ArticlePDF Available

Livestock Damage by Carnivores and Use of Livestock Guardian Dogs for its Prevention in Europe -A review

Authors:

Abstract

In the last century livestock animals in Europe were decreased after industry revolution because of mechanization and industrialization. Ungulates were ignored as transport or pack animals. Small ruminants were decreased because lesser importance of wool and hair additional grazing areas were decreased because of using those areas as field, industrial or human buildings. In ancient times majority of people were farmers but nowadays farmers are minority almost in all developed countries. Because of those reasons while pastoral areas were decreasing, urban areas were increased which caused smaller living areas for wild animals. Besides that developed gun industry facilitated killing wild animals for hunting or other reasons. In most of European countries, large carnivores have been decreased because of those reasons. Farmers tend to raise animals from extensive systems to intensive systems in order to get more yields by giving less feed or spend less money. All these reasons push farmers for intensive farming systems.
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
23
Livestock Damage by Carnivores and Use of
Livestock Guardian Dogs for its Prevention in
Europe - A review
O. Yilmaz1*, F. Coskun2, M. Ertugrul3
1Ardahan University, Vocational High School of Technical Sciences, 75000, Ardahan, Turkey
2Ahi Evran University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Animal Science, 40100, Canakkale, Turkey
3Ankara University, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Animal Science, 06110, Ankara, Turkey
Correspondence: zileliorhan@gmail.com
Journal of Livestock Science (ISSN online 2277-6214) 6:23-35
Received on 31/03/2015; Accepted on 7/4/2015
Abstract
In the last century livestock animals in Europe were decreased after industry revolution because of
mechanization and industrialization. Ungulates were ignored as transport or pack animals. Small ruminants were
decreased because lesser importance of wool and hair additional grazing areas were decreased because of using
those areas as field, industrial or human buildings. In ancient times majority of people were farmers but
nowadays farmers are minority almost in all developed countries. Because of those reasons while pastoral areas
were decreasing, urban areas were increased which caused smaller living areas for wild animals. Besides that
developed gun industry facilitated killing wild animals for hunting or other reasons. In most of European
countries, large carnivores have been decreased because of those reasons. Farmers tend to raise animals from
extensive systems to intensive systems in order to get more yields by giving less feed or spend less money. All
these reasons push farmers for intensive farming systems.
Keywords: Bear; wolf; lynx; wolverine; livestock guardian dog.
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
24
Introduction
A livestock guardian dog (LGD) is a domesticated canine which stays with its herd, does not harm the
herd and defends livestock against predators (Yilmaz 2006). Unlike herding dogs, an LGD does not control the
movement of the flock with predatory actions causing bunching (Anonymous, 2012). LGDs have some common
characteristics that they are about the same size and colour as the livestock they were bred to guard (Cruz, 2011).
LGDs should have at least four characteristics that are intelligence, trustworthiness, attentiveness, and
protectiveness. First they have at least moderate intelligence, preferably high level of intelligence. Secondly they
must always stay with livestock but must not interfere with feed, reproduction, and puppy care of the herd beside
that must not harm any member of the flock/herd and must not show aggression to them. Thirdly they must
always be careful and alert. Fourthly they must exhibit instant deterrent response to intruders by barking or
attacking because of being independent self-thinking breed when they are on their own (Yilmaz 2006, Yilmaz
2007a,b).
LGDs are commonly used for guarding livestock animals which graze or browse. For sheltered animals
large carnivores are not much problematic but for open grazing, free range grazing, open hold animals, large
carnivores find chance to prey them and this situation is a real problem. The aim of this paper is to present a
short review about large carnivore damage on extensively grazing animals in 28 European countries.
1. Albania
Albania has large carnivores like bears, lynxes, and wolves except wolverines. There are about 180-200
bears, 5-10 lynxes, 200-250 wolves (but official estimate is 2,370 in 2009). In the country population of bears is
increasing, lynxes are decreasing, but wolves are stable. In the country there are neither compensation system
nor prevention and mitigation measures (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
2. Austria
In Austria there might be about 5 bears, 3-5 lynxes, and 2-8 wolves but they are generally seen
sporadically. In the country the populations of bear and lynx are stable, but wolves are decreasing. The bears
annually cause damage on 10-100 sheep, 0-2 other livestock such as cattle and rabbits, 10-30 beehives, 0-25
canisters with rape-seed oil. The wolves also cause damage on 15-70 livestock annually (Kaczenky et al.
2012a,b). In Austria bears are problem for livestock especially in forest areas. The bears caused damages in four
ways including damaging beehives and chain saws lubricated by vegetable oil, killing deer (both red and row)
and sheep. For prevention damages on beehives, electric fences were used. The vegetable oil is highly attractive
energy source for bears but bears caused more damage on the equipment than the loss of vegetable oil. Even
though a lot of chemical admixtures were used to prevent this problem, the result was unsuccessful. Another
problem was killing of red and row deer by bears. There was not an effective solution about this problem. The
last problem was being killed sheep by bears. For instance about 50 sheep were killed by about 10 bears in
southern Austria. In order to reimburse the sheep loss, a compensation program was started in 1970s. Authorities
pay the same price for such a sheep the farmer could get on the market within about 8 weeks. On the long term
authorities could offer money to farmers that want to invest in prevention measures or change the way they keep
their livestock. As a second step they could slowly decrease the percentage of compensation for those who did
not set any prevention measures. By this means authorities might be able to reach a gentle pressure for the
farmers to adapt to coexistence with bears and in general with big predators again (Gutleb 2001).
3. Bosnia-Herzegovina
Bosnia-Herzegovina possesses large carnivores like bears, lynxes, and wolves but not wolverines. There
are about 550 bears, 70 lynxes, 650 wolves. The population of bear is increasing but lynx and wolf are stable.
Between 2007-2011 42 sheep, 20 cattle/horse/pigs, 23 beehives, crop and fruit tree were damaged by bears; 400
livestock by wolves; sheep and goat by lynxes but there were no available data (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
4. Bulgaria
In Bulgaria there are about 530-590 bears, 11 lynxes, and 1.000 (according to official estimate 2.200-
2.500) wolves but no wolverines. The population of bear, lynx and wolf is stable. Between 2007-2011 about
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
25
81,850 € were paid for compensation caused by bears for 249 sheep, 18 goats, 27 cattle, 6 ungulates, 12 pigs, 3
dogs, 533 beehives, 58 fruit trees, and 325 kg of chokeberry (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). Bulgaria has a very good
shepherd dog named as Karakachan Shepherd and plenty of predators like brown bears, wolves, lynxes, foxes
and jackals (Sedefchev 2005, Stoynov 2005) and predation on livestock is a serious problem in Bulgaria. This
problem is not only just because of the number of animals killed but also livestock losses motivate the livestock
breeders to kill large carnivores in revenge, even using poison baits which are illegal in Bulgaria. Carnivores that
kill livestock in Bulgaria include the brown bear (Ursus arctos), wolf (Canis lupus), jackal (C. Aureus) and
exceptionally, the red fox (Vulpes vulpes). The spread of poison baits has unfavourable impact on the
populations of carrion eating species as black vulture (Aegypius monachus), bearded vulture (Gypaetus
barbatus), griffon vulture (Gyps fulvus), egyptian vulture (Neophron percnopterus), imperial eagle (Aquila
heliaca) and golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos). Most of those species are threatened and some of them have even
been exterminated from Bulgaria because of the use of poison baits in the past (Stoynov 2005).
In a region which is about 20-25,000 km2 there are about 1,200 wolves and 600 bears. This population
is the highest in Europe. In 1997 a project was initiated by cooperation with Bulgarian Biodiversity Preservation
Society, Wolf Protection Society and Wolf Conservation Trust. In this project some Karakachan dogs were
supplied for herdsmen in order to reduce conflict between local people and large carnivores. The second aim was
to increase nationwide population of Karakachan dogs. There was no report of livestock loss since Karakachan
dogs were provided to specific flocks. There was a major problem that some Karakachan dogs were killed by
hunters and this problem was getting worse in the country. This was because of the hunter’s hatred of livestock
guarding dogs and the fact that these dogs sometimes kill hunting dogs, which try to penetrate into a flock
(Sedefchev 2005).
Another project with support of Wild Flora and Fauna’s (WFF) was initiated in southwest edge of
Bulgaria. In this region wolves cause the most numerous killing of livestock, but bears causes the highest
economic losses by killing larger livestock like cattle and horses. Jackals and red foxes are rarely responsible for
livestock losses. Feral dogs are a very serious problem in the settlements and the areas where wolves and bears
are absent. The mortality ratio due to predation is up to 10 % in the herds where no LGDs are used and less than
1% in herds where good LGDs are used with. The mortality due to feral dogs is about 1.1%, and due to other
reasons like thunderstorms, diseases etc., is about 1.2 %. A compensation program was applied in 2000 under
this project by the WFF. In order to get compensation if predators kill livestock, the farmers must implement
three criteria containing a) good guarding dogs should be used with the herd, b) the herd should always be
herded by a shepherd and c) the herd should never be left outside the corrals during night. The WFF provided 20
Karakachan dogs under the project and the results were highly satisfied. It was proved that predators did not
attack the herds with well-trained mature Karakachan dogs (Stoynov 2005).
5. Croatia
Croatia has large carnivores like bears, lynxes, and wolves except wolverines. There are about 1,000
bears, 50 lynxes, 168-219 wolves containing 50 packs. The population of bear is increasing but that of lynx and
wolf is stable. Between 2007-2010, 6,000 € was paid as compensation for 2-20 sheep/goats, 0-33 beehives, crop
and fruit tree that were damaged by bears, and 194,000 € for 1,500 livestock. There were no cases of confirmed
damaged by lynxes (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
6. Czech Republic
In the Czech Republic there are 43-58 lynxes, and 1 wolf but no bears and wolverines and their
population is stable. There were no report of damage by lynxes but 1,800 € was paid for 10 livestock because of
wolf damages (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
7. Estonia
Estonia has large carnivores like bears, lynxes, and wolves but not wolverines. There are about 700
bears, 790 lynxes, 230 wolves. The population of bears, lynxes and wolves is increasing. In the country there
was almost no livestock depredation. The most damages happened on beehives which was 12,500 for 105
hives by bears and 95,000 € for 209 cases by wolves (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
8. Finland
Finland possesses large carnivores like bears, lynxes, wolves, and wolverines. There are about 1,600-
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
26
1,800 bears, 2,430-2,610 lynxes, 150-165 wolves and 165-175 wolverines. In the country population of bears,
lynxes and wolverines is strongly increasing, on the contrary wolves are decreasing. There was almost no
livestock depredation. Compensation costs were 750,000 for 681 reindeers and 172,700 for 30100 sheep,
05 other cattle/ horses, 04 dogs, 150250 beehives, hundred packages of silage and some damage in outfields
caused by bears, 15,600 for 25 livestock and 827,122 € for 554 reindeer caused by lynxes, 0.5-1.35 million
for 650-1001 reindeer, 32,68-154,302 for 30-120 sheep, 2-6 cattle and horses, 25-35 dogs (Kaczensky et al.
2012a,b).
9. France
Bears, lynxes and wolves are present in France but not wolverine. There are about 22 bears, 13 lynxes,
and about 68 wolves consist of 13 packs and 7 trans boundary packs. In France the populations of bear, lynx and
wolf is increasing. Between 2006 and 2011 the amount of 103,000 € was paid for 200 sheep/goats and 31
beehives because of bears, 18,360 € was paid for 92 sheep because of lynxes, and 1 million € was paid for 4,618
livestock because of wolves (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). It is possible for a Great Pyrenees, a large breed of dog
used as LGD to wander the village during the winter when its flock of sheep were stabled in barn. When spring
came the dog would follow her sheep to the mountains. The tendency to travel great distances that was originally
a positive trait is now liability in a country crossed with highways and heavy traffic (Cruz, 2011).
In French Jura there are about 36,000 ewes together with 347,000 cows and 4,000 goats. In grazing
system of the region sheep and lambs are kept in pastures from early spring to late autumn. In these pastures
sheep are always unguarded and wander freely by day and night. Livestock guard-dogs are not used in the Jura
which may cause damage to livestock. A long term surveillance showed that there was no general lynx-livestock
problem in spite of the absence of measures to livestock guardian dogs. At the regional scale, sheep losses to
lynx were less than 0.5 % of the available stock (Stahl and Vandel 2001).
A study was carried out to investigate the recolonization of lynx in French Jura between 1984 and 1998.
The number of attacks increased from three to 188 between 1984 and 1989. During following years, 66-131
attacks were recorded annually which caused 92-194 sheep killed per year. These observed data demonstrated
that lynx were not killing sheep due to shortages of alternative prey or in response to an increased need for food
when rearing young. As a result it could be said that the cost-effectiveness of guard-dogs or the selective
removal of some individual lynx should be evaluated (Stahl et al. 2001a). The research team conducted another
research about effect of removing lynx for reducing attacks on sheep between 1989 and 1999. In the research a
total of eight lynx and two large carnivores thought to be lynx was legally removed from high conflict areas by
trapping (n=7), shooting (n=1) or poisoning with toxic collars on sheep (n=2). The sex-ratio of captured lynx
was seven males and one female. The researchers realized after a long term observation that selective removals
could only temporarly reduce the problem of concentrated lynx damage. The only way to obtain a durable effect
was to improve shepherding techniques (Stahl et al. 2001b).
10. Germany
In Germany there are lynxes and wolves, but there are no bears and wolverines. In Germany there are
estimated about 12 lynxes, and 14 wolf packs besides single residents of 43 adult wolves. The population of lynx
is stable but wolf is stable. Although livestock depredation is rare, the wolves caused damage on 225 small
livestock in 2011 and 26,584 € was paid for this damage (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). In some regions, some
shepherds do not have enough experiences how to integrate an adult and trained guard dogs. An experiment in
cooperation with the College and Research Institute for Animal Breeding and Husbandry had been conducted to
gain practical information about how to integrate two adult guarding dogs into a sheep herd. In addition to it the
possible use of guarding dog was analysed in the Netherlands by holding one interview with a Dutch shepherd
combined with analysing the Dutch farming system. Shepherds indicated that they had no experiences with
integrating an adult guard dog and they recommended using a similar strategy for integrating an adult dog as
they had used for guard dog pups. A Switzerland study reported that mostly a leash was used to guide the dog
through the herd and let the sheep accustomed to the dog. In some other reports, the dog was located in a
separated fenced in place, so there was only smell and sight contact with the sheep. In most cases it took up to 5
days before the sheep accepted the presence of the guard dogs inside the herd. In order to overcome this
difficulty a project was applied by signing a protocol between the Guard Dogs Inc. and State Agency for
Environment, Health and Consumer Protection in state of Branderburg (Van der Geest 2013).
In the protocol, it was important to consider what kind of guard dog, kind of sheep and kind of environment was
present during the process, due to influence of those factors on the result of the integration process. On the
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
27
second stage some actions which should be taken are explained. The most used material in the beginning of the
process was a strong leash. Buying two adult guard dogs and the price for a LGD expert for the supervision of
the project were the major costs of an integration process. Two main issues were recommended by shepherds.
They are financial support for food expenses and public awareness for the use of livestock guarding dogs.
Shepherds kept sheep on a similar way in the Netherlands as in Brandenburg. However, the Netherlands was
more populated then most regions in Brandenburg. According to observed results, it could be concluded that
guarding dogs were an effective protection method for sheep against wolves. A good integration of
inexperienced guard dogs in a sheep herd was possible, when there was a good understanding about sheep and
guard dogs from shepherds. Moreover it was necessary to think about prevention methods to protect sheep
against predation by wolves (Van der Geest 2013).
11. Greece
Greece possesses bears, and wolves, but do not possess lynxes, and wolverines. There are about 400-
450 bears, and 700 wolves. Year by year population of bears is increasing, but wolves is stable. In the country
there was almost no livestock depredation. Compensation costs were 19,000 € for 200 sheep/goat, 98,000 for
215 cattle/horse, 24,000 for 530 beehives/swarms caused by bears, 0.8-1.5 million € for 20.000 sheep, 12.000
goat, 2.000 cattle, 2.000 ungulates (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
12. Hungary
Hungary owns lynxes but do not own other large carnivores like bears, wolves, and wolverines. There
are about 1-3 lynxes in the whole country and this population is stable. In the country there was hardly livestock
depredation cases (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
13. Italy
Italy has bears and wolves as large carnivores. Lynxes are not present in the Apennine but there are no
available data about presence of lynxes in the Alps. The number of large carnivore population is estimated about
45-48 bears, and minimum 67 wolves consists of 12 packs and 7 trans boundary packs. In the country the
populations of bear is stable but wolf is increasing. Between 2007-2011 about 81,850 € were paid for
compensation caused by bears for 249 sheep, 18 goats, 27 cattle, 6 ungulates, 12 pigs, 3 dogs, 533 beehives, 58
fruit trees, and 325 kg of chokeberry (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). In northwest Italian Alps, sheep breeding is a
traditional activity which is still important for the economy of the region. On the other hand it is an important
area for the conservation of the alpine environment too. Because of the absence of large carnivores and the lack
of labour, shepherds used to drive their flocks to mountain pastures and leave them alone for the whole summer
until 2000s. The free ranging flocks used to exploit even the remote areas of summer pastures, spending the
night outdoors without protection. After some increased carnivores attack including wolf, fox and stray dogs, the
risk of losses due to depredation has affected alpine grazing management. This situation discouraged the
exploitation of more remote and inaccessible pastures, and forced shepherds to guard flocks during the day and
fenced them in protected enclosures during the night. This new condition has altered the distribution of sheep
dung on pastures (Coppinger et al. 1983, Cugno, 2004).
Hence a study was conducted to search dung distribution of sheep on summer pasture in Demonte,
province of Cuneoy. Large carnivores in the Alps have caused great changes in sheep pastoral systems. The
traditional grazing management has been replaced by a non-traditional system, with constant shepherd
surveillance and the use of night-time enclosures. Consequently it was seen that the distribution of sheep dung
had been affected, with possible effects on vegetation and pastoral quality. As a possible solution the corrals
could be surrounded by permanent electric fences to prevent livestock depredation. Nevertheless dung was
excessively concentrated in the areas where flocks were sheltered. As a result, being of large carnivores in the
area might be indirectly detrimental not only to the ecosystem, but also to the economic system, if management
changes to integrate them will not be put into practice (Cugno, 2004).
14. Kosovo
In Kosovo there is no information about bears, lynxes and wolves and do not have any wolverines
(Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
28
15. Latvia
Latvia possesses bears, lynxes and wolves, but do not possess wolverines. There are about 10-15 bears,
600 lynxes, and 200-400 wolves. In the country population of bears and wolves are increasing, but lynxes are
stable. In the country there was no damages caused by bears and no damage compensation system. There were
only few cases of livestock depredation reported annually caused by lynxes. Although there were 50-329
livestock damages, there was no compensation policy caused by wolves (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
16. Lithuania
In Lithuania there are lynxes and wolves, but there are no bears and wolverines. There are about 40-60
lynxes, and roughly 300 wolves. In the country populations of lynx and wolf are stable. In the country there were
no damages and no damage compensation system caused by lynxes and wolves. Although livestock depredation
is rare, the wolves caused damage on 225 small livestock in 2011 and 26.584 € was paid for this damage
(Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
17. Macedonia
Macedonia owns bears, lynxes and wolves, but do not own wolverines. There are about 160-200 bears,
23 lynxes, and 267 wolves. In the country population of bears is increasing, wolves are stable, but lynxes are
decreasing. There were only few cases reported for 53 sheep/goat, 167 cattle/horse/donkey/pig, and 152 beehives
caused by bears. In the country there is no central information on livestock depredation existed, although
interviews and other surveys indicated that conflict levels are low caused by lynxes and is no information about
damages caused by bears (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
18. Montenegro
In Montenegro there is no information about bears, lynxes and wolves and do not own any wolverines.
(Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
19. Norway
Norway has large carnivores like bears, lynxes, wolves and wolverines. There are about 46 bears, 384-
408 lynxes including 65-69 family groups, 23-24 wolves containing 3 packs and 2 scent marking pairs, and
about 385 wolverines. Except lynxes the other large carnivores are increasing in the country. Compensation costs
were 2,000,000 € for 3,800-7,000 sheep, 35,000 € for 4-75 semi-domestic reindeer because of bear damage, 2.1-
2.9 million for 7,000-10,000 sheep and 1.1-3.4 million for 3,000-8,000 semi-domestic reindeer because of
lynx damage, 120,000-430,000 for 400-2,300 sheep and 70,000 for 239 reindeer because of wolf damage
(Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). Norway spent considerable resources attempting to eradicate carnivores during the
last 100 years. After Law on the Extermination of Predators was constituted in 1846 wolves, bears, lynx,
wolverines and golden eagles were started to be terminated. By the early 20th century, they were nearly extinct.
When the large predators were mitigated, the pattern of sheep farming changed, and flocks grew in size and were
no longer guarded by shepherds. From 1996 to 1999, an average of 2.1 million sheep was released each summer
into the wild lands for grazing (Linnell and Broseth 2002). For example in Norway lynx are always crucial
problem for livestock. About 9,000 lambs were killed by lynx in 1999. Therefore Linnell performed an analysis
to define age and sex specific depredation rates of Eurasian lynx on sheep. Some radio-collared lynx were
monitored to investigate their behaviours. Yearling lynx and males killed more than others (Linnell et al. 2000).
Even though Norway has several sledges and hound dog breeds containing Norwegian Buhund, Norwegian
Elkhound Black, Norwegian Elkhound Grey, Norwegian Lundehund, Halden Hound, Hygen and Dunker
(Anonymous, 2014), there is no livestock guardian dog breed. To overcome this handicap, a project was initiated
and 13 Great Pyrenees were tried to use for livestock guarding. They were analysed for behaviours against
people, livestock, dogs, horses, reindeer, and bear to determine if they will be suitable for protecting livestock in
Norway. All of 13 dogs did not show any aggressive behaviour against unfamiliar people, and aggressiveness
towards dogs and livestock was also low. However, 91% of the dogs chased reindeer and 3 dogs intended to
chase bears. Their nonaggressive behaviour against people, dogs and livestock, and their active reaction towards
bears suggested that this breed could be suitable for using as livestock guardians in Norway. However, the
tendency of dogs to chase reindeer was a trait that could cause conflicts in reindeer-herding areas (Hansen and
Bakken 1999).
Hansen and Smith did another study to search different working regime of Great Pyrenees. A total of
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
29
3,500 ha unfenced forest/mountain range pasture in bear habitat comprised the research area in which 624 sheep
from 2 herds grazed. The field trial lasted 3 months, and a total of 10 Great Pyrenees participated for various
time intervals. In this study three various working systems were evaluated including loose dogs without the
command of a dog handler as Method A, loose dogs under the command of a dog handler as Method B, and
loose dogs guarding sheep inside a fenced, 1 km2 forest pasture as Method C. Behavioural activity patterns on
night and data on predation were recorded. The Method A was proved unusable because it was too uncontrolled
for Norwegian conditions. Sheep dispersed too widely and dogs ranged too far, causing conflicts in nearby
settlements with wildlife, and with livestock. In the Method C the dogs were 3 times less active and were
engaged in guarding activities. They barked 15 times more frequently, and no sheep carcasses were found inside
the fence. Hence the Method C probably had the best preventive effect (Hansen and Smith 1999).
Between 1996 and 2002 three different projects were initiated using 25 LGD dogs of Great Pyrenees,
Maremma-Abruzzese, and Tatra Mountain breeds. In these projects four different LGD using methods were
employed- LGDs used in combination with herding and use of night corrals as Method 1, LGDs on fenced
pastures as Method 2, LGDs alone with sheep on open range as Method 3, and LGDs loose on patrol together
with a range inspector as Method 4. The Method 1 was significantly most successful loss-reducing method, but
also the most expensive due to the need for continuous herding, moreover the limitation placed on grazing
pattern resulted in reduced lamb growth. The Method 2 was the least expensive method and proved the second
best preventive effect. Losses were reduced by close to 100%, dependent upon pasture size. This way of using
dogs was not very time consuming because the dogs could guard during both day and night without people being
present. The Method 3 required dogs that were strongly socialized to sheep. This method was not to be
recommended under Norwegian condition because this way of dog keeping could be too uncontrolled, and
widely scattered free-ranging sheep made the guarding difficult. The Method 3 of patrolling method showed that
a range inspector patrolled the grazing area together with a loose LGD in a systematic way. In that way the range
was covered during a certain time. LGD breeds were preferred to other dog breeds because they have good
combination of behaviours suited for this job. They are calm with respect to livestock, would chase carnivores
away, and had a low hunting instinct against to other wildlife. This method also has a lower loss-reducing effect
than the Method 2, however, total losses of depredation, accidents and illness reduced from 15% to as little as 2
3% in that area where the best results were achieved. However, after the two year LGD study was finished and
the dogs were taken away, losses increased again. Other studies had shown that patrolling without a dog had
minor loss reducing effect (Hansen 2005).
20. Poland
In Poland there are all large carnivores except wolverine. The number of large carnivore population is
estimated about 80 bears (but official estimate is 119-164), 200 lynxes, and 576-723 wolves containing 136-150
packs and 2 scent marking pairs. In the country populations of bears and wolves are increasing, but lynxes is
stable. In 2010 about 61,555 were paid for 556 beehives because of bears and 95,000 for 1,000 livestock
because of wolves (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). Livestock damage caused by large carnivores is not a severe
problem in Poland. The amount of compensation paid is also quite small. It is paid by the authorities of every
province and reaches on average €uro 50,000 per year for the whole country. Nevertheless, predation on
livestock affects negative attitudes among farmers and makes this issue interesting for the media. As a
consequence sensational press and TV reports increase influence on social attitudes towards large carnivores.
Moreover hunters generally use this situation as an argument for including wolves on the game list again despite
being protected in Poland. In Poland two projects were applied in 2000s which were attempting to resolve large
carnivore/farmer conflicts by the introduction of Tatra Mountain Shepherd Dogs which were the only LGD
breed of Poland into livestock flocks (Nowak and Myslajek, 2005; Smietana, 2005).
The first project was conducted in the Bieszczady Mountains which was eastern range of the Polish
Carpathians by the Institute of Nature Conservation, Polish Academy of Sciences between 1995 and 2001. In
Bieszczady Mountains there were about 40-80 wolves, 40-60 lynxes and 30-50 brown bears which are all
protected in Poland. In the project the aim was to decrease losses from wolf predation using LGDs among
breeders who never used such dogs. 13 Tatra puppies were delivered to 11 sheep or sheep/goat farms. At the end
of the project all dogs were successfully used by farmers except one. This dog was not accepted by the flock of
sheep except two lambs (Smietana 2005).
The second project had been started by the Association for Nature Wolf in the Western Beskidy
Mountains. In Western Beskidy Mountains there were about five wolf packs containing about 22 individuals, 19
lynxes and 4 brown bear which are all protected in 2000s. Based on the project 12 Tatra Mountain Shepherd
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
30
dogs were distributed into 10 farms. The dogs protected sheep flocks in eight farms and cows and horses in two
farms. After several years it was proved that the Tatra Mountains Shepherd Dog could be successfully used as a
method of livestock protection against wolf attacks, both for sheep and cattle. The most common mistakes made
by farmers were inadequate care and training process such as poor care leading to diseases and allowing the dog
to play with children (Nowak and Myslajek 2005).
21. Portugal
There were about 220-435 wolves in 2005 but recent data is not available. In Portugal population of
lynxes is decreasing. In 2010 the amount of 763,858 € was paid for 2,497 wolf attacks (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
In Portugal the carnivore damage is commonly made by Iberian Wolf (Canis lupus signatus). Due to the low
numbers of natural prey such as roe and red deer, the main Iberian wolf diet is based almost exclusively on
domestic animals mainly sheep and goat. On the other hand in some areas of Portugal mortality of goat kids due
to the lack of disease prevention can reach more than 50% of the yearly production per flock, whereas maximum
wolf predation registered was around 5%. In Portugal, human persecution caused to Iberian wolf extinction in
80% of the country, particularly since the 1970s (Ribeiro 2004, Ribeiro and Petrucci-Fonseca 2004, 2005).
The best solution for this problem is use of Livestock Guarding Dogs among livestock flocks and herds.
Grupo Lobo applied a project overcome this problem in 1997. On the first step the alternate use of native breeds
of LGDs was searched. Three breeds of LGDs containing the breeds of Cão de Castro Laboreiro, Rafeiro do
Alentejo and Cão da Serra da Estrela were chosen to protect livestock from predators. From those breeds a total
of 75 pups (38 males and 37 females) was selected and distributed to flocks. Criteria for flock selection were
based on the amount of damages, the existence of conditions to receive a dog and the shepherd’s motivation to
cooperate in the project. After pups grew up, they were evaluated by caring criteria of attentiveness,
trustworthiness and protectiveness which were suggested by Coppinger and Coppinger (2005) (Fonseca 2000).
The adult dogs were evaluated as excellent or good in attentive, trustworthy, and protective behavior as
92%, 98% 90% respectively. The projects gave some outcomes that there had been the increased tolerance
towards the wolf. The support given by the project in what concerns LGDs and the payment of damages were
referred by some livestock producers as the main causes that prevent the use of illegal lethal methods to reduce
predation. Secondly there was overall increase in concern by livestock producers regarding the welfare of the
dogs integrated in the project. There was also a higher regard for these dogs in comparison to others, due to their
performance and contribution to flock protection. One factor that contributed to the acceptance of the project and
the acknowledgment of the importance of using good LGDs had been the reputation achieved by some of the
dogs integrated in the project. Lastly one of the most important means of diffusion of the use of LGDs had been
the transfer of information between livestock producers. This was evident in the more than 40 requests for dogs
by new livestock producers, in the last few years (Ribeiro 2004, Ribeiro and Petrucci-Fonseca 2004, 2005).
22. Romania
Bears, lynxes and wolves are present in Romania but not wolverine. There are about 6,000 bears which
is the highest population in Europe, 1,200-1,500 lynxes, and 2,300-2,700 wolves. The population of bears,
lynxes, and wolves is stable. There was no recent information about damages and compensation costs
(Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). The Carpathian Large Carnivore Project (CLCP) was applied in 1990s and it made a
survey of the damage caused by large carnivores to livestock in summers 1998, 1999 and 2000. Shepherd camps
included in the survey were 17 in 1998, 19 in 1999 and 26 in 2000. In 1998 and 1999 it revealed that wolves and
bears killed 2.08 % of all the sheep, for an average of 9.94 sheep per camp in each grazing season of 4.5 months
(Mertens and Prombeger 2000, Mertens et al. 2001). In Romania there are three LGD breeds, the Ciobănesc
Român Carpatin, the Ciobănesc Român Mioritic (Mioritic Shepherd Dog) and the Ciobanesc Român de
Bucovina (Bucovinian Shepherd Dog). These are ancient breeds and it is likely that these dogs have been
commonly used by shepherds until not too long ago (Mertens and Schneider 2005).
Livestock protection methods in Romania are still quite well preserved, with dogs and shepherds always
guarding the flock and the sheep being penned at night. On the other hand several kinds of problems made so
that guarding was not always done optimally. First the livestock guarding dogs were not actively trained. As
soon as they were big enough, the pups were put in the flock together with the adult dogs and they were
supposed to learn from the other dogs how to guard the sheep. Secondly the salaries and the food for the
shepherds and the rent of the pasture were expensive compared with the incomes from livestock rearing. That
was why often not enough shepherds were present to guard the sheep and, as the rented pasture was often not
enough, the sheep were kept in the forest, being more exposed to attacks of predators. Another problem in
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
31
Romania is that dogs are killed by wolves. Between January 2001 and October 2002 the wolves were reported to
have attacked livestock in 149 households on an area of 69.9 km2, killing 62 sheep, 7 cattle, 1 kid, 2 foals and
186 dogs including 157 adult LGDs, 2 pups and 27 small herding dogs. Dogs were killed in 137 households,
other livestock in 24. The amount of attacks per household ranged between 1 (74%) to 2 (17%), exceptionally up
to ten. Only four attacks (2%) were unsuccessful in which the animals were neither injured nor killed. The
amount of animals attacked per household ranged between 1 to 14 animals. In most of them one animal was
attacked (65%) and in only 5% between 5 and 14 animals (Mertens and Schneider 2005).
23. Serbia
In Serbia there are bears, lynxes and wolves but no wolverines. There are about 68-78 bears, 65-75
lynxes, and 750-850 wolves. The population of bears and wolves is stable, but lynxes is decreasing. There were
no damages and no damage compensation system caused by lynxes and wolves. There is no central information
on livestock depredation, although interviews and other surveys indicated that conflict levels are low caused by
lynxes and is no information about damages caused by bears. There is no governmental compensation for
livestock but only in the Province of Vojvodina wolf is strictly protected to be killed (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
24. Slovakia
Slovakia has large carnivores like bears, lynxes, and wolves but not wolverines. There are about
minimum 800-1,100 bears (but official estimate is 1,940), 300-400 lynxes (but official estimate is much higher),
200-400 wolves (but official estimate is 1,823). All large carnivores are stable and not increasing. Compensation
costs were 5,500 for 160 sheep/goat, 1200-.1900 for 15 cattle, 12,000 for 200 beehives because of bear
damage, and 16,000 € for 500 livestock because of wolf damage (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). The main predators
on livestock in the Slovak Carpathians are the wolf and brown bear (Rigg et al. 2011). The species of wolves and
bears are reported to generally kill cattle and goats. Bears also kill some poultry, pigs and rabbits, while wolves
sometimes prey on dogs and occasionally cats. Sheep, however, are the most frequently predated domestic
species. Around 89% of all sheep in Slovakia are in regions with bears and/or wolves. Slovensky Cuvac and
Caucasian Shepherd Dogs in Slovakia retain traits desirable for livestock guarding dogs (Rigg 2001). PLCLC
started a project in 2000 there were LGDs at almost all upland sheep farms but very few were free-ranging and
attentive to sheep (Rigg 2001). LGDs were used in one of three ways. First permanently they should be chained
near the sheepfold or farm buildings, which could have provided some protection, mainly by barking to alert
shepherds at night. Secondly they were chained during the day but released at night. In third way they were left
free to wander (Rigg 2005). The project revealed that the presence of LGDs alone did not necessarily deter
predators or stop all losses, but the mean and maximum reported losses at flocks with one or more free-ranging
LGDs were significantly lower than those at other flocks in the same regions. Caucasian Shepherd Dogs were
perhaps more likely than Slovensky Cuvac to exhibit aggressive protective behaviour which could make them
more effective at repelling determined predators. A successful outcome was not guaranteed by bonding pups to
livestock. Many farmers and shepherds were reluctant to undertake extra work in order to implement more
effective preventive measures against predators, even where high losses had been reported. Several external
factors hindered revitalizing the proper use of LGDs, including dogs being shot by hunters, encounters with
walkers and farm visitors and socio-economic changes both within the livestock industry and on a broader scale.
An outreach programme could help to alleviate some of these problems by explaining the role and behaviour of
livestock guarding dogs (Rigg 2004, 2005).
25. Slovenia
Slovenia has bears, lynxes and wolves but no wolverines. There are about 401-490 bears, 10-15 lynxes,
and 32-43 wolves. The population of bears is increasing but lynxes and wolves are stable. Compensation was
252,497 € containing number of attacks by bears to 650 sheep/goat, 15 cattle/horses/pigs, 425 other like bee
hives, agriculture, orchards, animal feed, car accidents, and feeders by increasing the trend since 2007. In 2011
about 975 € were paid for 9 sheep because of lynxes and 269,000 € were paid for 453 animals because of wolves
(Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b).
26. Spain
In Spain there are bears and wolves but not lynxes and wolverines. The number of large carnivore
population is estimated about 22-27 bears. There was no recent estimate of total population size of wolves but it
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
32
was about 2,000 wolves in 2005. In the country population of bears is increasing, but wolves are decreasing. In
2010 about 20,500 € were paid for 70 sheep and 29 beehives because of bears and 2 million € because of wolves
(Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). In order to strengthen the dwindling population (only 6 bears at that time) in the
Pyrenees, extra 3 adult bears arrived from Slovenia in 1996. As a result attacks on sheep have increased from
that time significantly. Those 3 bears were brought from a Slovenia where there were relatively few sheep, and
where sheep usually grazed in the vicinity of little villages in the countryside. Whilst local bears were
responsible for only 3-4 sheep kills per year, newly arrived bears killed between 20 and 25 sheep annually.
Moreover cubs born from those bears appeared to have acquired similar feeding habits. In reaction to these
conflicts, the Spanish Great Pyrenean Club (GPC) offered to share their knowledge on Great Pyrenean Mountain
Dogs (GPMDs) with the Department of the Environment in Catalonia (Icardo 2005). GPC convinced Spanish
authorities that this breed was used effectively to prevent predation in North America, Canada, France, and Israel
and could benefit both shepherds and wildlife. Efforts were made to put such plans into action and during the
years 1998 and 1999, twenty-nine Great Pyrenean puppies which were born in flocks, mainly issued from the
French Pyrenees were purchased by the administration from the Spanish Great Pyrenean Club, to be given to
stockowners to protect their flocks. Unfortunately the speed at which these changes took place was detrimental
to the efficiency of dogs, which were handed over to shepherds with few instructions and no funding for
technical surveillance or veterinary care. The Department of Environment eventually examined the outcome of
these reintroductions. Results showed that there was an alarming mortality rate of 21% of LGDs. Moreover, 23
% of the owners showed unsatisfactory procedures, while only 3 % were qualified as excellent. However, 80 %
of the LGDs showed attentive behaviours towards the flock. As a result the project reached the optimum target
and was almost successful (Icardo 2005).
27. Sweden
Sweden has large carnivores like Norway containing bears, lynxes, wolves and wolverines. There are
about minimum 3,300 bears, 1,400-1,900 lynxes including 277 lynx family groups, 29 packs and 25 scent
marking pairs, and about 680 wolverines. Except lynxes the other large carnivores are increasing in the country
like Norway. Compensation costs were 37,000 € for 50-100 sheep and few other animals, 187,000 € for
reindeers because of bear damage, 17,500 € for 90 sheep and 3.5 million € for reindeer herders because of lynx
damage, 100,000 € for 200-500 livestock and 20 hunting dogs and 82,000 € for 239 reindeer herders because of
wolf damage (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). In Sweden there is no modern knowledge of working with guarding
dogs to protect livestock from large predators and there are no special breeds of livestock guarding dogs from
Scandinavia. According to data from people living in the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries revealed
that some kind of dogs in those days were used as all-round dogs, some of them accompanying livestock and
people during the days in the forest. On some occasions some of them actually got into fights with both wolves
Canis lupus and bears Ursus arctos. Still, the interest in guarding dogs was aroused again and both farmers and
the authorities wanted to learn more about how they work and how to raise and keep them. Recently most
livestock in Sweden is fenced, either within electrical fences, traditional sheep wire-netting fences, or with sheep
wire-netting fences supplemented with two electrical wires. The 210,000 (adult) Swedish sheep are found in
7,600 flocks and some of them are situated in areas with large carnivores, mainly wolves and lynxes. The
Wildlife Damage Centre has worked intensively with electrical fences to protect against large predator
depredation since 1997 (Levin 2005).
A minority of farmers which were less than a hundred let their animals range freely during the summer.
These farms were situated in boreal areas in the central to north central parts of Sweden. Majority of them were
located in the same area as dense, or growing, populations of bears and wolves. Between 1995 and 2005
problems had been reported from a few farms with free ranging sheep or dairy cattle. The confirmed number of
free ranging animals being killed or injured by large predators was not high, but there was a widespread anxiety
that something will happen and some farmers were also convinced that the actual presence of predators in the
neighbourhood stressed the livestock and caused indirect damage, like failed ovulation, abortions, decreasing
milk production, etc. In those situations a livestock guarding dog could be of help, as long as it could work by
itself. Unfortunately there were no shepherds in Sweden and it would probably be very difficult to get people to
work as shepherds. Less than 2% of the economically active population was engaged in farming (Levin 2005).
The Wildlife Damage Centre encouraged farmers with certain needs to get puppies of good quality
guarding dogs and also recommended that the county councils subsidise the purchase of the dogs. The intention
of Swedish livestock breeders was to follow the development of those dogs under Swedish conditions in the long
term. They did this with yearly survey for each dog, as well as annual meetings with the dog owners to discuss
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
33
and share experience. In 2000s there were nine dogs working actively to protect livestock in Sweden. Eight of
the dogs were Maremma-Abruzzese, and work within fenced areas. The dogs were born in a Swedish kennel, but
had Italian working dogs as parents. The breeders had lived in Italy and spent a lot of time learning about the
dogs from shepherds in the Abruzzi Mountains. All working dogs were raised with livestock at the same farms
where they now live. Two of these dogs protect alpacas in a flock that was attacked by wolf two years ago, the
rest protect sheep in areas with lynx, wolves and occasionally bears. The ninth dog was an Anatolian Shepherd
Dog. This dog was first raised in a town, but was taken to a farm as a two-year-old. The introduction seemed to
have gone well so far, and last summer the dog was protecting free ranging goats in an area with bears, lynx and
occasionally wolves (Levin 2005).
28. Switzerland
Bears, lynxes and wolves are present in Switzerland but not wolverine. There are about 2 bears, 124-
143 lynxes, and about 8 wolves which had first reproduction in 2012. In the country populations of bears and
lynxes are stable, but wolves are increasing. Between 2006 and 2011 the amount of 103,000 € was paid for 200
sheep/goats and 31 beehives because of bears, 18,360 € was paid for 92 sheep because of lynxes, and 1 million €
was paid for 4,618 livestock because of wolves (Kaczensky et al. 2012a,b). Wolves Canis lupus were extinct in
Switzerland about 150 years ago (Landry et al. 2005). However, wolves spread from Italy and France to
Switzerland in 1995 and started regularly to attack livestock (Landry et al. 2005, Mettler 2005). In February
1999, the Federal Office for Environment, Forests and Landscape initiated the Swiss Wolf Project (SWP) in
order to overcome the conflicts generated by the wolf and make possible the cohabitation with man. The project
was carried out by KORA which was a coordinated research projects for the conservation and management of
carnivores in Switzerland (Mettler 2005). KORA had three main targets including prevention, information and
monitoring the wolves. 25 guard dogs which were mainly Great Pyrenees had been brought to different sheep
flocks, some of them already before the start of the SWP. Moreover 8 shepherds and aid shepherds had been
involved in the project in order to advice the farmers or to protect sheep flocks located in hot spots. At last,
donkeys and electric fences had been used to protect smaller sheep flocks (Weber 2000).
In Switzerland shepherding was left to reduce the expenses since 1940s. At present sheep were free-
ranging on alpine pastures and checked only once a week. In 2000s the wolf had returned only in the south of
Switzerland in cantons of Valais, Tessin and Grisons. Between 1998 and 2003, 456 sheep and goats had been
compensated as wolf kills. The carcasses are checked by a local gamekeeper. Officially, there were still about 3
to 6 wolves in the southern part of Switzerland in 2000s (Weber 2000).
The first LGDs were provided by two sheep owners who faced the first wolf attacks in 1995. They
bought two Great Pyrenees pups in the Alps Maritime, Mercantour, and South of France in 1996. Between 1998
and 2003, 64 more LGDs were brought in flocks in Switzerland. KORA authorities acquired a total of 20 Great
Pyrenees (10 females and 10 males, from three distinct regions) directly from France and four Maremma-
Abruzzese dogs (Landry et al. 2005). The Maremma-Abruzzese originated from the Abruzze province, Italy,
where its use as a LGD had been known for at least 2000 years (Lüthi and Mettler 2005). Every LGD was bred
from working parents. KORA also provided 3 St-Bernard pups at the St- Bernard Hospice. They have received
two Spanish Mastiffs and one Mioritic from a Romanian worker from Brasov as well. 42 pups were directly born
in KORA project from 9 litters and 36 (19 females and 17 males) were introduced in flocks, the others in
families. The wolves were quite rare in Switzerland, so it was impossible to estimate the effectiveness of the
LGDs. However, sheep owners noticed that their dogs were very effective against foxes and ravens predation on
lambs and against stray dogs (Landry et al. 2005).
On the other hand Maremmanos showed some deficiencies. Playfulness that leads to injuries and losses
had been a common problem especially in young dogs and it must to be taken seriously. Mobbing and
unbalanced social structure within a team of Maremmanos could be successfully controlled by removing or
exchanging individual members of a team. Two Maremmanos had shown more attachment to people than to
livestock and thus were insufficiently loyal and attentive to their flock. Some dogs roamed too far from the flock
for possible reasons of being females in heat, hunting for wildlife, searching for food leftovers near huts or
houses. Harassment of sick individuals that stayed behind or showed abnormal behavior had been observed in
some cases mainly with dogs younger than 2 years. Some dogs showed too aggressive guarding behavior
towards other dogs or people. Imported adult dogs coming from a different context should have been treated
carefully, especially if it was unclear how the puppies have been raised (Lüthi and Mettler 2005).
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
34
Conclusion
In Europe livestock animals decreased after industrial revolution because of mechanization and
industrialization year by year. Because of some reasons while pastoral areas were decreasing, urban areas were
increased which caused smaller living areas for wild animals. On the other hand developed gun industry
facilitated killing wild animals for hunting or other reasons. In most of European countries, large carnivores have
decreased because of these reasons. Farmers tend to raise animals from extensive systems to intensive systems in
order to get more yields by giving less feed or spend less money. At conclusion large carnivores have strong
pressure on livestock animals in Europe.
References
1) Anonymous (2012) Livestock guardian dogs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livestock_guardian_dogs
(accessed 11.10.2012)
2) Anonymous (2014) Native Dog Breds of Norway. Publication of Norwegian Kennel Club and Norwegian
Genetic Resource Centre a part of the Norwegian Forest and Landscape Institute.
http://www.skogoglandskap.no/filearchive/native_dog_breeds_norway.pdf (accessed 11.10.2012)
3) Coppinger R, Lorenz J, Glendinning J, Pinardı P (1983) Attentiveness of Guarding Dogs for Reducing
Predation on Domestic Sheep. Journal of Range Management 36(3): 275-279.
4) Coppinger R, Coppinger L, (2005) Livestock Guarding Dogs: From the Transhumance to Pre-Zygotic
Selection. Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 9: 2-9.
5) Cruz C (2011) Working dogs - What is their job? http://www.lgd.org/library.htm (erişim 04.01.2012)
6) Cugno D (2004) Influence of Large Carnivores on the Distribution of Excreta by Sheep on a Summer Pasture,
in the NW-Italian Alps. Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 7: 5-7.
7) Fonseca F P (2000) The Recovery of Livestock Guarding Dogs’ use and the Iberian Wolf Conservation in
Portugal - Promising results. Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 1: 8-9.
8) Gutleb M B (2001) Experiences of 10 Years of Damage Prevention for Brown Bears in Austria. Carnivore
Damage Prevention News, 4: 9.
9) Hansen I, Bakken M (1999) Livestock-guarding Dogs in Norway: Part I. Interactions. J. Range Manage, 52:
2-6.
10) Hansen I, Smith M (1999) Livestock-guarding dogs in Norway Part II: Different working regimes. J. Range
Manage, 52: 312-316.
11) Hansen I (2005) Use of Livestock Guarding Dogs in Norway.
http://www.kora.ch/en/proj/cdpnews/cdpnews008.htm#Hansen (erişim 04.01.2012)
12) Icardo M (2005) Briefing on the Re-Introduction of LGDs in Catalonia (Spain). Carnivore Damage
Prevention News, 9: 34-35.
13) Kaczensky P, Chapron G, von Arx M, Huber D, Andrén H, Linnell J (2012a). Status, management and
distribution of large carnivores bear, lynx, wolf & wolverine in Europe, Part I.
http://www.kora.ch/index.php?id=136&L=1 (accessed 11.10.2012)
14) Kaczensky P, Chapron G, von Arx, M, Huber D, Andrén H, Linnell J (2012b). Status, management and
distribution of large carnivores bear, lynx, wolf & wolverine in Europe, Part II.
http://www.kora.ch/index.php?id=136&L=1 (accessed 11.10.2012)
15) Landry J M, Burri A, Torriani D, Angst C (2005) Livestock Guarding Dogs: a New Experience for
Switzerland.Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 8: 40-47.
16) Levin M (2005) Livestock Guarding Dogs in Sweden: a Preliminary Report.Carnivore Damage Prevention
News, 8: 8-9.
17) Linnell J D C, Odden J, Kvam T, Andersen R (2000) Who did it? Age and sex specific depredation rates of
Eurasian lynx on domestic sheep. Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 2: 9-10.
18) Linnell J D C, Broseth H (2002) Compensation for Large Carnivore Depradation of Domestic Sheep 1994-
2001. Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 6: 11-13.
19) Lüthi R, Mettler D (2005). Experiences with the Maremmano-Abruzzese as an LGDog in Switzerland.
Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 9: 39-44.
20) Mertens A, Prombeger C (2000) Problems in Damage Prevention in Romania. Carnivore Damage Prevention
News, 2: 5.
Yilmaz et al. 2015/J. Livestock Sci. 6:23-35
35
21) Mertens A, Gheorghe P, Prombeger C (2001) Carnivore Damage to Livestock in Romania. Carnivore
Damage Prevention News, 4: 10.
22) Mertens A, Schneider H (2005) What Is Wrong With Romanian Livestock Guarding Dogs? Carnivore
Damage Prevention News, 9: 9-13.
23) Mettler D, (2005) The Institutionalisation of Livestock Protection in the Alps with respect to the Small Scale
Agriculture of Switzerland.Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 9: 36-38.
24) Nowak S, Myslajek R W (2005) Livestock Guarding Dogs in the Western Part of the Polish
Carpathians.Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 8: 13-16.
25) Ribeiro S (2004) Livestock Guarding Dogs in Portugal- Results From a 13 Year Programme.
http://www.agridea-lausanne.ch/files/lgdportugal.pdf (erişim 04.01.2012)
26) Ribeiro S, Petrucci-Fonseca F (2004) Recovering the Use of Livestock Guarding Dogs in Portugal: Results
of a Long-Term Action. Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 7: 2-4.
27) Ribeiro S, Petrucci-Fonseca F (2005) The Use of Livestock Guarding Dogs in Portugal. Carnivore Damage
Prevention News, 9: 27-33.
28) Rigg R (2001) Livestock Guarding Dogs: Their Current Use World Wide. PhD Thesis U. Of Aberdeen.
Dept. Fo Agriculture. Aberdeen, UK.
29) Rigg R (2004) The Extent of Predation on Livestock by Large Carnivors in Slovakia and Mitigating
Carnivore-Human Conflict Using Livestock Guardian Dogs. MSc Thesis, University of Aberdeen, UK.
30) Rigg R (2005) Livestock Depredation and Livestock Guarding Dogs in Slovakia.Carnivore Damage
Prevention News, 8: 17-27.
31) Rigg R, Findo S, Wechselberger M, Gorman M L, Sillero-Zubiri C, Macdonald D W (2011) Mitigating
CarnivoreLivestock Conflict in Europe: Lessons from Slovakia. Fauna & Flora International, Oryx,
45(2): 272280
32) Sedefchev S (2005) The Karakachan Dog Continuation of an Old Bulgarian Tradition. Carnivore Damage
Prevention News, 9: 14-18.
33) Śmietana W (2005) Use of Tatra Mountains Shepherd Dog in the Bieszczady Mountains. Carnivore Damage
Prevention News, 8: 10-12.
34) Stahl P, Vandel J M (2001) Factors Influenceing Lynx Depradation on Sheep in France: Problem Individuals
and Habitat. Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 4: 6-8.
35) Stahl P, Vandel J M, Herrenschmidt V, Migot P (2001a). Predation on livestock by an expanding
reintroduced lynx population: long-term trend and spatial variability. Journal of Applied Ecology,
38(3): 674-687.
36) Stahl P, Vandel J M, Herrenschmidt V, Migot P (2001b) The effect of removing lynx in reducing attacks on
sheep in the French Jura Mountains. Biological conservation, 101(1): 15-22.
37) Stoynov E (2005) Providing Livestock Guarding Dogs and Compensation of Livestock Losses Caused by
Large Carnivores in Bulgaria. Carnivore Damage Prevention News, 9: 19-23.
38) Van der Geest O (2013) Livestock Guarding Dogs integrating guarding dogs into a new livestock herd.
University of Applied Science, Spreewald, Germany.
39) Weber J-M (2000) Wolf Return in Switzerland: A Project to Solve Conflicts. Carnivore Damage Prevention
News, 2: 8-9.
40) Yilmaz O (2006) Livestock Guardian Dogs (Unpublished PhD Seminar). Ankara University, Institute of
Science and Technology, Ankara.
41) Yilmaz O 2007a Some Morphological Characteristics of Kangal Dogs Raised in Various Parts of Turkey
(Unpublished PhD thesis). Ankara University, Institute of Science and Technology, Ankara.
42) Yılmaz O 2007b Turkish Kangal (Karabash) Shepherd Dog. Impress Printing, Ankara.
... Conflict between lynx and livestock breeders is almost unknown in Serbia, hence interviews and surveys addressing this issue indicate that conflict levels related to damages on livestock caused by lynx are low. There exists also no central information on livestock depredation in the country (Yilmaz et al. 2015). According to Kaczensky et al. (2013), there is just one reported case of a chicken killed by a lynx in 2010. ...
... In Poland, very few cases of lynx attacking livestock are reported and poses not a severe problem, according to Mysłajek and Nowak (2013), the species does not seem to have any economic significance on livestock breeding. Still, it affects negative attitude towards the species among farmers (Yilmaz et al. 2015). ...
... The amount of compensation payments for damages caused by large carni voresreaching on average 200.000 € annually for the entire country, with 0.1 to 4 % caused by lynx (Yilmaz et al. 2015;Schmidt, pers. comm.). ...
Technical Report
Full-text available
The aim of this compendium, compiled within the Central Europe INTERREG Project 3Lynx, is to present an overview of current lynx management approaches and monitoring methods, about challenges and problems arising by the presence of the species. Furthermore, for the detection and capture of Eurasian lynx in order to determine their distribution within other populations and occurence areas outside the Bohemian-Bavarian-Austrian (BBA), East-Alpine and Dinaric population which are focus within the 3Lynx project. Assessment of these efforts allows for identification of factors that have emerged as threats, barriers and drivers during implementation of active and passive monitoring schemes and informs future choices concerning monitoring, participatory measures for stakeholder involvement and other related topics, which are identified as crucial elements for the successful implemantation of a fully functioning Eurasian lynx management and monitoring scheme. The compendium lists approaches (and their outcomes and "lessons learned") in all different European countries housing Eurasian lynx populations. It includes management and monitoring programs that are currently in use, are under development or are planned for the future. Additionally, threats and arising conflict scenarios within the respective countries are mentioned and subsequent conflict management and compensation plans are described, where available, with the goal of identifying and pointing potential options and solutions for conflict mitigation and reduction feasible for implementation within other countries as well. At last, a conclusion provides a summary about the aspects of lynx management and monitoring, that have emerged as the most urgent and important topics in the respective countries/populations, as well as problems or challenges that have arisen. Additionally, the appendix provides overview tables of applied management and monitoring schemes and compensation schemes, as well as existing/arising threats and conflicts for each country and population accompanied by a list of actual literature references, which cites actual approaches and publications allowing easy access of information to deal with the respective topic in more detail. The review of available and implemented management and monitoring schemes for the existing Eurasian Lynx populations within Europe within the present compendium will support the 3Lynx project, as well as other prospective projects concerning conservation of Eurasian lynx populations in Europe, with useful information that should function as a guide and provide assistance in the development and implementation of standardized management and monitoring schemes for joint monitoring efforts and the ensurance of comparable results and easier interpretation of these data in the subsequent analysis in the future.
... Les pays scandinaves restent un cas à part avec leur système de conduite des troupeaux où les rennes semi-domestiques et les moutons sont en élevage extensif, sans gardiennage et les pertes sont importantes (plusieurs dizaines de milliers d'animaux par an, Swenson & Andrén, 2009;. A l'inverse en Europe de l'Est, seuls quelques animaux par an sont prédatés (moins d'une vingtaine dans tous les cas) dans des pays qui ont souvent maintenu les méthodes traditionnelles de prévention contre la prédation (gardiennage, chiens de protection, parcs de nuit, Mertens & Promberger, 2001;Keçi et al., 2008;Rigg et al., 2011;Yilmaz et al., 2015). La ...
... Les chiens de protection ont montré leur utilité dans la réduction des attaques de lynx mais aussi de loups et d'ours (Rigg et al., 2011;Yilmaz et al., 2015). Les premières expérimentations menées en 1998 dans le Jura par l'association ARTUS avec deux chiens Montagne des Pyrénées furent un succès, en termes de réduction des attaques. ...
Technical Report
Full-text available
Le Lynx boréal est une espèce protégée au niveau international par la Convention de Berne relative à la conservation de la vie sauvage et du milieu naturel de l’Europe de 1979, et par la Directive 92/43/CEE dite « Habitats-Faune-Flore » où il est classé comme espèce d’intérêt communautaire prioritaire. En France, il bénéficie d’une protection totale via l’arrêté ministériel du 23 avril 2007 fixant la liste des mammifères terrestres protégés sur l’ensemble du territoire et les modalités de leur protection. Dans la Liste rouge nationale établie selon les critères de l’Union Internationale pour la Conservation de la Nature (UICN), il est classé « En Danger ». Fin 2017, le Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle (MNHN) considérait que la tendance de population était à la « diminution ». Cette situation a conduit à l’émergence de plusieurs initiatives sous forme de plan en faveur de la conservation de l’espèce portées par des organisations telles le Centre de Recherche et d’Observation sur les Carnivores (CROC) qui a initié dès 2016 le Programme Lynx massif des Vosges (PLMV devenu depuis le Plan Régional d’Actions en faveur du Lynx dans le massif des Vosges) ou le WWF qui a confié à la SFEPM la rédaction d’un Plan d’Actions pour la Conservation du Lynx (PNCL) en 2018. Afin de contribuer aux exigences de la loi pour la reconquête de la biodiversité, de la nature et des paysages du 8 août 2016, le Ministère en charge de l’écologie a en parallèle mandaté le Préfet de la région Bourgogne-Franche-Comté pour élaborer un Plan National d’Actions (PNA) en s’appuyant sur le travail de coordination de la Direction Régionale de l’Environnement, de l’Aménagement et du Logement (DREAL) Bourgogne-Franche-Comté et de rédaction de l’Office Français de la Biodiversité (OFB). La stratégie à long terme en faveur du Lynx boréal en France se donne pour objectif de rétablir l’espèce dans un bon état de conservation sur l’ensemble de son aire de présence actuelle et les nouveaux espaces de colonisation spontanée. La mise en œuvre de cette stratégie s’appuiera sur des objectifs progressifs et, pour certains, différenciés selon les massifs. Ce premier PNA vise à rétablir l’état de conservation de l’espèce sur 5 ans, sans réintroduction, ni régulation et dont les objectifs sont : • l’amélioration de la connaissance de la dynamique de l’espèce sur l’ensemble des massifs où le Lynx est présent, en particulier sur le massif alpin, ainsi que sur les zones récentes de recolonisation ; • sur le massif jurassien et le massif alpin, le maintien/rétablissement d’une dynamique démographique interannuelle positive ; • .sur le massif des Vosges, où le Lynx boréal est en danger critique d’extinction, car ses effectifs sont très faibles, l’enrayement de la dynamique démographique négative, en travaillant prioritairement à l’amélioration de la perception de l’espèce par les acteurs locaux. Ce document priorise les actions nécessaires sur un horizon de 5 ans, tout en identifiant des actions qui contribueront ultérieurement à la stratégie d’expansion géographique de l’aire de présence du Lynx et la viabilité à long terme sur le territoire national.
... • Das Mitführen eines Hundes (keine besondere Ausbildung notwendig) kann zu einem zusätzlichen Vergrämungseffekt führen, der zum Schutz von Nutztieren bereits nachgewiesen wurde (Yilmaz et al. 2015). ...
... Das regelmäßige Begehen eines Gebiets mit Hunden zur Vergrämung von Luchsen wird im Kontext des Herdenschutzes als wirksam beschrieben (Yilmaz et al. 2015). In Untersuchungen konnte festgestellt werden, dass ein Hund und ein Schäfer ein Gebiet von 10 km 2 bis 12 km 2 mit einem Einsatz von 15 Stunden Arbeit / Woche kontrollieren können. ...
... Moreover, the results showed that the Qala-Diza region had the highest body weight Pishdar dogs. Accordingly to Atasoy et al (2011) and Yilmaz et al (2015), also recorded similar geographical body weight variations in Kangal and Akbash dogs, respectively. ...
... The fact that males are heavier and more significant in size than females is a typical result, and this result returned to the effect of male hormones that affected the body dimensions (Spira, 1982;Arnold, 2004). A similar result clarified by many researchers (Li et al, 2014;Yilmaz et al, 2015). ...
Article
Full-text available
The study was done to determine the genetic evaluation and effects of some factors on body weight and dimensions for Pishdar dogs, which are specified in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. About 74 selected dogs were used in this study. The mean body weight was 73.50 ±13.33 kg/dog. Data were subjected to SAS programs (ANOVA) to determine the effects of sex, location, and age of Pishdar dog on its body weight and dimensions. The results found a significant effect of sex, geographical location and age on the dog's body weight and most of the body dimensions. The aged male Pishdar dog that raised in Qala-Diza geographical region gave significantly higher weight and body dimensions compared with other groups. Significant positive correlations were found among body weight and body dimensions at different ages, and all correlations among weights with body dimensions were significantly positive correlation except the correlation between ear length with chest wide and back length. The best stepwise regression model to predict the bodyweight was obtained for 7 out of 24 dimensions with 88.04 % R 2 and mean value of Cp (-3.9070). The effects of non-genetic factors are necessary to be corrected before making any genetic evaluations among dogs. Accordingly, its mixed model procedure (BLUP) has been used with ranged values from-45.0 to 35.0 kg for dog body weight. These results indicated that high genetic variations among dogs for these traits, and it means that selection can play a significant role in improving growth performance in Pishdar dogs.
... Together with the livestock, mostly sheep flocks, LGDs typically live under harsh mountain environments in the open and free-range grazing production systems. They are large-bodied dogs that are locally adapted and selected to demonstrate intelligence, trustworthiness, attentiveness, and protectiveness [1]. While most LGD breeds are common in Europe and Asia, they can be found all over the world. ...
Article
Full-text available
Balkan Livestock Guardian Dogs (LGD) were bred to help protect sheep flocks in sparsely populated, remote mountainous areas in the Balkans. The aim of this study was genomic characterization (107,403 autosomal SNPs) of the three LGD breeds from the Balkans (Karst Shepherd, Sharplanina Dog, and Tornjak). Our analyses were performed on 44 dogs representing three Balkan LGD breeds, as well as on 79 publicly available genotypes representing eight other LGD breeds, 70 individuals representing seven popular breeds, and 18 gray wolves. The results of multivariate, phylogenetic, clustering (STRUCTURE), and FST differentiation analyses showed that the three Balkan LGD breeds are genetically distinct populations. While the Sharplanina Dog and Tornjak are closely related to other LGD breeds, the Karst Shepherd is a slightly genetically distinct population with estimated influence from German Shepard (Treemix analysis). Estimated genomic diversity was high with low inbreeding in Sharplanina Dog (Ho = 0.315, He = 0.315, and FROH>2Mb = 0.020) and Tornjak (Ho = 0.301, He = 0.301, and FROH>2Mb = 0.033) breeds. Low diversity and high inbreeding were estimated in Karst Shepherds (Ho = 0.241, He = 0.222, and FROH>2Mb = 0.087), indicating the need for proper diversity management. The obtained results will help in the conservation management of Balkan LGD dogs as an essential part of the specific grazing biocultural system and its sustainable maintenance.
... Overall, however, livestock guarding dogs (LGDs) remain the most effective non-lethal method to reduce losses to predators. The ability of LGDs to protect livestock from predators has been documented in a range of contexts (reviewed in Rigg, 2001;Gehring et al., 2010;Yilmaz et al., 2015). A recent LGD program implemented in Portugal showed that the majority of farmers considered that the advantages of having LGDs outweighed the costs and they were interested in maintaining them in their flocks (Ribeiro et al., 2017a). ...
Article
Full-text available
Traditionally, research on farm animal welfare has mainly been focused on welfare problems thought to be common in intensive systems, whereas the welfare of animals kept in extensive systems has attracted much less attention. This may be due to the generally held belief that extensive systems are advantageous in terms of animal welfare. Although it is undeniable that extensive systems have many benefits in terms of animal welfare, they are by no means free of welfare problems. This review highlights the animal welfare problems that are most likely to be found in extensive systems following the four animal welfare domains of “nutrition,” “environment,” “health,” and “behavior.” Extensive environments are highly variable and heterogeneous in terms of climate conditions, food quality, and access to high-quality water, and this can raise serious welfare concerns related to chronic hunger and thirst, and thermal stress. These problems will vary depending on the location and time of year. Some diseases are more likely in extensive systems than in intensive ones and this can be compounded by supervision of animals being more difficult in extensive systems. Several painful husbandry procedures as well as neonatal mortality and predation are other potential welfare issues for animals raised in extensive systems. Finally, infrequent handling and / or potentially aversive handling can impair human-animal relationship and have a negative effect on the welfare of extensive livestock. Detection and monitoring of welfare problems in extensive systems are essential for implementing practical solutions adapted to local challenges. Selecting animals that are adapted to local conditions reduces some of the welfare problems encountered in extensive systems. Practice-led innovations should be undertaken in extensive systems and should support knowledge-exchange strategies with producers.
Article
Depopulation and economic marginalization of rural districts have induced a progressive land abandonment in agricultural and pastoral districts. In Europe, areas at higher risk of farmland abandonment are characterized by low‐intensity pasture systems whose fate is strongly dependent on state incentives or subsidies to rural development promoting more sustainable land‐use trajectories. Especially in Southern Europe, undergrazing is the main driver of pasture degradation. In such a context, a land management preserving pasture resilience requires a wider knowledge about the impact of practices on the ecological characteristics of pastures and an improved understanding of complex socio‐environmental interactions underlying the adoption of such practices. Based on these premises, this study investigates the extent to which the past land management reflects the current state of agro‐pastoral systems in a local community of Southern Apennine (Basilicata, Italy). Based on a multi‐scale analysis integrating multiple sources of data and exploratory techniques, three land‐use trajectories with different implications for land degradation were identified: (i) areas completely abandoned, (ii) areas with a decrease in grazing where the management system is remained unchanged and, (iii) areas characterized by a decrease in grazing with changes in the management system. Results outline the importance of landscape history shaping (optimal and sub‐optimal) land management and the influence of landscape structure on livestock performances within different farm management types. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Chapter
Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is commonly used to assess the desirability of living with wildlife. This framing usually presents ecological discomforts as pure negatives that are, however, often sufficiently balanced out by positive utilities that wildlife bring with them, mostly in the form of ecosystem services. However, in the context of CBA, it is often argued that certain animal threats can be re-interpreted as benefits. This is associated with the ‘risk is fun’ culture, where limited and controlled threats benefit individual self-realization by providing psychological stimulation and opportunities for testing ones virility, which are often lacking in the modern comfort and safety oriented culture. While this interpretation goes some way towards explaining the positive role of ecological discomforts, it delimits the role of animals as tools for human self-realization, wholly integrated within the perpetuation of the established culture and identities. Meanwhile, there are strong indications that discomforting animals are also important in moral sense, as partners who question, negate and undermine our identities and dominant cultural patterns, and as entities demanding respect in their own right.
Article
Full-text available
Balkans consist of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Greece, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Romania, Slovenia, Serbia, and Turkey. In Balkans there are quite succesfull livestock guardian dogs including Akbash Shepherd in (Turkey), Bucovina Shepherd (Romania), Bulgarian Shepherd (Bulgaria), Carpatin Shepherd (Romania), Greek Shepherd (Greece), Karabash (Kangal) Shepherd (Turkey), Karaman Shepherd (Turkey), Kars (Caucasian) Shepherd (Turkey), Karst Shepherd (Slovenya), Koyun Shepherd (Turkey), Macedonian Karaman Shepherd (Macedonia), Mioritic Sheep (Romania), Sharplaninac (Kosovo/Macedonia), Tornjak (Bosna-Herzegovinia). In Balkan countries are generally developing countries in which livestock production is still crutial in their economics. Moreover geograpy of Balkans are mainly mountainous and forrest areas. In those areas there are some predators such as bear, fox, jackal, lynx, and wolf. Those conditions create that livestock guardian dogs are necessary for livestock production in Balkans.
Article
Full-text available
Livestock-guarding dogs are an effective way of protecting rangeland sheep from predators. However, open mountain/forest range and widely ranging sheep are factors that may make adaptation to Norwegian conditions difficult. This paper focuses on the dogs' working patterns and effectiveness under different working regimes. A 3,500 ha. unfenced forest/mountain range pasture in bear habitat comprised the research area in which 624 sheep from 2 herds grazed. The field trial lasted 3 months, and a total of 10 Great Pyrenees participated for various time intervals. Three different working regimes were evaluated: 1) loose dogs without the command of a dog handler (Method A); 2) loose dogs under the command of a dog handler (Method B); and 3) loose dogs guarding sheep inside a fenced, 1 km2 forest pasture (Method C). Nocturnal behavioural activity patterns and data on predation were recorded. Method A proved too uncontrolled for Norwegian conditions, because sheep dispersed too widely and dogs ranged too far, causing conflicts in nearby settlements with wildlife, and with livestock. Pasture dogs (C) were >3 times less active and were engaged in guarding activities < 50% as often as patrol dogs (B). However, they barked >15 times more frequently, and no sheep carcasses were found inside the fence. Therefore, Method C probably had the best preventive effect.
Article
Full-text available
Predation of livetsock in Bulgaria is a serious problem. Not just because of the number of animals killed, but rather because the livetsock losses motivate the livetsock breeders to kill large carnivores in revenge, even using poison baits which are illegal in Bulgaria. Carnivores that kill livetsock in Bulgaria include the brown bear Ursus arctos, wolf Canis lupus, jackal Canis aureus and exceptionally, the red fox Vulpes vulpes. The deployment of poison baits has unfavorable impact on the populations of carrion eating species as vultures, namely: black vulture Aegypius monachus, bearded vulture Gypaetus barbatus, griffon vulture Gyps fulvus, egyptian vulture Neophron percnopterus and several eagles: imperial eagle Aquila heliaca and golden eagle Aquila chrysaetos.
Article
We documented behaviors of Great Pyrenees livestock-guarding dogs toward people, livestock, dogs, horses, reindeer, and bear to determine if they might be suitable for protecting livestock in Norway. None out of 13 dogs showed aggressive behavior towards unfamiliar people, and aggressiveness towards dogs and livestock was also low. However, 91% of the dogs tested chased reindeer. A willingness to chase bears was apparent in all 3 dogs tested. Although the Norwegian strains of the Great Pyrenees are bred mainly for exhibition, they obviously have retained some behavioral patterns important for the livestock-guarding function. Their nonaggressive behavior towards people, dogs, and livestock, and their active reaction towards bears suggest that this breed could be suitable for use as livestock-guardians in Norway. However, the dogs' tendency to chase reindeer is a trait that may cause conflicts in reindeer-herding areas. /// Documentamos el comportamiento de los perros guardianes de ganado de raza "Great Pyrenees" hacia la gente, ganado, perros, caballos, renos y osos para determinar si ellos pudieran ser apropiados para proteger el ganado en Noruega. Ninguno de los 13 perros mostraron comportamiento agresivo hacia la gente desconocida y la agresividad hacia perros y ganado también fue baja. Sin embargo, 91% de los perros bajo prueba persiguieron los renos. La disponibilidad para perseguir osos fue aparente en los 3 perros probados. Aunque la líneas noruegas de la raza "Great Pyrenees" son criados para exhibición, ellos obviamente han retenido algunos patrones de comportamiento importantes para la función de proteger el ganado. Su comportamiento no agresivo hacia la gente, perros y ganado y su reacción hacia los osos suguieren que esta raza pudiera ser apropiada para usarla en Noruega como perros guardianes de ganado. Sin embargo, la tendencia de los perros a perseguir renos es una característica que pudiera causar conflicto en áreas donde hay manadas de renos.