Wildlife Management And Public Engagement: A Case Study On Crows
Humans have changed our environment – both on a micro and macro level – in a variety of ways that have been both beneficial and detrimental for different species of wildlife. Some scavenger species especially have benefitted from living in close proximity to humans, and the way that humans have molded the environment to suit their needs. One species that has benefited greatly from their proximity to us are crows.
However, as is often the case, animals who benefit from being close to us often get caught up in conflict with us as well. In this case study, researchers looked at crows in Slovenia. In the past couple of decades, the number of crows in the country has risen steadily, and their scavenging behaviours – including eating fruits and crops, ripping garbage bags, attacking animals and humans, emitting loud voices, and faeces – have fostered a general antipathy towards the birds.
Researchers in Slovenia conducted this study to determine two things: First, they wanted to understand how the public felt about a population control problem; secondly, they wanted to identify ways that the public could be engaged in wildlife management based on their attitudes. They conducted a survey of several hundred participants.
Interestingly, one of the main results of the study was that most respondents responded to most of the questions neutrally on a likert scale. The researchers note that this “may imply indifference towards crows and conflicts between human and crows,” which would actually undercut the implication that human-crow conflicts are such a big problem that requires management. The researchers note that the respondents “did not want to participate actively in actions for crow regulation,” but did have some interest in knowing what kind of management was going on. The researchers take these results to indicate that the study group “did not possess a sufficient level of education about crow management. From results it was clear that they preferred to leave the crow management to those who had competence.” However, the results seem to indicate instead that the public is perhaps more ambivalent about crows than previously thought.
For animal advocates, the study shows just how important it is to gauge the opinion of the public on wildlife issues. In the worst case scenario, you find out that the public truly dislikes a certain species, and you may have to try to engage them in appropriate techniques to reduce conflict. In the best case, you may find out that the public is actually relatively neutral about a species, and that the bulk of the “conflict” is simply perceived. In this study, the researchers took the results to mean that management should be “left to the experts.” However, the results could also be interpreted to show that there is no real conflict to be managed.
http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1071/WR17004