TY - JOUR
T1 - Public Perceptions of Deer Management in Scotland
AU - Hare, Darragh
AU - Daniels, Mike
AU - Blossey, Bernd
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2021 Hare, Daniels and Blossey.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - In Scotland, large deer populations are associated with negative ecological and socioeconomic impacts, such as damage to peatlands and forests, agricultural and commercial forestry losses, Lyme disease transmission, and road accidents. Increasing the annual deer cull might help address these negative impacts, but could be ethically controversial. A stratified sample of adults living in Scotland (n = 1,002) responded to our online questionnaire measuring perceptions of deer management, including the acceptability of increasing the deer cull if doing so would help achieve a variety of ecological and social objectives. Overall, respondents indicated that it would be acceptable to increase the deer cull if doing so would serve public interests by reducing negative impacts of deer, with deer welfare, environmental conservation, and public health and safety being the most relevant ethical considerations. Although rural and urban respondents reported significantly different experiences and perceptions of deer, their values (i.e., attitudes, beliefs, and policy preferences) regarding deer management were very similar. Understanding values of the general public, beyond vocal interest groups, can help inform decisions on contentious wildlife management issues.
AB - In Scotland, large deer populations are associated with negative ecological and socioeconomic impacts, such as damage to peatlands and forests, agricultural and commercial forestry losses, Lyme disease transmission, and road accidents. Increasing the annual deer cull might help address these negative impacts, but could be ethically controversial. A stratified sample of adults living in Scotland (n = 1,002) responded to our online questionnaire measuring perceptions of deer management, including the acceptability of increasing the deer cull if doing so would help achieve a variety of ecological and social objectives. Overall, respondents indicated that it would be acceptable to increase the deer cull if doing so would serve public interests by reducing negative impacts of deer, with deer welfare, environmental conservation, and public health and safety being the most relevant ethical considerations. Although rural and urban respondents reported significantly different experiences and perceptions of deer, their values (i.e., attitudes, beliefs, and policy preferences) regarding deer management were very similar. Understanding values of the general public, beyond vocal interest groups, can help inform decisions on contentious wildlife management issues.
KW - animal welfare
KW - culling
KW - ecological restoration
KW - ethics
KW - human–wildlife conflict
KW - social acceptability
KW - wildlife governance and institutions
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85150059155&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85150059155&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3389/fcosc.2021.781546
DO - 10.3389/fcosc.2021.781546
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85150059155
VL - 2
JO - Frontiers in Conservation Science
JF - Frontiers in Conservation Science
M1 - 781546
ER -