The impacts of wild predators on livestock are a common source of human–wildlife conflict globally, and predators are subject to population control for this reason in many situations. Animal welfare is one of many important considerations affecting decisions about predation management. Recent studies discussing animal welfare in this context have presented arguments emphasizing the importance of avoiding intentional harm to predators, but they have not usually considered harms imposed by predators on livestock and other animals. Efforts to mitigate predation impacts (including ‘no control’ approaches) cause a variety of harms to predators, livestock and other wildlife. Successfully minimizing the overall frequency and magnitude of harms requires consideration of the direct, indirect, intentional and unintentional harms imposed on all animals inhabiting agricultural landscapes. We review the harms resulting from the management of dingoes and other wild dogs in the extensive beef cattle grazing systems of Australia to illustrate how these negative impacts can be minimized across both wild and domestic species present on a farm or in a free‐ranging livestock grazing context. Similar to many other predator–livestock conflicts, wild dogs impose intermittent harms on beef cattle (especially calves) including fatal predation, non‐fatal attack (mauling and biting), pathogen transmission, and fear‐ or stress‐related effects. Wild dog control tools and strategies impose harms on dingoes and other wildlife including stress, pain and death as a consequence of both lethal and non‐lethal control approaches. To balance these various sources of harm, we argue that the tactical use of lethal predator control approaches can result in harming the least number of individual animals, given certain conditions. This conclusion conflicts with both traditional (e.g. continuous or ongoing lethal control) and contemporary (e.g. predator‐friendly or no‐control) predation management approaches. The general and transferable issues, approaches and principles we describe have broad applicability to many other human–wildlife conflicts around the world.

中文翻译：

---

尽量减少与农业生态系统捕食管理相关的动物福利危害

野生捕食者对牲畜的影响是全球人类与野生动物冲突的常见根源，因此在许多情况下，捕食者都受到种群控制。动物福利是影响捕食管理决策的许多重要考虑因素之一。最近在此背景下讨论动物福利的研究提出了强调避免故意伤害捕食者的重要性的论点，但他们通常没有考虑捕食者对牲畜和其他动物造成的伤害。减轻捕食影响的努力（包括“无控制”方法）会对捕食者、牲畜和其他野生动物造成各种伤害。成功地最大限度地减少伤害的总体频率和幅度需要考虑直接、间接、对居住在农业景观中的所有动物造成的有意和无意伤害。我们回顾了澳大利亚广泛的肉牛放牧系统中管理野狗和其他野狗所造成的危害，以说明如何将农场或自由放牧牲畜放牧中的野生和家养物种的这些负面影响降至最低语境。与许多其他捕食者-牲畜冲突类似，野狗会对肉牛（尤其是小牛）造成间歇性伤害，包括致命的捕食、非致命的攻击（殴打和咬伤）、病原体传播以及与恐惧或压力相关的影响。作为致命和非致命控制方法的结果，野狗控制工具和策略对野狗和其他野生动物造成伤害，包括压力、疼痛和死亡。为了平衡这些不同的伤害来源，我们认为，在特定条件下，致命捕食者控制方法的战术使用可以导致伤害的个体动物数量最少。这一结论与传统（例如持续或持续的致命控制）和现代（例如捕食者友好或无控制）捕食管理方法相冲突。我们描述的一般和可转移的问题、方法和原则具有广泛的适用性，适用于世界各地的许多其他人类与野生动物冲突。捕食者友好或无控制）捕食管理方法。我们描述的一般和可转移的问题、方法和原则具有广泛的适用性，适用于世界各地的许多其他人类与野生动物冲突。捕食者友好或无控制）捕食管理方法。我们描述的一般和可转移的问题、方法和原则具有广泛的适用性，适用于世界各地的许多其他人类与野生动物冲突。