Return of the Eurasian lynx: using local stakeholder knowledge and experiences to inform lynx conservation in the French Alps
J USTINE SHANTI ALEX ANDER* 1 , 2 ,PHILIPPE CHRI S TE 1 , 2 and F RIDOLIN ZIMMERMANN3 , 1
Abstract Large carnivore conservation in human-domi- nated landscapes is a complex issue, often marked by the stark contrast between those who hold deep-rooted animos- ity towards these animals and those who welcome their presence. The survival of the Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx in Europe relies on effective coexistence with humans in multi-use areas. We explored the experiences and percep- tions of local hunters and pastoralists regarding the return of the lynx to the Giffre Valley, France, and mapped lynx distribution based on the probability of site use while ac- counting for detection probability. We conducted in- depth interviews with 29 respondents to gather data on lynx sightings, rationale for hunting and pastoralism, and perceptions of lynxes. We found that 45% of respondents had detected lynxes in the last 40 years, with an estimated site use of 0.66 ± SE 0.33 over the last decade, indicating there was a 66% probability of lynxes using the sites during that time period. Our results suggest that hunting and pas- toralism in the region are rooted in a desire to carry on local traditions and connect with the natural world. Respondents generally tolerated the presence of lynxes, perceiving few threats to their livelihoods and activities, and expressing a willingness to coexist peacefully. However, some identified future challenges that could arise with the return of large carnivores to the valley and highlighted scenarios that could lead to a decline in tolerance. This study emphasizes the valuable knowledge of local hunters and pastoralists and their potential role in lynx population monitoring and conservation. Integrating stakeholder values in decision- making processes is crucial for inclusive and sustainable responses to promote biodiversity.
Keywords Coexistence, conflict, Eurasian lynx, France, human–wildlife interactions, large carnivores, Lynx lynx
The supplementary material for this article is available at
doi.org/10.1017/S0030605324000334
*Corresponding author,
justine.s.alexander@
gmail.com 1Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Lausanne,
Switzerland 2Centre Interdisciplinaire de Recherche sur la Montagne, Université de
Lausanne, Bramois, Switzerland 3KORA, Carnivore Ecology and Wildlife Management, Ittigen, Switzerland
Received 17 September 2023. Revision requested 19 January 2024. Accepted 20 February 2024. First published online 23 October 2024.
Introduction
landscapes (Chapron et al., 2014; Davoli et al., 2022). The presence or recovery of these species is sometimes met with ingrained animosity rooted in human history and culture (Treves & Karanth, 2003). This is largely attrib- uted to the perceived risks posed to humans, livestock and game populations and associated negative interactions (Ripple et al., 2014; Davoli et al., 2022). In contrast, others welcome the presence of large carnivores, highlighting their important role in ecosystems and biodiversity protec- tion (Chapron et al., 2014). Large carnivore conservation ef- forts are complicated by political, social and economic issues raised by diverse groups of people (Chapron et al., 2014; Salvatori et al., 2020). Additionally, because of the ex- tensive home ranges and spatial requirements of carnivores, conservation initiatives must be carefully planned and coor- dinated at the population level across vast geographical scales, often encompassing diverse landscapes, administra- tive units and stakeholder groups (Chapron et al., 2014; Johansson et al., 2016). The long-term survival of the Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx in
T
Europe is largely dependent on the harmonious coexistence of human populations and wildlife in shared multi-use land- scapes (Boitani & Linnell, 2015; KORA Foundation, 2022). This calls for resolving social and political concerns and re- sponses associated with the return of large carnivores to such landscapes (Breitenmoser, 1998; Chapron et al., 2014; Boitani & Linnell, 2015). Notably, hunters and pastoralists play important roles, as their activities involve direct inter- actions with lynxes, their natural prey and other carnivores (Breitenmoser, 1998; Breitenmoser et al., 2010; Lescureux et al., 2011; Arlettaz et al., 2021). These stakeholders have specific concerns regarding the potential impact of carni- vores on their activities and livelihoods, which can shape broader public attitudes and influence conservation poli- cies (Lescureux et al., 2011; Lüchtrath & Schraml, 2015). Furthermore, they hold valuable knowledge about the pres- ence of lynxes and factors limiting their recovery at the local level (Lescureux et al., 2011). Currently documented perspectives of local actors re-
garding the lynx’s return or recovery in Europe are diverse and disparate (Lescureux et al., 2011; Lüchtrath & Schraml,
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited. Oryx, 2025, 59(1), 31–39 © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605324000334
he conservation of large carnivores is a highly con- tentious and demanding issue in human-dominated
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140
