Riverine habitats are essential ecotones that bridge aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, providing multiple ecosystem services. This study analyses the potential use of high-resolution satellite imagery, provided by the WorldView-2 satellite, in order to assess its viability for monitoring riparian ecosystems. It is performed by calculating the riparian strip quality index (RSQI) and calibrating it with the riparian quality index (QBR). The methodology was implemented in the Umia River, which is characterised by elevated anthropogenic pressures (located in the northwest of Spain). The results obtained by the method have a 92% of veracity and a kappa coefficient of 0.88. The average quality value obtained for the RSQI index was 71.57, while the average value for the QBR was 55.88. This difference could be attributed to the fact that the former does not differ between autochthonous and non-autochthonous vegetation. The areas with more accurate mapping corresponded to stretches of vegetation with optimal cover (80–50%), with good connectivity with the adjacent forest ecosystem and few or no presence of invasive plants. The worst-scoring sites had the next characteristics: low connectivity (< 10%), low forest cover (< 10%) and a higher presence of invasive plants. The degradation of vegetation could be explained by the presence of agriculture and deficient land use rationing caused by the type of ownership of the study area. The application of this index through satellite images will facilitate the environmental governance of multiple ecosystems and in special riparian ecosystems, obtaining a quick and objective methodology, easily replicable in other basins. Graphical Abstract

Surveys have been used to study the current perception towards wolves by different stakeholders such as ranchers, landowners, hunters, experts in the field, and employees of the environmental administration in the provinces of Pontevedra and A Coruña, in the northwest of Spain. The main objective of this study is the evaluation and further discussion of the compensation offered to affected people for damages caused by wolf attacks and whether such compensations represent an improvement in the degree of tolerance towards these animals. Significant differences (p < 0.05) were found among the different sectors interviewed, with the hunters being the least tolerant sector, followed by ranchers. The number of attacks in the area was proven to influence their perspective toward wolves and the need for preventive measures. There was unanimity among hunters, ranchers, and locals, who do not consider the tools provided by the Galician administration sufficient to palliate the damages produced by wolves. However, 53.8% of ranchers, the group whose livelihood will most likely be affected by wolf attacks, and 60% of the wolf experts believe that compensation does not help to reduce tolerance towards wolves. Losing an animal makes people more likely to agree to the use of lethal and non-lethal methods.