Human and pet multimodal cues intensify wildlife fear responses

O_LIFear of humans can drive persistent changes in wildlife behavioural and life-history traits, with cascading effects on entire ecosystems. Human multimodal cues and pet cues may influence impact of such fear, yet no study has tested how wildlife fear responses change when human acoustic cues and pet visual and acoustic cues are added to human visual cues. Filling this gap is important for managing human and pet outdoor activities while conserving wildlife. C_LIO_LIHere, with dogs representing the pet, we tested the effects of human and dog cues on fear responses of wild sika deer (Cervus nippon yesoensis) in approximately 800 km2 area, northern Japan, using alert distance (AD) and flight initiation distance (FID). First, we measured AD/FID with an approaching surveyor alone and with additional cues. Then, we fitted linear mixed-effects models while controlling for key covariates. C_LIO_LIFrom analyses with 266 observations, AD was estimated at 80.0 m with the human visual cue alone, and dog barking increased AD by 18.4m. FID was estimated at 57.1 m with the human visual cue alone, and human voice and the dog decoy increased FID by 11.3m and by 8.5 m, respectively. C_LIO_LIThese results demonstrate that human multimodal cues and pet cues can increase prey fear responses. Our findings also suggest that dog walking may expose wildlife to simultaneous human and pet cues more consistently than predator co-occurrence typically does in nature. The increase in FID with human acoustic cues, in contrast to previous studies, suggests that animals may shift cue weighting depending on predator species, potentially using human voices to help identify the threat as human. C_LIO_LIPrevious studies show that multimodal predator cues increase prey fear responses, and our findings extend this flamework to fear responses towards humans. Our findings can inform more tolerant management of human recreation and pet walking in sensitive areas. Reducing human and pet cues through signage, guidance, and zoning may prevent flight and associated energy expenditure, whereas mitigating vigilance may require behavioural guidance and spacing between pet-walking visitors. Overall, shaping how humans and pets behave may be more practical than blanket restriction. C_LI