Competition with fisheries and incidental capture in fishing gear are the major current threats for seabirds at sea. Fishing is a traditional activity in Portugal and is mainly composed of a great number of small vessels. Given the lack of knowledge on effects of the Portuguese fishing fleet on seabird populations, bycatch was assessed in mainland coastal waters for 2010–2012. Interviews and on-board data were divided into 5 strata, according to fishing gear: Bottom trawling, Bottom longline, Purse seine, Beach seine, Polyvalent (≥12 m) and Polyvalent (<12 m). Polyvalent included Setnets, Traps and Demersal longlines. Overall, 68 birds were recorded to be bycaught. The average catch per unit effort (CPUE) was 0.05 birds per fishing event. Polyvalent (<12 m), Polyvalent (≥12 m) and Purse seiners had the biggest seabird bycatch rates, with 0.5 (CPUE=0.1), 0.11 (CPUE=0.05) and 0.2 (CPUE=0.11) birds per trip, respectively. Within Polyvalent gear, Setnets captured the largest diversity of seabird species (CPUE=0.06), while Demersal longline had the highest CPUE (0.86). Northern gannet was the most common bycaught species. Although more observation effort is required, our results suggest that substantial numbers of Balearic shearwater might be bycaught annually, mainly in Purse seine and Setnets

Creating a future for elephants and people is a highly complex and dynamic challenge, involving social, behavioral, and ecological dimensions as well as multiple actors with various interests. To foster learning from human–elephant conflict (HEC) management projects and share best practices, a study was conducted to review the management of conflicts between elephants and humans in 12 African countries by qualitative expert interviews. Based on this information, a HEC management framework was developed in a two-tiered process. In the first phase, the theory of the framework was developed. In a second phase, the theoretical framework was validated and adjusted through stakeholder participation in two southern African projects (in Mozambique and Malawi). This holistic approach considers environmental as well as social, political, cultural, and economic factors directly or indirectly affecting interactions between people and wildlife. The framework integrates six interlinked strategies to guide managers and conservation practitioners to address HWC drivers and mitigate their impact. A legal environment and spatial planning form the basis of the framework. Social strategies, including meaningful stakeholder engagement and design of appropriate institutional structures and processes are considered the heart of the framework. Technical and financial strategies represent its arms and hands. At the top, monitoring steers all processes, provides feedback for adjustment, and informs decisions. The integration and coordination of these six strategies has great potential as a guiding route to human–wildlife coexistence in Africa and elsewhere.

Protected Areas (PAs) are important wildlife refuges and act as climate change buffers, but they may impact human livelihoods, particularly engendering a high risk of negative human-wildlife interactions (HWI). Understanding synergies and trade-offs among the drivers of overall human vulnerability within PAs is needed to ensure good outcomes for conservation and human well-being. We examined how climate variability, HWI, and socio-demographics affect livelihood vulnerability across three PAs in Mozambique, Southeast Africa. We used structured questionnaires to obtain information on livelihood vulnerability and social-ecological context-specific variables. We applied principal component analysis to understand synergies and trade-offs between the dimensions of vulnerability and linear models to test the effect of social-ecological drivers on vulnerability. We show that households are mostly vulnerable within PAs due to exposure to climate variability and to HWI, and their low capacity to employ livelihood strategies or to have a strong social network. Furthermore, we show that vulnerability to HWI and climate variability increases with distance to strict protection areas within the PAs and distance to rivers, which implies that proximity to strict protection areas and rivers within PAs still promotes better livelihood conditions than elsewhere. On the other hand, we also found that lower access to infrastructure and other livelihood assets enhances vulnerability, which reflects a trade-off within PAs that potentially limits the benefits of socially inclusive conservation. Our results show that the impacts of PAs, HWI, and climate on community vulnerability should not be viewed in isolation, but instead, conservation and livelihood improvement strategies should reflect their interconnectedness. Although livelihood vulnerability appears to be shaped by these general effects of PAs, it is important also to consider the local PA context when addressing or mitigating livelihood vulnerability in and around them.

Summary: Human–wildlife interactions (HWIs) occur in many rural African communities, with potential impacts on livelihood vulnerability. High livelihood vulnerability may force communities to employ strategies that increase the risk of negative HWIs, yet the extent to which HWIs drive or are driven by vulnerability is unclear. We hypothesized that more vulnerable households are more likely to be exposed to wildlife and experience negative interactions. To test this hypothesis, we calculated the Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI) of rural households in and around Quirimbas National Park (north-eastern Mozambique) and assessed whether there is a link between livelihood vulnerability and HWIs. We found a two-way association between LVI and HWIs, with more vulnerable households indeed taking greater risks and encountering wildlife when fetching water from rivers, whereas less vulnerable households tended not to employ strategies likely to increase wildlife encounters. We also observed that HWIs exert a strong effect on livelihood vulnerability, suggesting that HWIs should be included as an exposure factor in vulnerability assessments for rural households. We recommend that livelihood strategies and community vulnerability should be considered when designing HWI mitigation schemes and implementing conservation measures.

The diet of free-ranging bears is an important dimension regarding their ecology, affecting their behavior, population structure, and relation with humans. In Croatia, there has been no recent study on the natural food habits of brown bears (Ursus arctos) or the influence of artificial feeding sites on their diet. During 2017, we collected 53 brown bear stomachs from bears in 2 regions of Croatia—Gorski Kotar and Lika—to assess their diet. Plants—Allium ursinum, the Poaceae family, Cornus mas, berries (i.e., Prunus avium, Rubus plicatus), beechnuts (Fagus spp.)—and various plant parts (i.e., dry leaves, buds, conifer needles, and twigs), as well as mushrooms, made up 80% of the percentage of the volume (%V) of all consumed items. Corn (Zea mays) from the feeding sites made up 37% of the bears' diet (%V), whereas 20% (%V) was meat and 14% (%V) was pome fruits. Scavenged or preyed animal species, such as wild boar (Sus scrofa), horse (Equus caballus), domestic pig (S. scrofa domesticus), cattle (Bos taurus), roe deer (Capreolus capreolus), and small mammals comprised >66% of %FO (frequency of occurrence), but only 20% of %V. Our results showed that food resources (i.e., livestock such as horses, cattle, and pigs, and corn) found at supplemental feeding sites were more frequently chosen by bears than natural food in 2017, a year characterized by almost no beechnut crop. The results showed that subadult bears obtained most food from feeding sites. These 2 patterns suggested that bears may focus on artificial feeding sites to find food in years when natural food sources are depleted, although this should be tested using diet and food availability data collected from several years.

Biodiversity conservation traditionally necessitates setting aside land, which frequently impacts local communities. Although progress has been made on how to optimize this process, conflict frequently emerges when conservation and community goals are at odds. Improving communication and community inclusiveness in decision‐making processes is strongly recommended to achieve livelihood goals and conservation outcomes. We used social network analysis to understand how local communities are embedded within the structure and dynamics of stakeholder interactions in Quirimbas National Park (Mozambique). We detected a network of limited cooperation that lacks bidirectional communication, displaying low average knowledge transfer but high bonding across stakeholder groups with similar perceptions. Local communities only interact with the district government and they have a passive voice in the system. A more inclusive network structure is needed so that conservation and community livelihood goals can be achieved.