Experimental test of the efficacy of hunting for controlling human–wildlife conflict

Human–wildlife conflict can cause major declines in wildlife populations and pose a threat to human safety livelihoods. Large carnivores are among the most conflict-prone species because they range widely, eat human-associated foods, risk safety. Legal harvest of by licensed hunters is an attractive method attempt reduce conflict; however, there mixed evidence for its effectiveness. We leveraged unique management project Ontario, Canada which new spring American black bear (Ursus americanus) hunting season was implemented selected units addition existing fall season. examined human–bear interactions incidents before (2012 2013) after (2014 2015) this implementation treatment control areas. Further, using data from 2004–2019, we longer-term patterns when throughout entire province beginning 2016. Harvest increased significantly upon units, but no concomitant reduction or incidents, these were higher areas with relative Human–bear interactions, strongly related availability natural foods all analyses. Regulated, presumably sustainable ineffective at reducing near-term might have both. Our results support long history research showing that food primary driver human–wildlife conflict. Programs promoting coexistence between people wildlife, including education, capacity building, unnatural sources likely be successful conflicts bears.