Eurasian lynx in France 37


some concerns about the already large carbon footprint of tourism in the area, which was perceived to be excessive and damaging to nature. However, given that the lynx and the wolf are both carnivores, some respondents believed that too many of each could have a significant negative impact on small and large livestock, with one pastoralist proposing that populations of both lynxes and wolves to- gether could lead to an end of pastoralism in the valley.


Management strategies for coexistence


Respondents identified a number of challenges to coexis- tence with lynxes in the area. Some were concerned that the landscape may be too small and fragmented to sustain a lynx population, especially given the surge in human activ- ity from tourism throughout the year, even in more remote areas. Activities such as electric biking, skiing, snow shoe- ing, camping and trekking now occur in places that were previously hard to reach, and it was noted that people are now active in the mountains even at night. Differing views were expressed on other threats to lynxes


and their coexistence with humans. A few respondents thought that lynx predation on livestock and wild game (e.g. chamois and roe deer) would be likely to lead to retali- atory killings. However, two older hunters believed that lynxes are not linked to significant depredation and they therefore expect tolerance towards them. Some voiced con- cerns that the lynx could be perceived as a problematic predator, in the same way as the wolf. Current measures to manage the wolf population (Grente et al., 2023) were considered to be inadequate, leading to shifts in pastoral and land-use practices. One respondent reflected that wolf management efforts such as measures to prevent livestock depredation could have a positive impact on coexistence with lynxes. Another saw the expansion of forests as a pos- itive development for the lynx, whereas four respondents expressed concern about the impact of construction works on lynx habitat. Responses about other measures already in place that


could support lynx were centred around hunting regulations that limit the number of chamois and roe deer that can be killed. All hunters stated that over the last 40 years this has led to increases in the populations of these species. They also pointed out that well planned hunting reserves at commune level could play a role in creating protected spaces for lynxes. Other measures mentioned included the presence of other types of protected areas and annual population counts of key species led by the Hunting Federation, which may limit overhunting of prey species. Changes to pastoral prac- tices (including temporary electric fencing and use of protec- tion dogs) were reported by pastoralists to reduce the risk of livestock predation by wolves. However, no measures were being taken specifically with respect to lynxes.


Discussion


Recognizing and incorporating the multifarious perspectives about nature into decision-making processes is imperative to build inclusive and sustainable responses to the ongoing deg- radation of natural systems (Managi et al., 2022). Our study provides an important foundation for understanding lynx– human interactions in the Giffre valley and potentially the wider French Alps region. It highlights that hunting and pastoralism are strongly rooted in a wish to connect with the natural world and continue local traditions. Generally, hunters indicated their way of life is not threa-


tened by the current presence of lynxes. They explained that the lynx is not currently disrupting the managed en- vironment in which their activities and livelihoods are embedded. Older hunters underlined a shift in mentalities towards increased tolerance, because minimal damage and prey loss are attributed to lynxes. With some exceptions, most respondents recognized that the availability of large game has increased and did not consider predation of chamois and roe deer by lynxes to be a major concern. Similarly, no pastoralists reported any livestock losses to


lynxes over the last 40 years. Most herd cows and under- stand that cattle are not at risk of lynx depredation. This contrasts with the situation in the French Jura where depre- dation of small livestock remains a concern (Drouet-Hoguet et al., 2021), although this is probably related to the higher lynx density (0.24–0.91 individuals per 100 km2) in the Jura (Gimenez et al., 2019; Drouet-Hoguet et al., 2021). Nonetheless, some hunters expressed concerns that in-


creased lynx numbers could lead to a reduction in certain game species in the future. Some respondents believed that such a situation would warrant active management of the lynx, potentially including legal killing, as is practiced in Norway (Nilsen et al., 2012). Some also alluded to the possibility that hunters may end up killing lynxes illegally because there would be fewer game animals. These re- sponses highlight that tolerance of lynxes may be high cur- rently but could decline in the future. It is also possible that increased predation of roe deer and chamois could become a source of social conflict between hunters, wildlife managers and conservationists (Breitenmoser et al., 2010; Redpath et al., 2013).


Stakeholders expressed much stronger concerns about


the threat to their way of life posed by the return of wolves, overshadowing issues related to the lynx, as has been found in other regions (Lescureux et al., 2011). Wolves were per- ceived as amajor threat to traditional practices and pastoral livelihoods, which are closely linked to the valley’s identity and culture (Pettersson et al., 2021). Sweeping measures, including major shifts in pastoral practices, have been taken to reduce the risk of livestock predation by wolves, and these may have complex social effects and reinforce negative views of carnivores.


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


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