Public perception of river fish biodiversity in four European countries

Abstract

Public support for biodiversity conservation is shaped by people's values and their knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes toward the environment. We conducted the first multinational representative survey of the general public's perceptions of river fish biodiversity in France, Germany, Norway, and Sweden. For the online survey, 1000 respondents per country were randomly selected from large panels following country-specific quotas set on age, gender, and educational level. Questions covered people's level of knowledge, beliefs, values, and attitudes toward river fish, environmental threats, and conservation measures. We found that the public had limited knowledge of freshwater fishes. Two non-native species, rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), were widely perceived as native, whereas native Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) was mostly classified as native in Scandinavia and largely as non-native in central Europe. These results suggest an extinction of experience paralleling the extirpation or decline of salmon stocks in countries such as Germany and France. Respondents thought pollution was the dominant threat to riverine fish biodiversity. In reality, habitat loss, dams, and the spread of non-native fishes are equally important. Despite limited biological knowledge, respondents from all countries held an overwhelmingly proecological worldview, supported conservation stocking, and appreciated native fishes, although only a minority interacted with them directly. Differences among the 4 countries related to several conservation issues. For example, threats to biodiversity stemming from aquaculture were perceived as more prevalent in Norway compared with the other 3 countries. Promoting fish conservation based on charismatic species and use values of fishes may work well in countries with a strong economic and cultural link to the freshwater environment, such as Norway. In countries where people rather abstractly care for nature, focusing conservation messaging on broader ecosystem traits and non-use values of fishes is likely to win more support.

Managing river fish biodiversity generates substantial economic benefits in four European countries

“…An explanation for these between-country differences could be that European societies have been selectively affected by the “shifting baseline syndrom” (Pauly 1995). This process describes a long-term inter- and intragenerational extinction of knowledge of, and experience with, the conditions of the biological environments people live in due to a loss of opportunities to interact with nature (Papworth et al 2009; Soga and Gaston 2016), including domestic fish species (Kochalski et al 2018; Liebich et al 2018) and possibly other components of river biodiversity. As a result, people may have become disconnected from (largely) extinct species like Atlantic salmon in countries such as Germany (Wolter 2015; Lenders et al 2016; Kochalski et al 2018; Liebich et al 2018).…”

“…This process describes a long-term inter- and intragenerational extinction of knowledge of, and experience with, the conditions of the biological environments people live in due to a loss of opportunities to interact with nature (Papworth et al 2009; Soga and Gaston 2016), including domestic fish species (Kochalski et al 2018; Liebich et al 2018) and possibly other components of river biodiversity. As a result, people may have become disconnected from (largely) extinct species like Atlantic salmon in countries such as Germany (Wolter 2015; Lenders et al 2016; Kochalski et al 2018; Liebich et al 2018). Such a development would be critical as a loss of memory of past environmental degradation may ultimately lead to a reduction in the public’s engagement with, and notably their willingness-to-pay for, conservation efforts (McClenachan et al 2018).…”

“…People even benefited from nonnative fish species, whose occurrence may threaten freshwater biodiversity (Gozlan et al 2010; Cucherousset and Olden 2011. The utility attached to these species may originate from the fact that they have been stocked for a long period of time (Aas et al in press) and are likely considered naturalized across Europe (Kochalski et al 2018), and also from their relevance in the diets of many Europeans. Though previous studies have shown the importance of perceived biodiversity to human health and well-being, this relationship is not direct and depends on the presence of particular species (Fuller et al 2007; Pett et al 2016).…”

“…We further included two nonnative salmonids (brook trout [ Salvelinusfontinalis ] and rainbow trout [ Oncorhynchus mykiss ]; Table 1) which were both introduced to Europe in the late 19th century (Aas et al in press). These species are also known to the public as edible fishes but are often perceived as being native to Europe (Kochalski et al 2018). Two further migratory fish species were included: threatened European eel and the extinct sturgeon (Table 1), which benefit from free flowing rivers when migrating to their spawning grounds (Nieminen et al 2016).…”

Understanding Public Views on a Dam Construction Boom: the Role of Values

“…These may often disproportionately affect poor and marginalised populations, and create political dynamics around their construction, such as campaigns and activism against dams (Han 2013;Rothman 2001;Toshiko 1999). It is thus important to measure and understand views of the general public towards these infrastructure projects to provide insights on their political legitimacy (Schulz et al 2018) and understand public support for water policies (Kochalski et al 2019;Srdjevic et al 2018).…”