When Human–Wildlife Conflict Turns Deadly: Comparing the Situational Factors That Drive Retaliatory Leopard Killings in South Africa

SIMPLE SUMMARY: To better understand why retaliatory leopard killings caused by human-wildlife conflict happen in rural farming communities in South Africa and how to prevent them, this study interviewed conservationists, officials, and farmers living in a small village in the Western Cape Province. The respondents described four main problems that led to these killings: (1) the government’s response to the problem of human-leopard conflict is slow and unwilling; (2) this response was not effective; (3) there were inadequate resources to correctly respond to these killings; and (4) there was a lack of laws and their application as well as strong distrust between everyone involved, making it even harder to deal with the problem. Local community members had various innovative ideas that can be implemented to better handle the problem of human-leopard conflict in their region, which are highlighted in this article. Coupled with the criminological techniques proposed in this research, the problem of human-leopard conflict can be significantly reduced with local ideas and resources, in both the region and in other parts of the world that suffer from similar problems. ABSTRACT: Retaliatory killings caused by human-wildlife conflict have a significant impact on the survival of leopards. This study explores the reasons for retaliatory killings of leopards by interviewing community members in a small village in South Africa that experienced high incidences of human–leopard conflict. The semi-structured interviews focused on the reasons why retaliatory leopard killings occurred and how to best mitigate the situational factors that triggered these killings. Respondents cited four main problems that fueled these killings: the government’s response to human–leopard conflict was slow and unwilling; this response involved inefficient methods; there were inadequate resources to respond to these killings; and there was a clear lack of laws or their application. Local stakeholders provided a range of innovative strategies to reduce human-leopard conflict and retaliatory killings. While all parties expressed different reasons why these solutions were or were not effective, their conclusions were often similar. The distrust that existed between the parties prevented them from recognizing or accepting their common ground. Based on existing human–wildlife conflict mitigation techniques and solutions identified by local stakeholders, this article explores how criminological techniques, including situational crime prevention, can help identify and frame effective interventions to reduce the number of illegal leopard killings driven by human-wildlife conflict.