Depending on where you live in the United States, there are different species of animals that will be considered “nuisance” species by local residents and authorities. This broad study of the Northeastern U.S. identifies numerous species considered a “nuisance,” such as raccoons, squirrels, deer, and more, while also showing how residents feel about state agencies’ actions to control them. The study shows that the majority of residents view the animals around their living spaces positively, even though there is a range of opinions about who is responsible for dealing with wildlife “problems” and their related costs.

Responsive Management (RM), a publication that focuses on “wildlife management” issues, conducted a wide ranging telephone survey of residents of the Northeastern U.S., in an effort to “help state fish and wildlife agencies develop sustainable nuisance wildlife management strategies and viable solutions.” Interviewing nearly 4,000 respondents, the study gives a great deal of insight into how people feel about the animals that live around their homes, and what they expect of their local authorities in terms of controlling them. Perhaps most encouraging for animal advocates, on the general questions of how respondents feel about “wildlife near their home,” the overwhelming majority (83%) accept them, while only 5% regard them as a nuisance or as dangerous.

Digging into the numbers further, it could be that the general acceptance of animals around their homes is related to the fact that a third of respondents believe that it is the homeowners’ responsibility to manage wildlife around their homes, while only a quarter claim to have had bad experience with wildlife. Likewise, the vast majority of residents polled say that they engage in some type of wildlife associated activity, from watching or photographing wildlife to maintaining a birdfeeder to maintaining nest boxes or other living spaces for wildlife. Still, despite the fact that the overall opinion towards wildlife seems to be positive, when it comes to identifying “nuisance” species, respondents identified deer, raccoons, squirrels, skunks, and more as problems, for everything from lyme disease, pet safety, and rabies. When it comes to controlling these species, there is confusion over who is responsible, and who should be responsible. Likewise, respondents are not always aware what their local fish and wildlife service are responsible for, and how much funding they have to do their jobs. When asked about different options for managing wildlife, 83% supported removal and relocation, 77% supported legal, regulated hunting, and 72% supported putting up fences, while only 35% supported removal and euthanasia.

For advocates of wildlife in the Northeastern U.S., the results of the study should be encouraging. Not only do the respondents overwhelmingly view the animals around their homes positively, they view the responsibility for dealing with them as their own, and want to do so in ways that are generally non-violent and non-lethal. That being said, researchers noted that, no matter what kind of options were taken by management agencies, the most important factor was timeliness: “Even if little can be done, a timely response reduces residents’ frustration about how an agency may be addressing a problem with wildlife. […] A timely response, even if not otherwise wholly satisfactory, may greatly influence attitudes toward the agency.” Advocates for wildlife can use this information to try to make their responses to emerging wildlife issues as timely as possible, and keep residents on their side.

Original Abstract:
Fish and wildlife agencies nationwide are under increasing pressure to respond to calls and situations related to problems with wildlife. Yet many agencies receive no funding for these activities—it simply constitutes an added-on, unfunded responsibility. Furthermore, there are varied opinions and divergence in public opinion, and even among agency personnel, regarding common dilemmas related to wildlife problems, funding, and public expectations. What level of involvement should fish and wildlife agencies have in managing nuisance wildlife? A scientific survey conducted for the Northeast Wildlife Damage Management Research and Outreach Cooperative (hereinafter referred to as the Cooperative) helps wildlife professionals better understand public attitudes toward and expectations regarding management of problems caused by wildlife in the Northeast United States.