Resolving the conflict between driven‐grouse shooting and conservation of hen harriers

Thompson, Patrick S.; Amar, Arjun; Hoccom, David G.; Knott, Jeff; Wilson, Jeremy D.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01687.x

Cited by 39 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(41 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this predator conflict, these elements are starting to come into place after several decades and possible solutions are currently being debated and explored in the field (see Anderson et al 2009;Redpath and Thirgood 2009;Sotherton et al 2009;Thirgood and Redpath 2008;Thompson et al 2009). There will need to be flexibility and compromise.…”

Section: Examples Of Biodiversity Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 98%

The emergence of biodiversity conflicts from biodiversity impacts: characteristics and management strategies

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conflicts between the conservation of biodiversity and other human activities occur in all habitats and can impact severely upon socio-economic and biological parameters. In a changing environment, with increasing pressure on ecosystem goods and services and increasing urgency for biodiversity conservation, these conflicts are likely to increase in importance and magnitude and negatively affect biodiversity and human wellbeing. It is essential, however, to better understand what is meant by 'biodiversity conflicts' in order to develop ways to manage these effectively. In view of the complexity of the social and ecological contexts of conflicts, this paper explores 'biodiversity impacts' linked to agricultural, forestry and other sectoral activities in the UK. The paper then describes the transition from 'biodiversity impacts' to 'biodiversity conflicts', illustrating this concept with specific examples. While generalisations relating to conflict management are made difficult by their unique contextual settings, this paper suggests approaches for their management, based on the experiences of scientists who have been involved in managing conflicts. We consider the role of science and scientists; trust and dialogue; and temporal and spatial scales in biodiversity conflicts and highlight the combined role they play in successful biodiversity conflict management. Recommendations are also made for future research on biodiversity conflicts in a changing environment.

show abstract

Section: Examples Of Biodiversity Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 98%

The emergence of biodiversity conflicts from biodiversity impacts: characteristics and management strategies

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social acceptance of management strategies was noted in several papers as being an important objective (Witmer et al 2000;Andreassen et al 2005;Massei et al 2011), with one paper stating that the public have a right to involvement in conservation decision making due to the amount of public funding used for this purpose (Thompson et al 2009). However, only one study reported that public acceptance had been actively sought in the long term (Ziegltrum 2006) and none of the papers explicitly examined the level of public acceptance in diversionary feeding.…”

Section: Have Conservation Conflicts Been Reduced?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversionary feeding: an effective management strategy for conservation conflict?

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human population growth has led to increased contact between people and wildlife, with adverse impacts for both, such as damage to economic crops and wildlife persecution. Diversionary feeding, where food is used to draw animals away from problem activities or locations, is sometimes proposed as a socially acceptable conservation action, but little information exists on its success or what influences its efficacy. Here, we review literature on diversionary feeding and evaluate factors contributing to its success or failure. Success varied greatly among studies and successful uptake of diversionary food did not consistently produce outcomes that met stakeholder objectives. Studies often failed to report results in sufficient detail to allow a quantitative evaluation of efficiency. Of 30 trials presented in 21 studies, 13 enabled assessment of outcomes related to the ultimate objective of reducing conflict (related to threatened prey density, crop yield or nuisance reports) and only five of these were considered successful by the researchers conducting the study. A grand mean increase of 15 % in respective measures of success at the outcome stage was found across all studies. Although diversionary feeding is considered expensive, cost-effectiveness analyses were rarely conducted. Only a third of studies reported information on costs and benefits that could be used to inform future management actions. We propose a decision-making framework that incorporates ecological knowledge, financial costs and evidence from previous studies to aid the planning and implementation of diversionary feeding in an adaptive format. Future studies of diversionary feeding should clearly report objectives, results, costs and effort to allow the return-on-investment to be calculated for different levels of management effort.

show abstract

“…To reach this optimal win-win situation, more work on the perceptions about predators and wildlife at large among managers and conservationists should be developed to look for common ground, and more work about quantifying the economic losses to predation (in comparison with economic investments on predator control) should be developed, as quantification may help influencing perceptions. Beyond that, game managers should stop using illegal and nonselective control methods in order to modify the perception of nonhunters that the use of illegal methods is widespread (Thompson et al 2009). On the other hand, ecological scientists should boost the ongoing process of evaluation of the selectivity of predator control methods (Muñoz-Igualada et al 2008, Díaz-Ruíz et al 2010, should encourage the development of sound experimental research on alternative selective methods that are viewed as effective by managers, and should continue work on the effects of predation on population ecology of red-legged partridge, and other game and nongame prey.…”

Section: Conclusion and The Way Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Role of Economic and Social Factors Driving Predator Control in Small-Game Estates in Central Spain

Delibes‐Mateos¹,

Díaz-Fernández²,

Ferreras³

et al. 2013

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the most important human-wildlife conflicts in the world is that where predators are involved. Predators may compete with us for the same resources, such as game species. As a consequence, predators have been frequently controlled by game managers, which has negatively affected many predator populations worldwide. The understanding of human-wildlife conflicts requires a multidisplicinary framework that is rarely considered. We aim to evaluate the attitudes and behavior of game managers with regard to predator management in central Spain, as well as to explore factors that lead to these attitudes and behavior. Data were gathered through face to face interviews with game managers from 59 small-game hunting estates within central Spain. Predator control was employed in 90% of the estates, but control intensity was very variable among estates. Economic interests and perceptions about predators apparently influenced variation in control intensity. The main methods employed were cage-traps and shooting, but some illegal practices (e.g., leg-hold traps or snares without stopping devices) were also admittedly used for carnivores. Most managers considered that efficacy of legal methods for control of foxes (Vulpes vulpes) was very limited. Overall, nonselective methods, such as some types of snares, were more frequently employed in commercial than in noncommercial estates. Most managers believed that predators had an important effect on prey, and therefore that not doing it would lead to smaller hunting bags. Only managers from commercial hunting estates used stronger discourses such as that hunting would be impossible without carrying out predator control, which suggests that their tolerance for predators was lower than that of managers whose main motivation was not economic. Most managers considered that predator control was effective to reduce the number of predators, but only in the short term. Therefore, they highlighted the need of maintaining predator control every year. Our results highlight the important role that both social and economic factors (even stronger than ecological factors) play driving predator control, and therefore the need of incorporating these factors when making decisions to mitigate the human-predator conflict

show abstract

Resolving the conflict between driven‐grouse shooting and conservation of hen harriers

Cited by 39 publications

References 19 publications

The emergence of biodiversity conflicts from biodiversity impacts: characteristics and management strategies

The emergence of biodiversity conflicts from biodiversity impacts: characteristics and management strategies

Diversionary feeding: an effective management strategy for conservation conflict?

The Role of Economic and Social Factors Driving Predator Control in Small-Game Estates in Central Spain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About