The prohibition of recreational hunting of wild ungulates in Spanish National Parks: Challenges and opportunities.

A new regulation has led to the prohibition of recreational hunting on estates located within Spanish National Parks (NPs). Before the ban, eleven NPs in Spain had already reported negative ecological consequences associated with high densities of wild ungulates. The new situation that has occurred after the ban signifies that policies with which to control populations of wild ungulates in NPs, most of which do not have a sufficient natural capacity to regulate populations, depend exclusively on the parks' authorities. The banning of recreational hunting implies a series of social, ecological, economic and logistic challenges. The control of wild ungulate populations in NPs requires: i) the legal basis for culling; ii) social acceptance as regards removing animals and the extractive procedures employed in NPs; iii) the long-term monitoring of wild ungulates and the damages that they cause, and iv) sufficient financial and human resources. A more integrated management and policy plan is, therefore, required, which should be supported by two pillars: i) the sustainability of natural resources and the conservation of functional environments, and ii) providing society with explanations regarding the need to manage wild ungulates. In order to bridge the potential gap between these key pillars, it is important to involve stakeholders in the decision-making processes concerning wild ungulate management. The forthcoming changes in Spanish NPs provide a promising opportunity to make a substantial improvement to wild ungulate management in these protected areas. This management approach could, moreover, serve as an example and be transferred to other protected spaces.

The value of transhumance for biodiversity conservation: Vulture foraging in relation to livestock movements.

In recent decades, intensive techniques of livestock raising have flourished, which has largely replaced traditional farming practices such as transhumance. These changes may have affected scavengers' behaviour and ecology, as extensive livestock is a key source of carrion. This study evaluates the spatial responses of avian scavengers to the seasonal movements of transhumant herds in south-eastern Spain. We surveyed the abundance of avian scavengers and ungulates, and analysed the factors affecting the space use by 30 GPS-tracked griffon vultures (Gyps fulvus). Griffons' foraging activity increased in the pasturelands occupied by transhumant herds, which implied greater vulture abundance at the landscape level during the livestock season. In contrast, facultative scavengers were more abundant without transhumant livestock herds, and the abundance of wild ungulates did not change in relation to livestock presence. We conclude that fostering transhumance and other traditional farming systems, to the detriment of farming intensification, could favour vulture conservation.

Usually hated, sometimes loved: A review of wild ungulates' contributions to people.

Nature's contributions to people (NCP) may be both beneficial and detrimental to humans' quality of life. Since our origins, humans have been closely related to wild ungulates, which have traditionally played an outstanding role as a source of food or raw materials. Currently, wild ungulates are declining in some regions, but recovering in others throughout passive rewilding processes. This is reshaping human-ungulate interactions. Thus, adequately understanding the benefits and detriments associated with wild ungulate populations is necessary to promote human-ungulate co-existence. Here, we reviewed 575 articles (2000-2019) on human-wild ungulate interactions to identify key knowledge gaps on NCP associated with wild ungulates. Wild ungulate research was mainly distributed into seven research clusters focussing on: (1) silvicultural damage in Eurasia; (2) herbivory and natural vegetation; (3) conflicts in urban areas of North America; (4) agricultural damage in Mediterranean agro-ecosystems; (5) social research in Africa and Asia; (6) agricultural damage in North America; (7) research in natural American Northwest areas. Research mostly focused on detrimental NCP. However, the number of publications mentioning beneficial contributions increased after the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services conceptual framework was implemented. Human-ungulate interactions' research was biased towards the Global North and Cervidae, Suidae and Bovidae families. Regarding detrimental NCP, most publications referred to production damage (e.g. crops), followed by biodiversity damage, and material damage (e.g. traffic collisions). Regarding beneficial NCP, publications mainly highlighted non-material contributions (e.g. recreational hunting), followed by material NCP and regulating contributions (e.g. habitat creation). The main actions taken to manage wild ungulate populations were lethal control and using deterrents and barriers (e.g. fencing), which effectiveness was rarely assessed. Increasing research and awareness about beneficial NCP and effective management tools may help to improve the conservation of wild ungulates and the ecosystems they inhabit to facilitate people-ungulate co-existence in the Anthropocene.

Scientific priorities and shepherds' perceptions of ungulate's contributions to people in rewilding landscapes.

Nature's contributions to people (NCP) are all the contributions of living nature, both beneficial and detrimental, to the societies' life's quality. Ungulates play this dual role of providers of beneficial and detrimental NCP, as they are responsible of the supply of benefits (e.g. extractive experiences, habitat maintenance) and detriments (e.g. crops damage, traffic collisions). Our aim was to analyze the NCP provided by wild ungulates through examining the scientific priorities and the shepherds' perceptions in peninsular Spain. We reviewed scientific articles of NCP provided by ungulates in Spain and conducted questionnaires regarding NCP to shepherds in farming systems where domestic and wild ungulates cohabit. Then, we compared whether the scientific priorities match with those perceived by shepherds. Both stakeholders highlight more detrimental than beneficial NCP, although there are some mismatches between scientific priorities and shepherds' perceptions. Regarding detrimental NCP, soil alteration, silvicultural damage, human safety or traffic collision were included in scientific literature but not mentioned by shepherds. Contrarywise, shepherds mainly considered grazing competence and damage to animals (i.e. game species and livestock) as important detrimental NCP. Concerning beneficial NCP, whilst hunting was prominent in the publications, shepherds did not conceived it as an important beneficial contribution and considered the regulation of organisms (i.e. scavenging alternative prey) important benefits. These results can have twofold implications. The emphasis on detrimental NCP (studied and perceived) can reinforce the idea that ungulates can threaten humans rather than contribute to societies' wellbeing. The fact that research does not address the interests of shepherds can affect the social tolerance towards ungulates as the damages experienced or perceived by shepherds are not studied. Our results show the relevance of considering local knowledge held by shepherds and their perceptions, something highlighted by the NCP approach.