Abstract
Ecological mitigation comprises removal of specimens, changing their behavior or manipulating their habitat. In the case of protected species, such measures may not be applicable or may be restricted in the one or the other way. This chapter describes existing approaches and discusses their limitations in context of protected conflict species and in context of efficacy and cost-effectiveness. It outlines minimum, standard and advanced approaches and identifies their risks. The conclusions put ecological mitigation in the wider context and stress amongst others that a thorough understanding of the biology and ecology of the conflict is essential, that traditional ecological knowledge may be misleading, that human dimensions and emotions are essential aspects and costs of different methods are rather of secondary nature.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bangs EE, Fontaine JA, Jimenez MD, Meier TJ, Bradley EH, Niemeyer CC, Smith DW, Mack CM, Asher V, Oakleaf JK (2005) Managing wolf-human conflict in the northwestern United States. In: Woodroffe R, Thirgood S, Rabinowitz A (eds) People and wildlife: conflict or coexistence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Begon M, Harper JL, Townsend CR (1996) Ecology: individuals, populations, and communities, 3rd edn. Blackwell Science, Cambridge
Bruckmeier K, Westerberg H, Varjopuru R (2013) Reconciliation in practice: the seal conflict and its mitigation in Sweden and Finland. In: Klenke R, Ring I, Kranz A, Jepsen N, Rauschmayer F, Henle K (eds) Human-wildlife conflicts in Europe—fisheries and fish-eating vertebrates as a model case. Springer, Heidelberg
Caughley G, Sinclair ARE (1994) Wildlife ecology and management. Blackwell Science, Cambridge
Conover M (2002) Resolving human—wildlife conflicts: the science of wildlife damage management. Lewis Publishers (CRC Press LLC), Boca Raton
Poledníková K, Kranz A, Poledník L, Myšiak J (2013) Otters causing conflicts: the fish farming case of the Czech Republic. In: Klenke R, Ring I, Kranz A, Jepsen N, Rauschmayer F, Henle K (eds) Human-wildlife conflicts in Europe—fisheries and fish-eating vertebrates as a model case. Springer, Heidelberg
Pulliam HR, Danielson BJ (1991) Sources, sinks, and habitat selection: a landscape perspective on population dynamics. Am Nat 137:51–66
Reimoser F (2002) Wildlife ecological spatial planning (WESP): an instrument for integrating wildlife into comprehensive land management. In: 24th Congress of the international union of game biologists, Thessaloniki, 20 sept 1999, pp. 176–185
Santos-Reis M, Santos R, Antunes P, Sales-Luís T, Gomes J, Freitas D, Madruga L (2013) Reconciliation of the conflict between otters and fish farmers: lessons from Sado estuary in Portugal. In: Klenke RA, Ring I, Kranz A, Jepsen N, Rauschmayer F, Henle K (eds) Human-wildlife conflicts in Europe—fisheries and fish-eating vertebrates as a model case. Springer, Heidelberg
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kranz, A. (2013). Module 7: Ecological Mitigation. In: Klenke, R., Ring, I., Kranz, A., Jepsen, N., Rauschmayer, F., Henle, K. (eds) Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe. Environmental Science and Engineering(). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-34788-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-34789-7
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)