Abstract: The author studied livestock killed by predators in the Spiti Valley, India, to determine what species had killed yaks, horses, donkeys, and other domestic animals. Eleven of the kills examined were made by snow leopards and six by the Tibetan wolf. Wolves were involved in surplus killings, while snow leopards kill as food is needed. lgh

Abstract: 1. Spatial responses to risk from multiple predators can precipitate emergent consequences for prey (i.e. multiple-predator effects, MPEs) and mediate indirect interactions between predators. How prey navigate risk from multiple predators may therefore have important ramifications for understanding the propagation of predation-risk effects (PREs) through ecosystems.
2. The interaction of predator and prey traits has emerged as a potentially key driver of antipredator behaviour but remains underexplored in large vertebrate systems, particularly where sympatric prey share multiple predators. We sought to better generalize our understanding of how predators influence their ecosystems by considering how multiple sources of contingency drive prey distribution in a multi-predator–multi-prey system.
3. Specifically, we explored how two sympatric ungulates with different escape tactics—vertically agile, scrambling ibex Capra sibirica and sprinting argali Ovis ammon—responded to predation risk from shared predators with contrasting hunting modes—cursorial wolves Canis lupus and vertical-ambushing, stalking snow leopards Panthera uncia.
4. Contrasting risk posed by the two predators presented prey with clear trade-offs. Ibex selected for greater exposure to chronic long-term risk from snow leopards, and argali for wolves, in a nearly symmetrical manner that was predictable based on the compatibility of their respective traits. Yet, acute short-term risk from the same predator upended these long-term strategies, increasing each ungulates' exposure to risk from the alternate predator in a manner consistent with a scenario in which conflicting antipredator behaviours precipitate risk-enhancing MPEs and mediate predator facilitation. By contrast, reactive responses to wolves led ibex to reduce their exposure to risk from both predators—a risk-reducing MPE. Evidence of a similar reactive risk-reducing effect for argali vis-à-vis snow leopards was lacking.
5. Our results suggest that prey spatial responses and any resulting MPEs and prey-mediated interactions between predators are contingent on the interplay of hunting mode and escape tactics. Further investigation of interactions among various drivers of contingency in PREs will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding and improved forecasting of the ecological effects of predators.

Abstract: Applied ecology lies at the intersection of human societies and natural systems. Consequently, applied ecologists are constantly challenged as to how best to use ecological knowledge to influence the management of ecosystems (Habel et al. 2013). As Hulme (2011) has pointed out, to do so effectively we must leave our ivory towers and engage with stakeholders. This engagement is especially important and challenging in areas of the world where poverty, weak institutions and poor governance structures conspire to limit the ability of local communities to contribute to biodiversity conservation. These communities often bear disproportionate costs in the form of curtailed access to natural resources, ecosystem services, and developmental
programmes, and also suffer wildlife-caused damage, including injuries or loss of human life, and economic
and psychological impacts (Madhusudan & Mishra 2003). It is well-recognized that conservation efforts in large parts of the world historically have been perceived to be discriminatory by local people (Mishra 2016). The need for engagement with local communities is therefore embedded in the 2020 Aichi biodiversity targets and is widely thought to be critical to the success of conservation efforts. However, although the need for engagement is clear, as ecologists and practitioners we often have little formal training in how we should engage with local communities and how we can recognize the pitfalls and opportunities provided by developing genuine partnerships. The practical challenges of achieving effective engagement are considerable (Agrawal & Gibson 1999; Waylen et al. 2010, 2013), and such forays are fraught with difficulties and ethical considerations (Chan et al. 2007). When they are done badly, conservation interventions
can damage relationships and trust, and lead to serious injustice to local people and setbacks for ecological
outcomes (Duffy 2010). Much has been written on knowledge exchange and participatory research approaches (e.g. Reed et al. 2014 and references therein). This Practitioner’s Perspective
seeks to focus on the next logical step: the elements that practitioners and researchers need to consider when
engaging with communities to effect conservation. Engagement around the management of protected areas
has been discussed and formalized (e.g. Dudley 2008). Considerable literature has also emerged, particularly
from Africa, on the use and co-management of natural resources, commonly referred to as community-based natural resource management or CBNRM (e.g. Fabricius 2004; Roe, Nelson & Sandbrook 2009; Child & Barnes
2010). There have been attempts to draw general principles for CBNRM (e.g. Thakadu 2005; Gruber 2010). In
the related field of community-based conservation, however, while there have been efforts to draw lessons (e.g. Berkes 2004), little exists in terms of frameworks or guidelines for effectively working with local communities to effect biodiversity conservation in multi-use landscapes
(Mishra 2016). The eight principles for community-based conservation outlined here (Fig. 1) build on ideas developed in fields as diverse as applied ecology, conservation and natural
resource management, community health, social psychology, rural development, negotiation theory, and ethics
(see Mishra 2016). They have been developed, challenged and tested through 20 years of community experience andour own research on the endangered snow leopard Panthera uncia and its mountain ecosystems, in South and Central Asia. We suspect that with contextual adaptations, their relevance for applied ecologists and practitioners may be universal.