A dividing issue: Attitudes to the shooting of rear and release birds among landowners, hunters and the general public in Denmark. (30th November 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gamborg, C.; Jensen, F.S.; Sandøe, P.
• Is Part Of: Land use policy. Volume 57(2016:Nov.)
• Page Start: 296
• Page End: 304
• Publication Date: 2016-11-30
• Subjects: Conflict -- Ethics -- Recreational hunting -- Restocking -- Values; Land use -- Periodicals; Land use -- Government policy -- Periodicals; Sol, Utilisation du -- Périodiques; Sol, Utilisation du -- Politique gouvernementale -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 333.7305
• DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.06.008
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0264-8377

Abstract

Abstract: Why are organised shoots involving birds that are farm-reared and subsequently released a dividing issue in several countries? As a contribution to answering this question the paper reports a national survey of landowners ( n = 1207), hunters ( n = 1130) and the general public ( n = 1001) in Denmark. While there was broad agreement across all three groups that recreational hunting of naturally occurring "surplus" wildlife is acceptable, the release of farm-reared game birds for shooting was a dividing issue, both within the groups and between them. The majority of participants (51%) in the survey representing the general public were against the practice; a majority of hunters (61%) were in favour of it; and landowner approval rates lay between these two poles. Respondents with a "mutualist" or "distanced" wildlife value orientation according to the definitions by Teel et al. (2005) consistently displayed a more negative attitude to rear and release shooting than those with a "utilitarian" orientation. The differences in attitude could not be explained in terms solely of underlying concerns about nature conservation and biodiversity protection. Concerns about the behaviour of the released birds, and about hunting "culture" and regulatory measures, also informed the participants' attitudes. The regulatory framework governing shooting based on the release of farm-reared birds could reflect a wider range of concerns than those hitherto acknowledged.