Abstract
Authorities, wildlife managers, and stakeholders face an increased availability of management actions to handle conflicts between human activities and large carnivores. Conflict situations often require fast decisions and actions, with long term consequences. Access to knowledge about the effects of various actions, and how these actions may be received by stakeholder groups and the public is important. This project aims to provide understanding of the diversity of management actions, the degree of people?s intention to oppose-accept (O-A) these actions, drivers of the intention to O-A, and differences in the intention between the general public and stakeholder groups. Relevant management actions are identified by a literature review and focus group discussions with stakeholders and managers. Psychological theory on emotions and attitudes are employed to identify and analyse possible drivers. Empirical data is collected in a web-survey among stakeholder groups and the public. The degree of the intention is captured by the Q-sort technique. The Potential for Conflict Index is used to identify measures of high conflict risk. Results are synthesized in guidelines for managers including a ranked list of potential mitigation actions for depredation on reindeer, sheep, hunting and pet dogs. Outcomes are published as peer-reviewed papers, a PhD-thesis and communicated via the Wildlife Damage Centre (SLU).
Sweden