The case for fencing remains intact

C Packer, A Swanson, S Canney, A Loveridge, Stephen Garnett, M Pfeifer, A Burton, H Bauer, D MacNulty

    Research output: Contribution to journalEditorial

    Abstract

    Creel et al. argue against the conservation effectiveness of fencing based on a population measure that ignores the importance of top predators to ecosystem processes. Their statistical analyses consider, first, only a subset of fenced reserves and, second, an incomplete examination of 'costs per lion.' Our original conclusions remain unaltered. 
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)1414-e4
    Number of pages2
    JournalEcology Letters
    Volume16
    Issue number11
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2013

      Fingerprint

    Cite this

    Packer, C., Swanson, A., Canney, S., Loveridge, A., Garnett, S., Pfeifer, M., ... MacNulty, D. (2013). The case for fencing remains intact. Ecology Letters, 16(11), 1414-e4. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12171