Abstract
Abstract
Centralized management of large carnivore populations in rural and remote landscapes used by local people often leads to conflicts between the objectives of wildlife conservation and rural development. We tested the hypothesis that the presence of wolves indirectly reduces landowner revenues from traditional small game hunting, and that landowner revenues are more variable closer to wolf territories. The assumed mechanism is that hunters fear that their economically and culturally valuable hunting dogs may be killed by wolves, which results in reduced hunting, and thus reduced revenues for landowners where and when wolves occur. To determine the effect of wolf presence on revenues from sport hunting, we obtained data from 1990 to 2009 on income from small game management areas, in Hedmark and Oppland Counties in Norway, as well as locations of wolf territories. Small game management areas experienced increased sport hunting revenue with increasing distance to the closest wolf territory. Also, inter-annual variation in revenue decreased with increasing distance from wolf territories. Thus, wolf presence may reduce landowners’ revenues from small game hunting, and cause higher economic variability in rural communities. It is important to note that while the economic impacts of wolves may be compensated where governments have the will and the economic resources, the impacts on the lifestyles of rural people (e.g. hunter’s fear of losing prized dogs to wolves) will remain controversial.
Funder
Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas
Skogtiltaksfondet
Høgskolen i Hedmark
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Nature and Landscape Conservation,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference58 articles.
1. Allen BL, Allen LR, Andrén H, Ballard G, Boitani L, Engeman RM, Fleming PJS, Ford AT, Haswell PM, Kowalczyk R, Linnell JDC, Mech LD, Parker DM (2017a) Can we save large carnivores without loosing carnivore science? Food webs 12:64–75.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fooweb.2017.02.008
2. Allen BL, Allen LR, Andrén H, Ballard G, Boitani L, Engeman RM, Fleming PJS, Ford AT, Haswell PM, Kowalczyk R, Linnell JDC, Mech LD, Parker DM (2017b) Large carnivore science: non-experimental studies are useful, but experiments are better. Food webs 13:49–50.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fooweb.2017.06.002
3. Angelstam P, Wikberg P-E, Danilov P, Faber WE, Nygrén K (2000) Effects of moose density on timber quality and biodiversity restoration in Sweden, Finland, and Russian Karelia. Alces 36:133–145
4. Angelstam P et al (2013) Solving problems in social-ecological systems: definition, practice and barriers of transdisciplinary research. Ambio 42:254–265.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-012-0372-4
5. Angelstam P, Manton M, Pedersen S, Elbakidze M (2017) Disrupted trophic interactions affect recruitment of boreal deciduous and coniferous trees in northern Europe. Ecol Appl 27:1108–1123.
https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.1506
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献