RESUMO
Outdoor recreation is widespread, with uncertain effects on wildlife. The human shield hypothesis (HSH) suggests that recreation could have differential effects on predators and prey, with predator avoidance of humans creating a spatial refuge 'shielding' prey from people. The generality of the HSH remains to be tested across larger scales, wherein human shielding may prove generalizable, or diminish with variability in ecological contexts. We combined data from 446 camera traps and 79,279 sampling days across 10 landscapes spanning 15,840 km2 in western Canada. We used hierarchical models to quantify the influence of recreation and landscape disturbance (roads, logging) on ungulate prey (moose, mule deer and elk) and carnivore (wolf, grizzly bear, cougar and black bear) site use. We found limited support for the HSH and strong responses to recreation at local but not larger spatial scales. Only mule deer showed positive but weak landscape-level responses to recreation. Elk were positively associated with local recreation while moose and mule deer responses were negative, contrary to HSH predictions. Mule deer showed a more complex interaction between recreation and land-use disturbance, with more negative responses to recreation at lower road density or higher logged areas. Contrary to HSH predictions, carnivores did not avoid recreation and grizzly bear site use was positively associated. We also tested the effects of roads and logging on temporal activity overlap between mule deer and recreation, expecting deer to minimize interaction with humans by partitioning time in areas subject to more habitat disturbance. However, temporal overlap between people and deer increased with road density. Our findings highlight the complex ecological patterns that emerge at macroecological scales. There is a need for expanded monitoring of human and wildlife use of recreation areas, particularly multi-scale and -species approaches to studying the interacting effects of recreation and land-use change on wildlife.
RESUMO
The urban-wildland interface is expanding and increasing the risk of human-wildlife conflict. Some wildlife species adapt to or avoid living near people, while others select for anthropogenic resources and are thus more prone to conflict. To promote human-wildlife coexistence, wildlife and land managers need to understand how conflict relates to habitat and resource use in the urban-wildland interface. We investigated black bear (Ursus americanus) habitat use across a gradient of human disturbance in a North American hotspot of human-black bear conflict. We used camera traps to monitor bear activity from July 2018 to July 2019, and compared bear habitat use to environmental and anthropogenic variables and spatiotemporal probabilities of conflict. Bears predominantly used areas of high vegetation productivity and increased their nocturnality near people. Still, bears used more high-conflict areas in summer and autumn, specifically rural lands with ripe crops. Our results suggest that bears are generally modifying their behaviours in the urban-wildland interface through spatial and temporal avoidance of humans, which may facilitate coexistence. However, conflict still occurs, especially in autumn when hyperphagia and peak crop availability attract bears to abundant rural food resources. To improve conflict mitigation practices, we recommend targeting seasonal rural attractants with pre-emptive fruit picking, bear-proof compost containment, and other forms of behavioural deterrence. By combining camera-trap monitoring of a large carnivore along an anthropogenic gradient with conflict mapping, we provide a framework for evidence-based improvements in human-wildlife coexistence.
