ban on hunting does not help either.

The human–wildlife conflict is common in both developing and developed countries. African elephant ivory has historically achieved a high price that subsequently caused a dramatic fall in the population between 1979–1989. Elephants were listed in CITES Appendix I in 1989. Populations in southern Africa have since rebounded and, despite an increase in poaching and smuggling after the ban on exports, they have been downgraded to Appendix II. It is not the case that humans exclusively threaten elephants. In Tanzania, for example, dozens of people annually get mauled by elephants, with the human–elephant conflict generally being more critical around nature reserves. In Europe and the United States, thriving trophy hunting turned out to be a powerful means of managing damage caused by animals. Developing countries sometimes seek to mimic this positive effect, for example, by game hunting for elephants and tigers.

Wild animal meat (bushmeat), fish, shellfish, and even insects are important protein sources, especially in poorer areas of the world, such as sub-Saharan Africa. Therefore, there is no alternative to making use of wildlife for food more sustainable, while managing the human–wildlife conflict. The same holds for farmland, which is usually the land that had once been occupied by wild birds or beasts before being taken over by human inhabitants. If farming is to coexists with wild birds and beasts, some level of the human–wildlife conflict is inevitable in agriculture, as well as in forestry and fisheries. People are inseparable from the biosphere, and thus not only use wildlife but are sometimes being used by wildlife too. Under the Convention on Biological Diversity, the basis of nature conservation is that there are ecosystem services or nature’s contribution to people that promote human well-being. This leads to the idea of Sustainable Development Goals.