Skip to main content

TECHNOLOGY AND CODE article

Front. Conserv. Sci.
Sec. Human-Wildlife Interactions
Volume 5 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fcosc.2024.1478450
This article is part of the Research Topic Conflict Analysis, Resolution and Mediation in Biodiversity Conservation View all 3 articles

Drones outperform dogs for hazing bears: a comparison of carnivore aversive conditioning tools

Provisionally accepted
  • Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, United States

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Human-wildlife conflict can result in harm to people and their livelihoods, and frequently ends in reduced tolerance for species and/or removal of animals. Resolving and preventing conflict is essential for conserving carnivore populations. Here I conducted a six-year study of the efficacy of non-lethal hazing tools to deter grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) away from people on the prairies of North-Central Montana. I tested a new technology, drones, and traditional methods of hazing bears including dogs, projectiles, and vehicular pursuit. These various hazing techniques were successful at stopping undesirable bear behaviors and caused a significant increase in avoidance behavior and distance to human infrastructure. Results from these 163 hazing events suggest aversive conditioning may have occurred over longer time scales as older bears required less hazing and hazing events decreased over each calendar year. Drones outperformed other hazing techniques where the odds of a pursuit of a bear being possible increased 127% relative to vehicular chasing due to accessibility issues. Relative to vehicular pursuit, dogs required high maintenance and had an 86% reduction in the odds a hazing event would be successful relative to vehicular pursuit. Grizzlies fled to locations that were farther from roads and human development. Hazing tools were effective for immediately resolving complaints and preventing further conflicts.

    Keywords: Aversive Conditioning, Conflict prevention, Human-wildlife coexistence, Human-wildlife conflict, Non-lethal, Carnivore recovery, rewilding, UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle)

    Received: 09 Aug 2024; Accepted: 15 Nov 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Sarmento. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Wesley Sarmento, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, Helena, United States

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.