Vultures vs livestock: Conservation relationships in an emerging conflict between humans and wildlife

Abstract

Human–wildlife conflict is emerging as an important topic in conservation. Carnivores and birds of prey are responsible for most conflicts with livestock and game but since the mid 1990s a new conflict is emerging in south-west Europe: the presumed killing of livestock by griffon vultures Gyps fulvus. Lack of scientific data and magnification of the problem by the media are increasing alarm amongst the public, and political pressures to implement management decisions have not been based on scientific evidence. We compiled information on 1,793 complaints about attacks by griffon vultures on livestock, lodged with Spanish authorities from 1996 to 2010. Spain is home to the majority (95%) of griffon vultures and other scavengers in the European Union. Most of the cases occurred in areas of high livestock density, affected principally sheep (49%) and cows (31%), and were associated with spring birthing times (April–June). On average 69% of the complaints made annually were rejected because of a lack of evidence about whether the animal was alive before being eaten. The total economic cost of compensation was EUR 278,590 from 2004 to 2010. We discuss possible ways to mitigate this emerging human–wildlife conflict. These need to include the participation of livestock farmers, authorities, scientists and conservation groups.

Full text

Published for
Fauna & Flora International April 2014 · Volume 48 · Number 2
Oryx Volume 48 · Number 2 · April 2014 · pp. 157–XXX
The International Journal of Conservation
www.oryxthejournal.org
Volume 48 · Number 2
April 2014
157 Open? Closed? Ajar? What is happening to the peer
reviewed literature? M. Fisher
159 Briefly
169 Conservation news
172 Vultures vs livestock: conservation relationships in
an emerging conflict between humans and wildlife,
A. Margalida, D. Campión & J.A. Donázar
XXX The discovery, biodiversity and conservation of Mabu
forest—the largest medium-altitude rainforest in
southern Africa, J. Bayliss, J. Timberlake, W. Branch,
C. Bruessow, S. Collins, C. Congdon et al.
XXX Old wine, new bottles? Using history to inform
the assisted colonization debate, J.M. Winston, B.A.
Minteer & J.P. Collins
XXX Translocation and hand-rearing of the short-tailed
albatross Phoebastria albatrus: early indicators of
success for species conservation and island restoration,
T. Deguchi, R.M. Suryan, K. Ozaki, J.F. Jacobs, F. Sato,
N. Nakamura & G.R. Balogh
XXX Diversity, distribution and status of bats on the
Andaman and Nicobar Islands, India, B. Aul, P.J.J.
Bates, D.L. Harrison & G. Marimuthu
XXX Protection of the white-nest swiftlet Aerodramus
fuciphagus in the Andaman Islands, India: an
assessment, S. Manchi & R. Sankaran
XXX Perceptions matter: how fishermen’s perceptions affect
trends of sustainability in Indian fisheries, D. Karnad,
M. Gangal & K.K. Karanth
XXX Effects of livestock on occurrence of the Vulnerable
red panda Ailurus fulgens in Rara National Park, Nepal,
H.P. Sharma, J.L. Belant & J.E. Swenson
XXX Habitat of the Vulnerable Formosan sambar deer Rusa
unicolor swinhoii in Taiwan, S.-C. Yen, Y. Wang & H.-Y. Ou
XXX Monitoring the effects of forest clear-cutting and
mongoose Herpestes auropunctatus invasion on wildlife
diversity on Amami Island, Japan, K. Sugimura,
K. Ishida, S. Abe, Y. Nagai, Y. Watari, M. Tatara et al.
XXX Estimating puma Puma concolor population size in
a human-disturbed landscape in Brazil using DNA
mark–recapture data, R.A. Miotto, M. Cervini,
M. Kajin, R.A. Begotti & P.M. Galetti Jr
XXX Categorizing threatened species: an analysis of the Red
List of the flora of Brazil, M.A. Moraes, R.A.X. Borges,
E.M. Martins, R.A. Fernandes, T. Messina
& G. Martinelli
XXX Updated global distribution of the threatened marine
limpet Patella ferruginea (Gastropoda: Patellidae): an
example of biodiversity loss in the Mediterranean,
F. Espinosa, G.A. Rivera-Ingraham, M. Maestre, A.R.
González, H. Bazairi & J.C. García-Gómez
XXX Impact of human pressure and forest fragmentation
on the Endangered Barbary macaque Macaca sylvanus
in the Middle Atlas of Morocco, N. Ménard, Y. Rantier,
A. Foulquier, M. Qarro, L. Chillasse, D. Vallet et al.
XXX Ecological trap in the buffer zone of a protected area:
effects of indirect anthropogenic mortality on the
African wild dog Lycaon pictus, E. van der Meer,
H. Fritz, P. Blinston & G.S.A. Rasmussen
XXX Assessing reintroduction success in long-lived primates
through population viability analysis: western lowland
gorillas Gorilla gorilla gorilla in Central Africa, T. King,
C. Chamberlan & A. Courage
XXX Factors influencing the illegal harvest of wildlife by
trapping and snaring among the Katu ethnic group in
Vietnam, D.C. MacMillan & Q.A. Nguyen
Cover Griffon vulture covered in blood from feeding, Spain.
A new type of conflict with wildlife is emerging in south-west
Europe: the presumed killing of livestock by griffon vultures.
Lack of scientific data and magnification of the problem by
the media are increasing alarm amongst the public but political
pressures to implement management decisions have not been
based on scientific evidence. Compilation of complaints about
attacks by griffon vultures on livestock shows that 69% of the
complaints were rejected because of a lack of evidence about
whether the animal was alive before being eaten. Nevertheless,
illegal practices such as intentional poisoning of griffon
vultures have been detected, affecting dozens of individuals.
Mitigation of this emerging human–wildlife conflict needs
to include the participation of livestock farmers, relevant
authorities, scientists and conservation groups. For further
details, see pp. XXX–XXX. (Photograph © Wild Wonders
of Europe / Widstrand / NaturePL.com).
www.oryxthejournal.org
Supported by
40?
3DSHUIURP
UHVSRQVLEOHVRXUFHV
-:*

*

Vultures vs livestock
An emerging human–
wildlife conflict?
Mabu forest
Discovery, biodiversity
and conservation
Old wine, new bottles?
History and the assisted
colonization debate
Perceptions matter
Sustainability in Indian fisheries
Anthropogenic mortality
Ecological trap for African wild dogs
Translocation of the short-tailed albatross
Early indicators of success

Published for
Fauna & Flora International April 2014 · Volume 48 · Number 2
Oryx Volume 48 · Number 2 · April 2014 · pp. 157–XXX
The International Journal of Conservation
www.oryxthejournal.org
Volume 48 · Number 2
April 2014
157 Open? Closed? Ajar? What is happening to the peer
reviewed literature? M. Fisher
159 Briefly
169 Conservation news
172 Vultures vs livestock: conservation relationships in
an emerging conflict between humans and wildlife,
A. Margalida, D. Campión & J.A. Donázar
XXX The discovery, biodiversity and conservation of Mabu
forest—the largest medium-altitude rainforest in
southern Africa, J. Bayliss, J. Timberlake, W. Branch,
C. Bruessow, S. Collins, C. Congdon et al.
XXX Old wine, new bottles? Using history to inform
the assisted colonization debate, J.M. Winston, B.A.
Minteer & J.P. Collins
XXX Translocation and hand-rearing of the short-tailed
albatross Phoebastria albatrus: early indicators of
success for species conservation and island restoration,
T. Deguchi, R.M. Suryan, K. Ozaki, J.F. Jacobs, F. Sato,
N. Nakamura & G.R. Balogh
XXX Diversity, distribution and status of bats on the
Andaman and Nicobar Islands, India, B. Aul, P.J.J.
Bates, D.L. Harrison & G. Marimuthu
XXX Protection of the white-nest swiftlet Aerodramus
fuciphagus in the Andaman Islands, India: an
assessment, S. Manchi & R. Sankaran
XXX Perceptions matter: how fishermen’s perceptions affect
trends of sustainability in Indian fisheries, D. Karnad,
M. Gangal & K.K. Karanth
XXX Effects of livestock on occurrence of the Vulnerable
red panda Ailurus fulgens in Rara National Park, Nepal,
H.P. Sharma, J.L. Belant & J.E. Swenson
XXX Habitat of the Vulnerable Formosan sambar deer Rusa
unicolor swinhoii in Taiwan, S.-C. Yen, Y. Wang & H.-Y. Ou
XXX Monitoring the effects of forest clear-cutting and
mongoose Herpestes auropunctatus invasion on wildlife
diversity on Amami Island, Japan, K. Sugimura,
K. Ishida, S. Abe, Y. Nagai, Y. Watari, M. Tatara et al.
XXX Estimating puma Puma concolor population size in
a human-disturbed landscape in Brazil using DNA
mark–recapture data, R.A. Miotto, M. Cervini,
M. Kajin, R.A. Begotti & P.M. Galetti Jr
XXX Categorizing threatened species: an analysis of the Red
List of the flora of Brazil, M.A. Moraes, R.A.X. Borges,
E.M. Martins, R.A. Fernandes, T. Messina
& G. Martinelli
XXX Updated global distribution of the threatened marine
limpet Patella ferruginea (Gastropoda: Patellidae): an
example of biodiversity loss in the Mediterranean,
F. Espinosa, G.A. Rivera-Ingraham, M. Maestre, A.R.
González, H. Bazairi & J.C. García-Gómez
XXX Impact of human pressure and forest fragmentation
on the Endangered Barbary macaque Macaca sylvanus
in the Middle Atlas of Morocco, N. Ménard, Y. Rantier,
A. Foulquier, M. Qarro, L. Chillasse, D. Vallet et al.
XXX Ecological trap in the buffer zone of a protected area:
effects of indirect anthropogenic mortality on the
African wild dog Lycaon pictus, E. van der Meer,
H. Fritz, P. Blinston & G.S.A. Rasmussen
XXX Assessing reintroduction success in long-lived primates
through population viability analysis: western lowland
gorillas Gorilla gorilla gorilla in Central Africa, T. King,
C. Chamberlan & A. Courage
XXX Factors influencing the illegal harvest of wildlife by
trapping and snaring among the Katu ethnic group in
Vietnam, D.C. MacMillan & Q.A. Nguyen
Cover Griffon vulture covered in blood from feeding, Spain.
A new type of conflict with wildlife is emerging in south-west
Europe: the presumed killing of livestock by griffon vultures.
Lack of scientific data and magnification of the problem by
the media are increasing alarm amongst the public but political
pressures to implement management decisions have not been
based on scientific evidence. Compilation of complaints about
attacks by griffon vultures on livestock shows that 69% of the
complaints were rejected because of a lack of evidence about
whether the animal was alive before being eaten. Nevertheless,
illegal practices such as intentional poisoning of griffon
vultures have been detected, affecting dozens of individuals.
Mitigation of this emerging human–wildlife conflict needs
to include the participation of livestock farmers, relevant
authorities, scientists and conservation groups. For further
details, see pp. XXX–XXX. (Photograph © Wild Wonders
of Europe / Widstrand / NaturePL.com).
www.oryxthejournal.org
Supported by
40?
3DSHUIURP
UHVSRQVLEOHVRXUFHV
-:*

*

Vultures vs livestock
An emerging human–
wildlife conflict?
Mabu forest
Discovery, biodiversity
and conservation
Old wine, new bottles?
History and the assisted
colonization debate
Perceptions matter
Sustainability in Indian fisheries
Anthropogenic mortality
Ecological trap for African wild dogs
Translocation of the short-tailed albatross
Early indicators of success

Vultures vs livestock: conservation relationships in
an emerging conflict between humans and wildlife
ANTONI MARGALIDA,DAVID CAMPIÓN and J OSÉ A. DONÁZAR
Abstract Human–wildlife conflict is emerging as an
important topic in conservation. Carnivores and birds of
prey are responsible for most conflicts with livestock and
game but since the mid 1990s a new conflict is emerging
in south-west Europe: the presumed killing of livestock
by griffon vultures Gyps fulvus. Lack of scientific data and
magnification of the problem by the media are increasing
alarm amongst the public, and political pressures to
implement management decisions have not been based on
scientific evidence. We compiled information on 1,793
complaints about attacks by griffon vultures on livestock,
lodged with Spanish authorities from 1996 to 2010. Spain
is home to the majority (95%) of griffon vultures and
other scavengers in the European Union. Most of the cases
occurred in areas of high livestock density, affected
principally sheep (49%) and cows (31%), and were associated
with spring birthing times (April–June). On average 69%of
the complaints made annually were rejected because of a
lack of evidence about whether the animal was alive before
being eaten. The total economic cost of compensation was
EUR 278,590 from 2004 to 2010. We discuss possible ways to
mitigate this emerging human–wildlife conflict. These need
to include the participation of livestock farmers, authorities,
scientists and conservation groups.
Keywords Behavioural changes, ecosystem services, preda-
tion, vulture, wildlife damage management
Introduction
Human–wildlife conflicts probably have an ancient
origin, perhaps starting in the Neolithic period,
and coincide with the sedentarization of human popu-
lations, the domestication of some animal species and the
beginning of intensive exploitation of the environment
(Anderson, 1997). However, in modern times, with the
increase in the human population, the occupation of
wilderness and the subsequent need to monetize natural
resources, the confrontations between wildlife and people
are becoming more common and of increasing concern to
ecologists and managers (Treves et al., 2009; Gehring et al.,
2010). This conflict mostly reflects a common scenario
of unstable coexistence in which large herbivores and
predators (mainly carnivores and birds of prey) damage
crops, fisheries, livestock and properties and jeopardize
human safety (Peterson et al., 2010). This conflict frequently
results in persecution of conservation target species,
even within protected areas (Graham et al., 2005; Peterson
et al., 2010).
Other groups of species, however, have traditionally
been respected, not only because they do not represent a
conflict with human interests but also because they provide
useful services (although some people ignore the value they
provide). Vultures and other large-bodied scavengers have,
for millennia, yielded an ecosystem service by eliminating
carcasses that would otherwise be carriers of disease
(Sekercioglu et al., 2004). However, because of profound
changes in European agro-grazing systems in the last
century, vulture populations have fallen into crisis, declining
severely in several European countries (Donázar et al.,
1996). Consequently, avian scavengers, and especially
griffon vultures (Gyps spp.), are now targets for conser-
vation action. In southern Europe a panoply of management
measures over the last 30 years has facilitated a spectacular
recovery (.200%in20 years) of the Eurasian griffon vulture
Gyps fulvus population in the Iberian Peninsula and other
regions of western Europe (Donázar et al., 2009b). As a
result, the Iberian Peninsula is home to the majority (95%)
of griffon vultures and other scavengers in the European
Union (Margalida et al., 2010).
This successful conservation strategy is now at risk
because of an emerging wildlife–human conflict that
emerged in the 1990s: attacks by griffon vultures on
livestock. This conflict has intensified in the last decade,
causing major unrest among farmers but receiving scarce
attention from the scientific community (Margalida et al.,
2011a). In the face of the public outcry because of attacks
on livestock attributed to vultures, there is a need for an
objective assessment of this problem and any implications it
has for the management and conservation of scavenger
populations. Our purpose here is to explore this emerging
issue, examining the human, economic and conservation
dimensions of this unusual conflict.
ANTONI MARGALIDA*(Corresponding author) Division of Conservation Biology,
Institute of Ecology and Evolution, University of Bern, Baltzerstrasse, 6, 3012
Bern, Switzerland. E-mail antoni.margalida@iee.unibe.ch
DAVID CAMPIÓN Gestión Ambiental de Navarra S.A., Pamplona, Navarra, Spain
JOSÉ A. DONÁZAR Department of Conservation Biology, Estación Biológica de
Doñana, CSIC, Sevilla, Spain
*Present address: Department of Animal Production (Division of Wildlife),
Faculty of Life Sciences and Engineering, University of Lleida, Av. Alcalde
Rovira Roure, 191, 25198 Lleida, Spain
Received 21 February 2012. Revision requested 12 May 2012.
Accepted 6June 2012. First published online 28 January 2014.
©2014 Fauna & Flora International,
Oryx
, 48(2), 172–176 doi:10.1017/S0030605312000889

Quantifying the impact of vulture attacks on
livestock
Although aggressive interactions between vultures and
livestock have been documented throughout Spain and
southern France, for an initial diagnosis of the phenomenon
we selected an area of 78,000 km
2
in north-east Spain.
During our study period (1996–2010) most of the reported
attacks on livestock attributed to griffon vultures in Spain
were concentrated in this zone (Fig. 1). The local griffon
vulture population has experienced continuous growth and
in 2008 was estimated at 7,433 pairs, constituting 27.3%of
the vulture population in the European Union (Fig. 2;
Margalida et al., 2010). This area is characterized by the
presence of abundant livestock (an estimated 709,294 cows,
3,236,333 sheep, 109,118 goats and 24,772 horses;
MAGRAMA, 2012). Most of this livestock is reared
extensively and their numbers increase in the mountains
during June–September because of transhumance.
Throughout the study area there were supplementary
feeding stations for avian scavengers, supplied mainly by
intensive farming (Donázar et al., 2009b). Traditionally,
livestock carcasses were left in the field to be consumed by
vultures but after the outbreak of bovine spongiform
FIG. 1 Study area
(encompassed by white line)
and circum-Mediterranean
distribution (shaded black) of
the Eurasian griffon vulture
Gyps fulvus population.
1
2–10
11–30
31–90
>90
FIG. 2 Distribution of griffon
vulture colonies in Spain in
2008. Circle size denotes
colony size (number of
breeding pairs). The study area
is shaded grey (modified from
Del Moral, 2009).
Vultures vs livestock 173
©2014 Fauna & Flora International,
Oryx
, 48(2), 172–176

encephalopathy (BSE) in 2001 there was a shortage
of domestic carcasses generally and at feeding stations
in Spain (Donázar et al., 2009a; Margalida et al., 2012).
This shortage was pronounced from 2006 onwards
following increasingly effective application of European
sanitary regulations, and it is estimated that the number
of carcasses available to vultures decreased by 80%inthe
study area (Cortés-Avizanda et al., 2010; Margalida et al.,
2014).
We compiled data from all complaints made to the
regional authorities responsible for the management of
livestock and wildlife during 1996–2010. Cases of apparent
predation of livestock by vultures were generally reported
to the authorities by forest rangers, and because of the
existence of monetary compensations we are confident
that virtually all of the potential livestock losses related to
griffon vultures were communicated. Following a complaint
lodged by a farmer, authorities sent administrative staff
(technical experts and/or forest rangers and veterinarians),
if necessary, to evaluate the damage. A complaint was
accepted and the farmer compensated if clear evidence was
found (i.e. wounds, bruises) demonstrating that the animal
was still alive when the vultures began to eat.
Between 1996 and 2010 there were 1,793 reported cases of
vulture attacks on livestock in the study region. The number
of successful compensation claims for vulture attacks
increased with time (r
s
50.55,P,0.025,n515;Fig. 3).
Most cases occurred after 2006 when supplementary feeding
stations were closed. On average 69% of the complaints
presented each year were rejected (range 57.6–73.8%).
Most of the cases (60%) were reported between April
and June and in 36% of cases the attack appeared to be
associated with birthing, generally affecting young and
occasionally the mother. The majority of complaints
involved sheep (49%), followed by cows (31%) and horses
(11%). The economic cost of the compensations assessed
during 2004–2010 was EUR 278,590 (Fig. 3).
A conflict with multiple causes?
The opportunistic killing of small- and medium-sized
vertebrates has been reported as relatively frequent for
some New World vulture species (Lowney, 1999; Avery &
Cummings, 2004) but has only been reported occasionally
for Old World vultures (Houston, 1994). Griffon vultures,
however, are obligate scavengers specialized in the con-
sumption of large ungulate carcasses (Houston, 1974).
Although before 1990 only anecdotal cases of livestock
predation by Eurasian griffon vultures had been reported
(Camiña et al., 1995), from the middle of 2000 onwards the
number of cases increased across many regions of Spain. A
similar scenario developed in the French Pyrenees: between
1993 and 2009 a total of 596 complaints were documented,
with 58.2% of them during 2007–2009 (C. Arthur &
V. Zenoni, unpubl. data).
The availability of food resources may have played a
significant role in this apparent behavioural change. In
western Europe the appearance of BSE caused food
shortages for scavengers as a result of changes in agricultural
policies (Donázar et al., 2009a; Margalida et al., 2010). To
control the disease the EU promulgated strict regulations
regarding the use of animal by-products (Regulation [CE]
No. 1774/2002). Although in 2009 and 2010 new regulations
in some cases permitted the disposal of carcasses to feed
avian scavengers (Margalida et al., 2010,2012), the global
result of the regulations is a strong decrease in food
availability that has affected demographic parameters and
population growth rates (Margalida & Colomer, 2012;
Margalida et al., 2014) and has caused dietary and
behavioural shifts, with vultures now tolerating human
presence to within a few metres (Donázar et al., 2009b;
Zuberogoitia et al., 2010). Complaints peaked between 2006
and 2010, coinciding with the period of food shortage,
supporting the idea that attacks by griffon vultures can be at
least partially explained by changes in food availability.
More frequent predation by griffon vultures could also be
influenced by changes in husbandry practices. Traditionally
in many European countries extensive-grazing livestock
were tended by shepherds and dogs, deterring predators
(Kaczensky, 1999). However, current practice in many
mountain areas of south-western Europe, where large
carnivores are absent, is to let livestock range freely or
remain unattended in large fenced enclosures, even at the
time of lambing. These circumstances increase the chance of
predation by small- and medium-sized predators such as
canids and other carnivores, common ravens Corvus corax
and even wild boars Sus scrofa (authors, unpubl. data).
These animals frequently consume available remains,
mainly placentas, but may come in contact with and attack
weakened animals, both offspring and mothers, something
that would not have been possible with the presence of
guard dogs and shepherds. Griffon vultures may consume
FIG. 3 Changes in the number of complaints about attacks by
griffon vultures on livestock received in the study area in north–
east Spain (Fig. 2) during 1996–2010. Data on the proportion of
complaints accepted (white bars) were not available before 2004.
The cost of compensation (1,000s EUR) is shown above the bars.
174 A. Margalida et al.
©2014 Fauna & Flora International,
Oryx
, 48(2), 172–176

the kills of other species and the remains of animals that
died at birth, and farmers may consider this opportunistic
behaviour as an attack.
In addition to farming practices, increasing griffon
vulture populations may have an important role in the
observed increase in predation cases; i.e. the probability of
interactions may have increased simply as a result of this
demographic trend. It is now possible to see vultures
breeding and feeding near human habitations and infra-
structure (Donázar et al., 2009b). Carcasses are consumed
very quickly, often before the farmer has the opportunity to
determine the cause of death of the animal, so vultures are
sometimes mistakenly characterized as fearless predators
responsible for the deaths.
Analysis of the spatial distribution of reported cases
of vultures attacking livestock shows that complaints are
clustered. This suggests either that phenomena increasing
the risk of interactions may be operating at a local scale or
that there are clusters of reporting behaviour by farmers.
Alternatively, the repeated cases of predation by vultures
in well-defined areas could be explained by the existence
of specialized problem individuals (Linnell et al., 1999).
Not necessarily independent of this, it is possible that
these observations may be partially explained by spatial
variability in husbandry practices, which could increase the
risk of killing events. In addition, the spatial and temporal
clustering of the conflict may be influenced by human-
related factors such as imitation (or patterns of unconscious
behaviour) between livestock owners looking for easy
compensation.
Discussion
Considering conflicts between humans and wild animals
in general, killing of livestock by griffon vultures is a
relatively minor problem. Domestic species, mostly dogs,
cause greater damage to livestock than vultures. However,
supposedly undesirable vultures are being dealt with
using illegal practices such as poisoned bait. Traditionally,
these practices were used for carnivores blamed for
damage to livestock and game; consequently, most cases
of poisoning of scavenger birds were incidental (Hernández
& Margalida, 2008,2009). However, griffon vultures have
now become a target and several cases of intentional
poisoning have been detected in the study area, affecting
dozens of individuals (Margalida et al., 2011a; Margalida,
2012). This new dimension to the problem is of concern as
long-lived species such as avian scavengers are extremely
sensitive to unnatural increases in mortality rates, which
can quickly lead to the extinction of populations (Oro
et al., 2008).
There is a strong current of opinion among managers,
governments and some ecologists, attributing the apparent
change in the conduct of vultures to lack of food.
Although empirical data are scarce (Margalida &
Colomer, 2012), farmers are demanding an increase in
the number and size of supplementary feeding sites for
vultures to alleviate a perceived scarcity of vulture food
(Margalida et al., 2011a,b). The negative perception of the
relationship between humans and vultures is an example
of how a minor conflict, with few economic repercussions,
can change a quasi-mutualistic relationship that has
existed for thousands of years (Margalida et al., 2010).
Unfortunately, the media find this conflict attractive and
the absence of scientific information has facilitated
magnification of the perception of the risks of vulture
attacks. In the short term, the media must endeavour to
use their influence to base public opinion on scientific
facts. In the medium and long term, solutions to this
emerging conflict need to be agreed by all stakeholders
involved, based on accurate information. Livestock
farmers, authorities, scientists and conservation groups
should then participate in the design and implementation of
future strategies for the management of vulture populations,
husbandry practices and the availability of carcasses. Recent
changes in sanitary policies allowing the presence of
livestock carcasses in the field could partially alleviate the
human perception of this conflict (Margalida et al., 2012). In
addition, in many countries of Europe and North America
the conflict between livestock and predators has been
minimized by the use of livestock protection dogs (see
review in Gehring et al., 2010), which serve as an effective
tool to reduce the number of attacks (Espuno et al., 2004;
Shivik, 2006).
This type of emerging conflict could also occur
between humans and other species that, as a result of
conservation strategies, recover rapidly. This could occur
in Europe in particular as many populations of large
vertebrates are recovering successfully (Deinet et al., 2013)
and the gap between wildlife and humans is progressively
increasing.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to D. García, G. Lampreave, J. Ruiz-Olmo
(Generalitat de Catalunya), M. Alcántara (Diputación
General de Aragón), J. Carreras (Diputación Foral de
Álava), J. Larumbe (Diputación Foral de Navarra),
I. Mendiola, M. Olano (Diputación Foral de Gipuzkoa)
and M. Razin (LPO, France) for providing data, and
J.C. del Moral and M. de la Riva for providing Fig. 2. The
comments of two anonymous reviewers improved the
article. L. Bortolotti kindly revised the English. AM was
supported by a Ramón y Cajal research contract from the
Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (RYC-2012-
11867).
Vultures vs livestock 175
©2014 Fauna & Flora International,
Oryx
, 48(2), 172–176

References
ANDERSON,K.(1997) A walk on the wild side: a critical geography of
domestication. Progress in Human Geography,21,463–485.
AVERY, M.L. & CUMMINGS, J.L. (2004) Livestock depredations by
black vultures and golden eagles. Sheep and Goat Research Journal,
19,58–63.
CAMIÑA, A., HONRUBIA,A.&SENOSIAÍN,A.(1995) Attacks on
livestock by Eurasian griffons in northern Spain. Journal of Raptor
Research,29,214.
CORTÉS-AVIZANDA, A., CARRETE,M.&DONÁZAR, J.A. (2010)
Managing supplementary feeding for avian scavengers: guidelines
for optimal design using ecological criteria. Biological Conservation,
143,1707–1715.
DEINET, S., IERONYMIDOU, C., M CRAE, L., B URFIELD, I.J.,
FOPPEN, R.P., COLLEN,B.&BÖHM,M.(2013)Wildlife Comeback
in Europe: The Recovery of Selected Mammal and Bird Species. Final
report to Rewilding Europe by Zoological Society of London,
BirdLife International and the European Bird Census Council.
London, UK.
DEL MORAL, J.C. (2009)El buitre leonado en España. Población
reproductora en 2008 y método de censo. SEO/BirdLife, Madrid,
Spain.
DONÁZAR, J.A., MARGALIDA,A.&CAMPIÓN,D.(2009b) Vultures,
Feeding Stations and Sanitary Legislation: A Conflict and its
Consequences from the Perspective of Conservation Biology.
Sociedad de Ciencias Aranzadi, Donostia, Spain.
DONÁZAR, J.A., MARGALIDA, A., C ARRETE,M.&SÁNCHEZ-
ZAPATA, J.A. (2009a) Too sanitary for vultures. Science,326,664.
DONÁZAR, J.A., NAVE SO, M.A., T ELLA, J.L. & C AMPIÓN,D.(1996)
Extensive grazing and raptors in Spain. In Farming and Birds in
Europe (eds D.J. Pain & M.W. Pienkowski), pp. 117–149. Academic
Press, Cambridge, UK.
ESPUNO, N., LEQUETTE, B., POULLE, M.L., M IGOT,P.&
LEBRETON, J.D. (2004) Heterogeneous response to preventive
sheep husbandry during wolf recolonization of the French Alps.
Wildlife Society Bulletin,32,1195–1208.
GEHRING, T.M., VERCAUTEREN, K.C. & LANDRY, J.M. (2010)
Livestock protection dogs in the 21st century: is an ancient
tool relevant to modern conservation challenges? BioScience,60,
299–308.
GRAHAM, K., BECKERMAN, A.P. & THIRGOOD,S.(2005)
Human–predator–prey conflicts: ecological correlates, prey
losses and patterns of management. Biological Conservation,
122,159–171.
HERNÁNDEZ,M.&MARGALIDA,A.(2008) Pesticide abuse in
Europe: effects on the cinereous vulture (Aegypius monachus)
population in Spain. Ecotoxicology,17,264–272.
HERNÁNDEZ,M.&MARGALIDA,A.(2009) Poison-related mortality
effects in the endangered Egyptian vulture (Neophron percnopterus)
population in Spain: conservation measures. European Journal of
Wildlife Research,55,415–423.
HOUSTON, D.C. (1974) The role of griffon vultures Gyps
africanus and Gyps ruppellii as scavengers. Journal of Zoology,
172,35–46.
HOUSTON, D.C. (1994) Family Cathartidae (New World vultures). In
Handbook of the Birds of the World (Vol. 2): New World Vultures to
Guineafowl (eds J. del Hoyo, A. Elliott & J. Sargatal), pp. 24–41. Lynx
Edicions, Barcelona, Spain.
KACZENSKY,P.(1999) Large carnivore depredation in livestock in
Europe. Ursus,11,59–72.
LINNELL, J.D.C., ODDE N, J., SMITH, M.E., AANES,R.&SWENSON, J.E.
(1999) Large carnivores that kill livestock: do ‘problem individuals’
really exist? Wildlife Society Bulletin,27,698–705.
LOWNEY, M.S. (1999) Damage by black and turkey vultures in Virginia,
1990–1996.Wildlife Society Bulletin,27,715–719.
MAGRAMA (MINISTERIO DE AGRICULTURA,ALIMENTACIÓN Y
MEDIO AMBIENTE)(2012)Http://www.magrama.gob.es/es/
[accessed May 2012].
MARGALIDA,A.(2012) Baits, budget cuts: a deadly mix. Science,338,
192.
MARGALIDA, A., CAMPIÓN,D.&DONÁZAR, J.A. (2011a) European
vultures’altered behaviour. Nature,480,457.
MARGALIDA, A., CARRETE, M., SÁNCHEZ-ZAPATA, J.A. &
DONÁZAR, J.A. (2012) Good news for European vultures. Science,
335,284.
MARGALIDA,A.&COLOMER, M.A. (2012) Modelling the effects of
sanitary policies on European vulture conservation. Scientific
Reports,2,753.
MARGALIDA, A., COLOMER, M.A. & O RO,O.(2014) Man-induced
activities modify demographic parameters in a long-lived species:
effects of poisoning and health policies. Ecological Applications.
Http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/13-0414.1.
MARGALIDA, A., COLOMER, M.A. & S ANUY,D.(2011b) Can wild
ungulate carcasses provide enough biomass to maintain avian
scavenger populations? An empirical assessment using a bio-
inspired computational model. PLoS One,6,e20248.
MARGALIDA, A., DONÁZAR, J.A., CARRETE,M.&SÁNCHEZ-
ZAPATA, J.A. (2010) Sanitary versus environmental policies: fitting
together two pieces of the puzzle of European vulture conservation.
Journal of Applied Ecology,47,931–935.
ORO, D., MARGALIDA, A., CARRETE, M., HEREDIA,R.&
DONÁZAR, J.A. (2008) Testing the goodness of supplementary
feeding to enhance population viability in an endangered vulture.
PLoS One,3,e4084.
PETERSON, M.N., BIRCKHEAD, J.L., LEONG, K., P ETERSON, M.J. &
PETERSON, T.R. (2010) Rearticulating the myth of human–wildlife
conflict. Conservation Letters,3,74–82.
SEKERCIOGLU, C.H., DAILY, G.C. & EHRLICH, P.R. (2004) Ecosystem
consequences of bird declines. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences of the USA,101,18042–18047.
SHIVIK, J.A. (2006) Tools for the edge: what’s new for conserving
carnivores. BioScience,56,253–259.
TREVES, A., WALLACE, R.B. & W HITE,S.(2009) Participatory
planning of interventions to mitigate human–wildlife conflicts.
Conservation Biology,23,1577–1587.
ZUBEROGOITIA, I., MARTÍNEZ, J.E., M ARGALIDA, A., G ÓMEZ, I.,
AZKONA,A.&MARTÍNEZ, J.A. (2010) Reduced food availability
induces behavioural changes in griffon vulture. Ornis Fennica,87,
52–60.
Biographical sketches
ANTONI MARGALIDA is interested in the behavioural ecology and
conservation biology of threatened species, particularly avian scaven-
gers. DAVID CAMPIÓN’Sinterests are in management and conser-
vation of threatened species. JOSÉ A. DONÁZAR’Sresearch in
conservation biology focuses on long-lived vertebrates.
176 A. Margalida et al.
©2014 Fauna & Flora International,
Oryx
, 48(2), 172–176