When is it acceptable to kill a strictly protected carnivore

Exploring the legal constraints on wildlife management within Europe's Bern Convention

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

22 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

As wolf populations expand across Europe, many countries face challenges in finding ways to address the concerns of some elements among the rural stakeholders who are being asked to share their landscapes with wolves for the first time in several generations. In these recovery landscapes, wolves are associated with a wide range of conflicts that include economic, psychological, perceptional, social, cultural and political dimensions. A recurring demand concerns the desire to introduce the use of carefully regulated lethal control of wolves, through either culling by state employees or hunting conducted by rural hunters. Introducing such measures can be very controversial, and many critics challenge their legality under the international wildlife conservation instruments that have nurtured wolf recovery. We evaluate this issue for the case of wolves in Norway, which are strictly protected under the Bern Convention. Drawing on the latest results of social science research, we present the multiple lines of argumentation that are often used to justify killing wolves and relate these to the criteria for exceptions that exist under the Bern Convention. We conclude that while the Convention provides apparent scope for allowing the killing of wolves as a means to address conflicts, this must be clearly justified and proportional to the conservation status of wolves so as to not endanger their recovery.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)129-157
JournalNature Conservation
Volume12
Issue number21
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 13 Sep 2017

Fingerprint

wildlife management
carnivore
culling
conservation status
nature conservation
hunting
stakeholder
economics
Europe
convention
conflict

Cite this

@article{eb59ab5d17dc4d0c8da5dc2831f53c48,
title = "When is it acceptable to kill a strictly protected carnivore: Exploring the legal constraints on wildlife management within Europe's Bern Convention",
abstract = "As wolf populations expand across Europe, many countries face challenges in finding ways to address the concerns of some elements among the rural stakeholders who are being asked to share their landscapes with wolves for the first time in several generations. In these recovery landscapes, wolves are associated with a wide range of conflicts that include economic, psychological, perceptional, social, cultural and political dimensions. A recurring demand concerns the desire to introduce the use of carefully regulated lethal control of wolves, through either culling by state employees or hunting conducted by rural hunters. Introducing such measures can be very controversial, and many critics challenge their legality under the international wildlife conservation instruments that have nurtured wolf recovery. We evaluate this issue for the case of wolves in Norway, which are strictly protected under the Bern Convention. Drawing on the latest results of social science research, we present the multiple lines of argumentation that are often used to justify killing wolves and relate these to the criteria for exceptions that exist under the Bern Convention. We conclude that while the Convention provides apparent scope for allowing the killing of wolves as a means to address conflicts, this must be clearly justified and proportional to the conservation status of wolves so as to not endanger their recovery.",
author = "John Linnell and Arie Trouwborst and Floor Fleurke",
year = "2017",
month = "9",
day = "13",
doi = "10.3897/natureconservation.21.12836",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "129--157",
journal = "Nature Conservation",
issn = "1314-6947",
publisher = "Pensoft Publishers",
number = "21",

}

When is it acceptable to kill a strictly protected carnivore : Exploring the legal constraints on wildlife management within Europe's Bern Convention. / Linnell, John; Trouwborst, Arie; Fleurke, Floor.

In: Nature Conservation, Vol. 12, No. 21, 13.09.2017, p. 129-157.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - When is it acceptable to kill a strictly protected carnivore

T2 - Exploring the legal constraints on wildlife management within Europe's Bern Convention

AU - Linnell, John

AU - Trouwborst, Arie

AU - Fleurke, Floor

PY - 2017/9/13

Y1 - 2017/9/13

N2 - As wolf populations expand across Europe, many countries face challenges in finding ways to address the concerns of some elements among the rural stakeholders who are being asked to share their landscapes with wolves for the first time in several generations. In these recovery landscapes, wolves are associated with a wide range of conflicts that include economic, psychological, perceptional, social, cultural and political dimensions. A recurring demand concerns the desire to introduce the use of carefully regulated lethal control of wolves, through either culling by state employees or hunting conducted by rural hunters. Introducing such measures can be very controversial, and many critics challenge their legality under the international wildlife conservation instruments that have nurtured wolf recovery. We evaluate this issue for the case of wolves in Norway, which are strictly protected under the Bern Convention. Drawing on the latest results of social science research, we present the multiple lines of argumentation that are often used to justify killing wolves and relate these to the criteria for exceptions that exist under the Bern Convention. We conclude that while the Convention provides apparent scope for allowing the killing of wolves as a means to address conflicts, this must be clearly justified and proportional to the conservation status of wolves so as to not endanger their recovery.

AB - As wolf populations expand across Europe, many countries face challenges in finding ways to address the concerns of some elements among the rural stakeholders who are being asked to share their landscapes with wolves for the first time in several generations. In these recovery landscapes, wolves are associated with a wide range of conflicts that include economic, psychological, perceptional, social, cultural and political dimensions. A recurring demand concerns the desire to introduce the use of carefully regulated lethal control of wolves, through either culling by state employees or hunting conducted by rural hunters. Introducing such measures can be very controversial, and many critics challenge their legality under the international wildlife conservation instruments that have nurtured wolf recovery. We evaluate this issue for the case of wolves in Norway, which are strictly protected under the Bern Convention. Drawing on the latest results of social science research, we present the multiple lines of argumentation that are often used to justify killing wolves and relate these to the criteria for exceptions that exist under the Bern Convention. We conclude that while the Convention provides apparent scope for allowing the killing of wolves as a means to address conflicts, this must be clearly justified and proportional to the conservation status of wolves so as to not endanger their recovery.

U2 - 10.3897/natureconservation.21.12836

DO - 10.3897/natureconservation.21.12836

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 129

EP - 157

JO - Nature Conservation

JF - Nature Conservation

SN - 1314-6947

IS - 21

ER -