Illegal Hunting As A Challenge To Natural Resource Management And Law Enforcement: Contested Legitimacy And Resistance

Informations

Funding country

Norway

Acronym

-

URL

-

Start date

1/1/2016

End date

12/31/2020

Budget

496,920 EUR

Fundings

Abstract

The work of regulating UU is demanding. The police face criticism both for doing too much, going after "ordinary people" and using resources on this, but also for doing too little and taking too easily on such matters. These conflicts are also found within the police. Many are hunters and can have quite strong views on wolves. In SNO this seems to be a minor problem. The regulation consists of both preventive work, supervision / surveillance and investigation. Today's control picture is characterized by the fact that SNO carries out much of the police work and follow-up in the field, while the role of the police there has diminished in recent decades. It depends, among other things. along with the closure of local police units and lack of resources in the field. Method use has also changed. Very rarely do the police receive tips that are of such a nature that a case can be raised. Investigation of "ordinary" cases is often based on information from witnesses who have observed the offense, which is unusual in the case of wolves. In recent years, after 2013, therefore, the police have in some cases used so-called proactive methods, that is, they have used hidden methods to monitor environments or persons believed to be operating UU. These types of methods help to make experts, intelligence and analysis more central than the local knowledge that local police had before. An unintended effect is that this type of offense is often classified as more serious than before and can be described as organized crime. In the context of our other findings, there is little doubt that this may reinforce the impression of abuse of power by the authorities.