重新引入,但不被接受:利益相关者对德国海狸鼠的看法

Maximilian Hohm, Simon S. Moesch, Jennifer Bahm, Dagmar Haase, Jonathan M. Jeschke, N. Balkenhol
{"title":"重新引入,但不被接受:利益相关者对德国海狸鼠的看法","authors":"Maximilian Hohm, Simon S. Moesch, Jennifer Bahm, Dagmar Haase, Jonathan M. Jeschke, N. Balkenhol","doi":"10.1002/pan3.10678","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\n\nWhile reintroductions of regionally extinct native species usually benefit ecosystems, reintroduced animals often struggle to locate appropriate habitats where they can establish themselves without conflict with humans. European beavers (Castor fiber) were successfully reintroduced to Germany almost 60 years ago and have reached high abundances again. As beavers can damage trees and change landscapes, they are increasingly in conflict with humans.\n\nWe investigated human perceptions of beavers in Germany using an online survey, as they are an example of a reintroduced species with an expanding population and potential conflicts with humans. We asked participants about their emotions (anger, fear, interest, joy) towards beavers and what they consider to be acceptable beaver habitats.\n\nOf nearly 1500 survey participants, 803 (53%) were from the general public, 475 (32%) from the agricultural sector and 219 (15%) from forestry. People in these sectors had very different perspectives: beavers were positively perceived by the general public, but negatively by stakeholders working in agriculture and forestry. Independently of stakeholder groups, we also found regional differences, as participants from Bavaria—the German state with the highest beaver densities—viewed beavers more negatively than those from the rest of Germany.\n\nZoos and wildlife parks, as well as urban and nature conservation areas, were considered to be the most acceptable habitats for beavers, whereas survey participants did not accept private gardens and cultivated areas as beaver habitats.\n\nWe discuss the sources of negative emotions towards beavers and how ecologically suitable habitats differ from those that appear acceptable by humans. Even 60 years after their reintroduction, beavers in Germany are still being recognized as both a novelty and a nuisance. Our findings highlight the need for active beaver management and increased public engagement to enable positive coexistence between beavers and humans in Germany.\n\nRead the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.","PeriodicalId":508650,"journal":{"name":"People and Nature","volume":"51 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reintroduced, but not accepted: Stakeholder perceptions of beavers in Germany\",\"authors\":\"Maximilian Hohm, Simon S. Moesch, Jennifer Bahm, Dagmar Haase, Jonathan M. Jeschke, N. Balkenhol\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pan3.10678\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n\\n\\nWhile reintroductions of regionally extinct native species usually benefit ecosystems, reintroduced animals often struggle to locate appropriate habitats where they can establish themselves without conflict with humans. European beavers (Castor fiber) were successfully reintroduced to Germany almost 60 years ago and have reached high abundances again. As beavers can damage trees and change landscapes, they are increasingly in conflict with humans.\\n\\nWe investigated human perceptions of beavers in Germany using an online survey, as they are an example of a reintroduced species with an expanding population and potential conflicts with humans. We asked participants about their emotions (anger, fear, interest, joy) towards beavers and what they consider to be acceptable beaver habitats.\\n\\nOf nearly 1500 survey participants, 803 (53%) were from the general public, 475 (32%) from the agricultural sector and 219 (15%) from forestry. People in these sectors had very different perspectives: beavers were positively perceived by the general public, but negatively by stakeholders working in agriculture and forestry. Independently of stakeholder groups, we also found regional differences, as participants from Bavaria—the German state with the highest beaver densities—viewed beavers more negatively than those from the rest of Germany.\\n\\nZoos and wildlife parks, as well as urban and nature conservation areas, were considered to be the most acceptable habitats for beavers, whereas survey participants did not accept private gardens and cultivated areas as beaver habitats.\\n\\nWe discuss the sources of negative emotions towards beavers and how ecologically suitable habitats differ from those that appear acceptable by humans. Even 60 years after their reintroduction, beavers in Germany are still being recognized as both a novelty and a nuisance. Our findings highlight the need for active beaver management and increased public engagement to enable positive coexistence between beavers and humans in Germany.\\n\\nRead the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508650,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"People and Nature\",\"volume\":\"51 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"People and Nature\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10678\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"People and Nature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10678","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然重新引入区域性灭绝的本地物种通常有利于生态系统,但重新引入的动物往往很难找到合适的栖息地,在那里它们可以安身立命,而不会与人类发生冲突。近 60 年前,欧洲海狸(Castor fiber)被成功重新引入德国,并再次达到很高的数量。由于海狸会破坏树木并改变地貌,因此它们与人类的冲突越来越多。我们通过在线调查研究了德国人对海狸的看法,因为海狸是一个重新引入的物种,其种群数量不断扩大,并有可能与人类发生冲突。在近 1500 名调查参与者中,有 803 人(53%)来自普通公众,475 人(32%)来自农业部门,219 人(15%)来自林业部门。这些部门的人们有着截然不同的观点:公众对海狸的看法是积极的,但农业和林业部门的利益相关者对海狸的看法却是消极的。动物园、野生动物园、城市和自然保护区被认为是海狸最容易接受的栖息地,而调查对象则不接受私人花园和耕地作为海狸的栖息地。我们讨论了海狸负面情绪的来源,以及生态适宜的栖息地与人类可接受的栖息地有何不同。即使在重新引入海狸60年后,海狸在德国仍被认为是一种新事物和讨厌的动物。我们的研究结果凸显了在德国积极管理海狸和提高公众参与度的必要性,以实现海狸与人类的积极共存。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reintroduced, but not accepted: Stakeholder perceptions of beavers in Germany
While reintroductions of regionally extinct native species usually benefit ecosystems, reintroduced animals often struggle to locate appropriate habitats where they can establish themselves without conflict with humans. European beavers (Castor fiber) were successfully reintroduced to Germany almost 60 years ago and have reached high abundances again. As beavers can damage trees and change landscapes, they are increasingly in conflict with humans. We investigated human perceptions of beavers in Germany using an online survey, as they are an example of a reintroduced species with an expanding population and potential conflicts with humans. We asked participants about their emotions (anger, fear, interest, joy) towards beavers and what they consider to be acceptable beaver habitats. Of nearly 1500 survey participants, 803 (53%) were from the general public, 475 (32%) from the agricultural sector and 219 (15%) from forestry. People in these sectors had very different perspectives: beavers were positively perceived by the general public, but negatively by stakeholders working in agriculture and forestry. Independently of stakeholder groups, we also found regional differences, as participants from Bavaria—the German state with the highest beaver densities—viewed beavers more negatively than those from the rest of Germany. Zoos and wildlife parks, as well as urban and nature conservation areas, were considered to be the most acceptable habitats for beavers, whereas survey participants did not accept private gardens and cultivated areas as beaver habitats. We discuss the sources of negative emotions towards beavers and how ecologically suitable habitats differ from those that appear acceptable by humans. Even 60 years after their reintroduction, beavers in Germany are still being recognized as both a novelty and a nuisance. Our findings highlight the need for active beaver management and increased public engagement to enable positive coexistence between beavers and humans in Germany. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信