Fit livestock with protective collars to reduce risk of predation by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

60%
Certainty

30%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Carnivores typically kill their prey by a fatal bite to the neck. Hard collars can protect animals’ necks. This may increase the effort needed by predators to kill livestock and, thus, reduce the likelihood of a fatal bite. If the intervention results in fewer livestock predated, this could reduce incentives for carrying out lethal control of predators.

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects of fitting livestock with protective collars to reduce human-wildlife conflict on rates of livestock killings by predators. This study was in South Africa.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

OTHER (1 STUDY)

Human-wildlife conflict (1 study): A replicated, before-and-after study in South Africa found that livestock protection collars reduced predation on livestock by carnivores.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A replicated, before-and-after study in 2006–2009 of seven livestock farms in savanna and shrubland in Eastern Cape, South Africa (McManus et al. 2015) found that using livestock protection collars reduced livestock fatalities caused by predators, compared to the rate when predators were controlled by lethal means. Results were not tested for statistical significance. When livestock collars were used, 1–12% of livestock were killed each year by predators. When not using livestock collars but, instead, carrying out lethal predator control, 6–31% of livestock were killed. Costs of using livestock collars (3.5 USD/livestock animal) were comparable to those of lethal control (0.7–6.0 USD/livestock animal). In August 2006–August 2007, all seven farms used lethal methods, including trapping and shooting, to control black-backed jackals Canis mesomelas, caracals Caracal caracal and leopards Panthera pardus. In September 2007–September 2009, all farms fitted animals with epoxy–metal mesh collars that protected the animal’s neck from predator bites. Farmers reported numbers of livestock killed by predators, and associated costs, in September in 2007–2009.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
McManus J.S., Dickman A.J., Gaynor D., Smuts B.H. & Macdonald B.W. (2015) Dead or alive? Comparing costs and benefits of lethal and non-lethal human-wildlife conflict mitigation on livestock farms. Oryx, 49, 687-695.

Please cite as:

Littlewood, N.A., Rocha, R., Smith, R.K., Martin, P.A., Lockhart, S.L., Schoonover, R.F., Wilman, E., Bladon, A.J., Sainsbury, K.A., Pimm S. and Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Terrestrial Mammal Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for terrestrial mammals excluding bats and primates. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Play predator calls to deter crop damage by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Deter predation of livestock by mammals by having people close by to reduce human-wildlife conflict Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link
Use lights and sound to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Action Link	Likely to be beneficial	3	Synopsis Link