Advertisement

Landowners’ wildlife value orientations, attitudes and behaviour in relation to game management practices

  • Christian GamborgEmail author
  • Jens Friis Lund
  • Frank Søndergaard Jensen
Original Article

Abstract

Landowners are shaping the landscape, sometimes through wildlife management for hunting purposes; however, no studies have looked at the connection between how landowners view wildlife (their wildlife value orientations—WVO) and, respectively, their attitudes to and stated game management practices potentially affecting the landscape. This study, using a nationally representative data set of landowners in Denmark, makes this connection. Using a utilitarian-pluralist-mutualist-distanced orientation scale, most Danish landowners (especially full-time farmers) were utilitarian followed by pluralist. Utilitarian and pluralist were generally more accepting of game management practices than mutualists and distanced landowners. Landscape- or nature-orientated game management practices were accepted by a clear majority of landowners regardless of WVOs (though utilitarian and pluralists were more positive). More narrow game-orientated management practices were significantly more acceptable for those with a utilitarian and mutualist orientation. In a management context, results are relevant when predicting changes in the rural landscape and the relation to developments in the composition of landowners, and in their WVO. Moreover, in relation to potential conflicts, the general public in Denmark has a higher proportion of mutualists and distanced than among landowners, and are likely to be less accepting of the narrow, game-orientated practices.

Keywords

Biotope changes Hunting Nature conservation Wildlife management 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to two anonymous reviewers for constructive comments.

Funding information

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support for this work from the “15. Juni Fonden”.

References

  1. Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Dec 50:179–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brown J, Mitchell B (2000) The stewardship approach and its relevance for protected landscapes. George Wright Forum 17:70–79Google Scholar
  3. Burger, GV, Teer JG (1981) Economic and socioeconomic issues influencing wildlife management on private land. In: Proceedings of wildlife management on private lands symposium. Wisconsin Chapter, The Wildlife Society, Madison, pp 252–278Google Scholar
  4. Cerri J, Mori E, Vivarelli M, Zaccaroni M (2017) Are wildlife value orientations useful tools to explain tolerance and illegal killing of wildlife by farmers in response to crop damage? Eur J Wildlife Res 63(4):70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Christensen AA, Svenningsen SR, Lommer MS, Brandt J (2014) New multifunctional hunting landscapes in Denmark. Dan J Geogr 114:25–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Conover MR (1998) Perceptions of American agricultural producers about wildlife on their farms and ranches. Wildlife Soc B 26:597–604Google Scholar
  7. Daley SS, Cobb DT, Bromley PT, Sorenson CE (2004) Landowner attitudes regarding wildlife management on private land in North Carolina. Wildlife Soc B 32:209–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Danmarks Statistik (2012) Landbrug 2012. Statistik om landbrug, gartneri og skovbrug. Statistics Denmark, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  9. Danmarks Statistik (2015) Statistisk Årbog 2015. [Statistical yearbook 2015]. Statistics Denmark, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  10. Decker DJ, Siemer WF, Forstchen AB, Smith C (2018) The role of human dimensions in state wildlife management. In: Ryder J (ed) State wildlife management conservation. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 194–237Google Scholar
  11. Delibes-Mateos M, Giergiczny M, Caro J, Vinuela J, Riera P, Arroyo B (2014) Does hunters’ willingness to pay match the best hunting options for biodiversity conservation? A choice experiment application for small-game hunting in Spain. Biol Conserv 177:36–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. FACE (2018) Biodiversity. The European Federation of Associations for Hunting & Conservation (FACE) https://www.face.eu/nature-conservation/biodiversity/. Accessed 23 August 2018
  13. Fulton DC, Manfredo MJ, Lipscomb J (1996) Wildlife value orientations: a conceptual and measurement approach. Human Dim Wildlife 1:24–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gamborg C, Jensen FS (2016a) Wildlife value orientations: a quantitative study of the general public in Denmark. Human Dim Wildl 21:34–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gamborg C, Jensen FS (2016b) Wildlife value orientations among hunters, landowners and the general public: a Danish comparative quantitative study. Human Dim Wildl 21:328–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gamborg C, Jensen FS (2017) Attitudes to recreational hunting: a quantitative survey of the general public in Denmark. J Outdoor Recreat Tour 17:20–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gamborg C, Palmer C, Sandøe P (2012) Ethics of wildlife management and conservation: what should we try to protect? Nat Educ Knowl 3(10):8Google Scholar
  18. Gamborg C, Jensen FS, Sandøe P (2016) A dividing issue: attitudes to game bird shooting among landowners, hunters and the general public in Denmark. Land Use Policy 57:296–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Genghini M, Spalatro F, Gellini S (2002) Farmers’ attitudes toward the carrying out of wildlife habitat improvement actions (WHIA) in intensive agricultural areas of Northern Italy. Z Jagdwiss 48:309–319Google Scholar
  20. Golden KE, Peterson MN, DePerno CS, Bardon RE, Moorman CE (2013) Factors shaping private landowner engagement in wildlife management. Wildlife Soc B 37:94–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Herzon I, Mikk M (2007) Farmers’ perceptions of biodiversity and their willingness to enhance it through agri-environment schemes: a comparative study from Estonia and Finland. J Nat Conserv 15:10–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Iversen T (2017) Markvildtlavenes indsats 2017. Jæger 10:45–46Google Scholar
  23. Kaltenborn BP, Bjerke T, Vitterso J (1999) Attitudes toward large carnivores among sheep farmers, wildlife managers and research biologists in Norway. Human Dim Wildl 4:57–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kellert SR (1984) Wildlife values and the privatel and owner. Am Forests 90:002060–002061Google Scholar
  25. Lund JF, Jensen FS (2017) Is recreational hunting important for landscape multi-functionality? Evidence from Denmark. Land Use Policy 61:389–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Manfredo MJ, Vaske JJ, Decker D (1995) Human dimensions of wildlife management: basic concepts. In: Knight RL, Gutzwiller KJ (eds) Wildlife and recreationists: coexistence through management and research. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 17–31Google Scholar
  27. Miljø-og Fødevareministeriet (2017) Bekendtgørelse om udsætning af vildt, jagtmåder og jagtredskaber (Bekendtgørelse nr. 1652 af 19/12/2017. https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=196508, 19.08.2018). Accessed 19 August 2018
  28. Mills J, Gaskell P, Ingram J, Chaplin S (2018) Understanding farmers’ motivations for providing unsubsidised environmental benefits. Land Use Policy 76:697–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mustin K, Newey S, Irvine J, Arroyo B, Redpath S (2010) Biodiversity impacts of game bird hunting and associated management practices in Europe and North America. Contract Report. James Hutton Institute, Aberdeen, 71 ppGoogle Scholar
  30. Primdahl J, Bojesen M, Vesterager JP, Kristensen LS (2012) Hunting and landscape in Denmark: farmers’ management of hunting rights and landscape changes. Landsc Res 37:659–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Raymond CM, Bieling C, Fagerholm N, Martin-Lopez B, Plieninger T (2016) The farmer as a landscape steward: comparing local understandings of landscape stewardship, landscape values, and land management actions. Ambio 45:173–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Renting H, Rossing WA, Groot JC, Van der Ploeg JD, Laurent C, Perraud D, Stobbelaar DJ, Van Ittersum MK (2009) Exploring multifunctional agriculture. A review of conceptual approaches and prospects for an integrative transitional framework. J Environ Manag 90:S112–S123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rose DC, Keating C, Morris C (2018) Understanding how to influence farmers’ decision-making behaviour: a social science literature review. Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, University of East Anglia, NorwichGoogle Scholar
  34. Søndergaard N (2009) Natur- og Vildtpleje. Landbrugsforlaget, AarhusGoogle Scholar
  35. Teel T, Dayer A, Manfredo M, Bright A (2005) Regional results from the research project entitled “Wildlife Values in the West”. (Project Rep. No. 58). Project Report for the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Colorado State University, Human Dimensions in Natural Resources Unit, Fort Collins, CO.Google Scholar
  36. Vandervell A, Coles C (1980) Game & the English landscape. The influence of the chase on sporting art and scenery. Debrett’s Peerage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  37. Zinn HC, Manfredo MJ, Barro SC (2002) Patterns of wildlife value orientations in hunters’ families. Human Human Dim Wildl 7:147–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Food and Resource EconomicsUniversity of CopenhagenFrederiksberg CDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource ManagementUniversity of CopenhagenFrederiksberg CDenmark

Personalised recommendations