Human Dimensions of Wildlife

An International Journal

ISSN: 1087-1209 (Print) 1533-158X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uhdw20

Stakeholder preferences and consensus

associated with managing an endangered aquatic
predator: the Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra)

Vasilios Liordos, Vasileios J. Kontsiotis, Charalambos Nevolianis & Christina

Emmanouela Nikolopoulou

To cite this article: Vasilios Liordos, Vasileios J. Kontsiotis, Charalambos Nevolianis & Christina
Emmanouela Nikolopoulou (2019): Stakeholder preferences and consensus associated with
managing an endangered aquatic predator: the Eurasian otter (Lutra�lutra), Human Dimensions of
Wildlife, DOI: 10.1080/10871209.2019.1622821

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2019.1622821

Published online: 27 May 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 29

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uhdw20
HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE
https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2019.1622821

Stakeholder preferences and consensus associated with managing

an endangered aquatic predator: the Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra)
Vasilios Liordos , Vasileios J. Kontsiotis, Charalambos Nevolianis,
and Christina Emmanouela Nikolopoulou
Department of Forestry and Natural Environment Management, Eastern Macedonia and Thrace Institute of
Technology, Drama, Greece

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Understanding public preferences is necessary for managing conserva- Commercial fisheries;
tion conflicts. We used a face-to-face survey of 514 Greek residents to conservation conflict;
investigate preferences for managing damage to fish stocks by the Greece; potential for conflict
endangered Eurasian otter. Similarities in acceptability and consensus index; recreational fisheries
were higher between the general public and recreational fishers, and
lower between these groups and commercial fishers. Commercial fish-
ers were proponents of management interventions, whereas the gen-
eral public and recreational fishers were neutral. Compensation was
preferred by all stakeholders, but fencing was favored only by commer-
cial fishers. More invasive approaches were largely rejected, whereas
increased factual knowledge about otter biology, taxonomy, and con-
servation increased the acceptability of noninvasive approaches. These
findings could be used for informing the process of managing conflict
between otter conservation and fisher interests aiming to achieve the
long-term protection of otter populations and mitigating their potential
impacts on fisheries and livelihoods.

Introduction
The Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra), hereafter just otter, is an endangered aquatic predator found
throughout mainland Greece and on some islands (Galanaki & Gaethlich, 2009). Otters are
viewed as charismatic and cunning animals in Greek tradition (Granitsas, 1921). According to
folklore, Noah was desperate because otters were devouring fish to extinction on Noah’s Ark
(Granitsas, 1921). Despite the conservation status of these otters, there has recently been an
increase in reported damage and complaints by commercial and recreational fishers, especially
fish farmers from northern Greece where otters are more abundant (Directorate of
Aquaculture and Inland Waters, Hellenic Ministry of Agricultural Development and Food,
unpublished data). Social conflict about the management of charismatic and symbolic species
such as the otter may be high (Heneghan & Morse, 2019), but Greece does not have an official
otter management plan because the conflict between people and otters has only recently
emerged. The creation of such a plan will require understanding public preferences for
management approaches aimed at preventing or mitigating otter impacts. Achieving long-
term conflict management would be critical for the conservation of an endangered species and
the protection of fisheries and livelihoods.

CONTACT Vasilios Liordos liordos@yahoo.com Department of Forestry and Natural Environment Management,
Eastern Macedonia and Thrace Institute of Technology, P.O. Box 172, Drama 66100, Greece
© 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 V. LIORDOS ET AL.

Although a few studies on public perceptions of otter damage and management have
been conducted in Poland and the Czech Republic (Kloskowski, 2005, 2011; Václavíková,
Václavík, & Kostkan, 2011), the study by Špur, Žunič Gomboc, and Šorgo (2018) in
Slovenia was the only one we found on the acceptability of certain measures for prevent-
ing fish predation by otters. However, attitudes toward wildlife have been found to vary
greatly between groups of people and regions, making it difficult to generalize findings
across geographic areas and populations (Teel & Manfredo, 2010; Teel, Manfredo, &
Stinchfield, 2007). Therefore, studies must be specific to place and population to attain
information that is valuable from a local management perspective.

Background
The otter has one of the widest distributions of all Palearctic mammals (Wilson &
Mittermeier, 2009). Otters weigh between 6 and 11 kg, and their daily food intake is
approximately 1 kg (Mason & Macdonald, 1986). They are carnivorous mustelids that
mainly prey on fish (Clavero, Prenda, & Delibes, 2003; Karamanlidis et al., 2014).
Throughout their range, otters suffered a severe decline during the 20th century (Reid et al.,
2014) and have therefore been classified as “near threatened” (Roos, Loy, de Silva, Hajkova, &
Zemanová, 2015). However, populations of the European subspecies L. l. lutra have recently
increased due to conservation efforts (Kranz, 2000; Reid et al., 2014). This increase led to a rise
in predation of fish stocked for angling and fish farms, thus leading to conflicts with
recreational and commercial fishers (Kloskowski, 2005; Kranz, 2000; Václavíková et al., 2011).
In Greece, otters have a wide distribution in freshwater habitats and although their
populations have not been thoroughly studied since the 1980s (Gaethlich, 1988; Macdonald
& Mason, 1982), they are thought to have decreased, mainly due to pesticide contamination
and habitat destruction, and therefore have been assigned to “endangered” status (Galanaki &
Gaethlich, 2009). Management and protection measures for the otter are not currently being
implemented in Greece, although this is a statutory obligation.
Management approaches used for reducing negative impacts from wildlife vary from
less invasive approaches, such as compensation and fencing, to highly invasive approaches
such as shooting and poisoning. Compensation for economic loss and the use of regular or
electric fencing around small lakes and ponds are the approaches most often used to
mitigate or avoid otter predation (Jay, 2008; Leblanc, 2003). Other nonlethal, but more
invasive, approaches could include immunocontraception, destruction of holts, and trap-
ping followed by relocating animals. Lethal approaches involve the killing of animals
through hunting, trapping, and poisoning. Approaches to decrease otter populations, both
nonlethal and lethal, are illegal in Greece because the species is protected by law as
endangered. Special permits are required for the use of such approaches, but the proce-
dure to obtain a permit is complicated. However, in our study here, these management
approaches were presented as part of an investigation of public preferences.
Human dimensions of wildlife research has shown that acceptability generally decreases
with increasing invasiveness of management approaches (Heneghan & Morse, 2019;
Sponarski, Vaske, & Bath, 2015; Treves, Wallace, Naughton-Treves, & Morales, 2006).
Furthermore, acceptability of approaches for managing conflicts with wildlife often varies
among different groups, such as park visitors and staff, farmers, hunters, and the general
 HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 3

public (Frank, Monaco, & Bath, 2015; Liordos, Kontsiotis, Georgari, Baltzi, & Baltzi, 2017;
Sponarski et al., 2015).
Knowledge can impact acceptability and this knowledge can be measured as self-
assessed (i.e., what a person believes he or she knows) or factual (i.e., when a person
either does or does not know a factually correct answer; Perry, Needham, Cramer, &
Rosenberger, 2014). Self-assessed knowledge could be measured with questions such as
“how aware do you feel about this issue,” whereas factual knowledge could be measured by
asking true/false or multiple choice questions where only one answer is correct. Factual
knowledge about the biology and behavior of wildlife species can influence public attitudes
to be more favorable. Liordos, Kontsiotis, Kokoris, and Pimenidou (2018), for example,
found that increased factual knowledge about snake biology and behavior influenced more
favorable attitudes toward snakes in Greece. Parker, Whittington-Jones, Bernard, and
Davies-Mostert (2014) reported that factual knowledge about African wild dogs (Lycaon
pictus) and their prey made the attitudes of rural residents in South Africa toward this
species significantly more favorable. If Greek residents mistakenly think that otters are
larger and require more food, they could perceive a greater threat to fish stocks than the
threat that actually exists. Although otters are considered charismatic animals (Kruuk,
2006), they could also be sometimes misclassified as rodents, which are among the least
likeable mammals (Tisdell, Wilson, & Swarna Nantha, 2006), and this mistake could lead
to negative attitudes. Furthermore, Tkac (1998) and Tisdell, Swarna Nantha, and Wilson
(2007) found that the most important factor influencing the public’s allocation of funds
for conservation was information about how endangered a species was.

Conservation Conflicts
Many conflicts arise when humans and wildlife species interact, initially referred to as human–
wildlife conflicts that happen “when the needs and behavior of wildlife impact negatively on the
goals of humans or when the goals of humans negatively impact the needs of wildlife” (Madden,
2004, p. 248). Use of this term has been criticized as detrimental to coexistence between humans
and wildlife partially because it implicates wildlife species in consciously antagonistic relation-
ships with humans, thus framing wildlife as something that threatens human existence, rather
than contributing to human welfare (Peterson, Birckhead, Leong, Peterson, & Peterson, 2010).
Redpath et al. (2013) suggested that human conflicts with wildlife would be better understood
and managed if partitioned into their two components: (a) human–wildlife impacts, which focus
on the direct interactions between humans and other species (Woodroffe, Thirgood, &
Rabinowitz, 2005), and (b) the underlying human–human conflicts between those seeking to
conserve species versus those with other interests (Young et al., 2010).
After reviewing the literature, Peterson et al. (2010) and Redpath, Bhatia, and Young
(2015) concluded that human conflicts with wildlife occur primarily between conservation
and other human activities. Redpath et al. (2013), building on Young et al. (2010), defined
conservation conflicts as “situations that occur when two or more parties with strongly
held opinions clash over conservation objectives and when one party is perceived to assert
its interests at the expense of another” (p. 100). Different management approaches, such as
fencing, scaring devices, and shooting, have proved to be successful in reducing some
impacts of wildlife on humans (Woodroffe et al., 2005). However, because conservation
conflicts occur fundamentally among people, the effectiveness of a management approach
4 V. LIORDOS ET AL.

at reducing impacts does not imply that conflicts are addressed unless all interested parties
support its use (Redpath et al., 2015).

Objectives and Hypotheses

We identified three stakeholder groups, based on the degree they were affected by otter
preferences for food: (a) the general public, including those not affected by variations in fish
stocks; (b) commercial fishers, including fishers and fish farmers who catch or rear fish for sale
and profit, and whose livelihood depends on fish stocks; and (c) recreational fishers, including
those who fish during leisure time and do not sell the catch. Our first objective was to investigate
the degree of acceptability of different management approaches for reducing otter damage on
fish stocks, and how this acceptability differs among these stakeholder groups. However,
opinions concerning a management approach may or may not differ among individuals and
groups. When all individuals feel the same way about a management approach, consensus has
been reached. On the other hand, when opinions are divided between agreement and disagree-
ment, there is a high potential for conflict. Knowing the level of potential conflict can help
managers take appropriate measures to alleviate social conflicts over proposed management
approaches.
Vaske, Beaman, Barreto, and Shelby (2010) developed the second generation of the
Potential for Conflict Index (PCI2) as a measure of the likelihood of conflict regarding the
acceptability of a management strategy. Accordingly, our second objective was to use the PCI2
index to estimate the potential for conflict or consensus about different management
approaches both between and within stakeholder groups.
Furthermore, factual knowledge about the conservation status and taxonomy of otters
might affect public attitudes toward this species, perceptions of its management, and
ultimately their behavior (Kaiser & Fuhrer, 2003). Therefore, our third objective was to
explore the degree of factual knowledge within stakeholder groups and assess its relation-
ship with acceptability of different management approaches. We hypothesized:

H1. Acceptability and consensus both decrease with increasing invasiveness of otter
management approaches.

H2. Acceptability and consensus regarding each otter management approach both differ
among stakeholder groups.

H3. Acceptability of otter management approaches is associated with the degree of factual
knowledge about this species.

Methods
Study Area
The study was conducted in northern Greece where otters are more abundant (Galanaki &
Gaethlich, 2009) and where most damage claims occur (Directorate of Aquaculture and Inland
Waters, Hellenic Ministry of Agricultural Development and Food, unpublished data). This area
includes the Districts of Epirus, Western, Central, and Eastern Macedonia and Thrace (Figure 1).
 HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 5

Figure 1. Map showing the districts of Greece in which the study was carried out.

The area has a human population of approximately 3,110,000 people (Greek Statistical Authority
[GSA], 2011). Most of the larger bodies of freshwater in Greece are found in this area, most
notably Megali, Mikri Prespa, Kerkini, Koronia, Volvi, and Vegoritis lakes, and Arachthos,
Acheloos, Aliakmon, Axios, Strymon, Nestos, and Evros rivers. Other than large waterbodies,
otters also exploit streams and irrigation canals with continuous riparian vegetation (Galanaki &
Gaethlich, 2009). The current population status of this species in this area is not well known, but
Macdonald and Mason (1982) reported that the species was more numerous in the catchments of
the rivers Strymon and Nestos in the District of Eastern Macedonia and Thrace than in the
catchments of the Aliakmon and Axios rivers in the District of Central Macedonia. The District
of Epirus is also thought to hold notable otter populations (Galanaki & Gaethlich, 2009).
Fish farmed in freshwater aquaculture operations in this area include the alien rainbow
trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and to a lesser extent the native common carp (Cyprinus
carpio). Fish are reared mostly in concrete tanks near waterbodies for easy access to the
water for releases. The common carp and local trout species (Salmo macedonicus,
S. pelagonicus, S. louroensis; with strict regulations due to their endemicity and scarcity)
are among the most popular for both commercial and recreational fishers, although the
Prussian carp (Carassius auratus gibelio), chub (Leuciscus cephalus), common roach
(Rutilus rutilus), Wels catfish (Silurus glanis), and tench (Tinca tinca) are also found in
the area.

Data Collection
Data were collected from on-site face-to-face questionnaires completed by Epirus, Western,
Central, and Eastern Macedonia and Thrace adult residents (i.e., 18 years of age or older)
6 V. LIORDOS ET AL.

between March and May 2017. A pretest of the questionnaire (n = 30 random people) was
conducted to test question clarity and completion time. Cities, towns, and villages were visited
in all of these Districts during hours when local shops were open (9.00–15.00 and 17.00–21.00,
from Monday to Saturday). Markets in most neighborhoods, in both poorer and wealthier
areas, were surveyed in an effort to assemble a demographically representative sample. Every
fifth person passing in front of the researcher was asked to participate by completing
a questionnaire (Vaske, 2008). In cases in which more than five people had passed while
a questionnaire was being completed, the first person encountered upon completion was
selected. Aquaculture facilities, fishing cooperatives, and anglers’ favorite spots within the
study area were also visited to ensure representation of the commercial and recreational
fishers groups in the sample. It took respondents 10 minutes on average to orally complete the
questionnaire with the assistance of the researcher.

Questionnaire Design
Participants were classified in a stakeholder group (i.e., general public, commercial fishers,
recreational fishers) and were then asked a series of questions and statements about their
demographic characteristics, acceptability of management approaches, and factual knowl-
edge about the otter. Demographic characteristics included gender (female, male) and age
(following the classification by GSA (2011), and aggregated into three classes of adults
18 years of age or older: young [18–34 years old], middle [35–54], old [over 54]) (Table 1).
Participants were asked to rate their acceptability of five management approaches varying
in degree of harm to wildlife (Table 2). Participants were asked: “Otters are semiaquatic
mammals that mostly feed on fish. When they consume commercially valuable fish stocks and
reduce the income of local fishers and fish farmers, how acceptable or unacceptable would be
to: (a) take no action; (b) compensate loss of income; (c) use fencing to exclude the animals
from commercially important areas; (d) use nonlethal control approaches (e.g., immunocon-
traception, exclusion from breeding sites, trapping and relocating); and (e) use lethal control
approaches (e.g., hunting, shooting, poisoning).” Participants were asked to rate each manage-
ment approach on a 5-point scale of “highly unacceptable” (–2), “unacceptable” (–1),
“neither” (0), “acceptable” (1), or “highly acceptable” (2).
Degree of factual knowledge about otter biology, taxonomy, and conservation status
was measured using four statements (Table 3). Participants were asked to rate each factual
knowledge statement on a 5-point scale of “strongly disagree” (–2), “disagree” (–1),
“neither” (0), “agree” (1), or “strongly agree” (2). Factual knowledge statements were
reverse-coded for consistency, except the statement “Otters are threatened with extinction
in the near future and therefore protected by Greek legislation,” so a rating of 2 corre-
sponded to the most correct answer (true, false; Table 3).

Table 1. Demographic characteristics by stakeholder group respondents to the survey (n = 514)

regarding the acceptability and consensus for Eurasian otter management in Greece in 2017.
Age (year) Gender
Stakeholder groupa 18–34 35–54 Over 54 Female Male
General public (n = 305) 97 (32) 117 (38) 91 (30) 166 (54) 139 (46)
Recreational fishers (n = 111) 26 (23) 49 (44) 36 (33) 21 (19) 90 (81)
Commercial fishers (n = 98) 31 (32) 44 (45) 23 (23) 11 (11) 87 (89)
a
Row frequencies and percentages (in parentheses) by age and gender categories in each stakeholder group.
 HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 7

Table 2. One-way analysis of variance comparisons between the general public, recreational fishers, and
commercial fishers regarding the acceptability of five approaches (mean score) for Eurasian otter manage-
ment in Greece in 2017. For each approach, mean responses not sharing an uppercase (A, B, or C) letter are
significantly different (p < .017; Tamhane post hoc tests with Bonferroni correction).
Management approaches General publica Recreational fishersa Commercial fishersa F p η
No action –.07 A –.08 A –.61 B 9.39 <.001 .29
Compensation .38 A .29 A 1.15 B 19.93 <.001 .38
Fencing –.38 A –.33 A .64 B 27.41 <.001 .43
Nonlethal control –.84 A –.90 A –.32 B 7.64 .001 .27
Lethal control –1.35 A –1.25 A –1.41 A 0.81 .440 .14
a
Cell entries are means on a 5-point scale from ‘–2ʹ (highly unacceptable) to ‘2ʹ (highly acceptable).

Table 3. Results of principal components exploratory factor analysis of respondents’ (n = 514) factual
knowledge about Eurasian otters. Descriptive statistics, factor loadings, communalities (Com), factor
eigenvalues, % variance explained and factor reliability are given.
Knowledge
Factual knowledge statementsa Mean ± SD Correct answer (Factor loadings) Com
Eurasian otters are threatened with extinction and .53 ± .94 True .89 .79
therefore protected by Greek legislation.
Eurasian otters are rodents. .37 ± 1.21 False .66 .44
Eurasian otters weight 20 kg. .79 ± 1.05 False .87 .76
Eurasian otters eat 5 kg of food each day. .53 ± 1.06 False .86 .74
Eigenvalue 2.72
% variance 67.41
Cronbach’s alpha .737
a
5-point scale, with ‘–2ʹ representing the wrong and ‘2ʹ the correct answer, as indicated in the respective column.

Statistical Analysis
One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for comparing the mean responses of
the general public, commercial fishers, and recreational fishers to each of the five manage-
ment approaches. Effect sizes were calculated by eta (η) (η = .100 denotes a minimal
relationship, η = .243 denotes a typical relationship, and η = .371 denotes a substantial
relationship; Vaske, 2008). Significant differences among groups were determined with
Tamhane post-hoc tests to account for heteroscedasticity after applying the Bonferroni
correction to adjust for multiple testing.
Measures of consensus include standard deviation and coefficient of variation
(Krymkowski, Manning, & Valliere, 2009). These measures, however, do not have an upper
and lower bound, making it difficult to interpret findings (Engel, Vaske, Bath, & Marchini,
2017). The PCI2 was developed to help address these issues (Vaske et al., 2010). PCI2 ranges
from 0 to 1. The least amount of consensus and greatest potential for conflict (PCI2 = 1) occurs
when responses are equally divided between two extreme values on a response scale (e.g., 50%
highly unacceptable, 50% highly acceptable). A distribution with 100% at any one point on the
response scale yields a PCI2 of 0 and suggests complete consensus and no potential for conflict.
PCI2 results can be visualized in bubble graphs (Vaske et al., 2010). The center of a bubble
represents mean acceptability of a particular issue by respondents, whereas the size of the
bubble depicts the magnitude of the PCI2 and indicates the degree of potential conflict (or
consensus) regarding acceptability of that issue. PCI2 was calculated for each of five manage-
ment approaches for each of the three stakeholder groups, and differences were tested with
pairwise d tests (Vaske et al., 2010) with Bonferroni correction.
8 V. LIORDOS ET AL.

Principal components exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with varimax rotation, using the
eigenvalue criterion of ≥1 for factor inclusion, was applied to the factual knowledge statements
for controlling if these items can coalesce in similar factual knowledge groups (i.e., factors).
Cronbach’s alpha was then used to determine whether the statements included in the
common factors produced by this factor analysis reliably measured respondent factual knowl-
edge about otters, with a value greater than .70 considered acceptable (Nunnally & Bernstein,
1994). The relationship between respondent factual knowledge and acceptability of manage-
ment approaches, by stakeholder group, was tested with linear regressions.
The one-way ANOVAs, factor analysis, reliability, and linear regressions were performed
with SPSS Statistics (version 21.0, IBM Corp., 2012). PCI2 statistics were calculated using free
online software (https://sites.warnercnr.colostate.edu/jerryv/potential-conflict-index). The
significance level was set at α = .017 (i.e., p < .017) after applying the Bonferroni correction.

Results
Demographics
A total of 514 questionnaires were completed, with 33 refusals, yielding a response rate of
94%. Among respondents, 305 belonged to the general public, 111 were recreational
fishers, and 98 were commercial fishers (Table 1). The general public group’s age and
gender ratios were compared to the total population. The study area’s population is 51%
female versus 49% male (54% vs. 46% in our study) and the age ratio is 29%, 36%, and
34% (32%, 38%, 30% in our study) in the 18–34, 35–54, and 55+ year old age classes,
respectively (GSA, 2011). The general public’s gender (χ2 = 1.06, df = 1, p = .277) and age
(χ2 = 2.85, df = 2, p = .240) in our study were not different from the population. Most of
the recreational and commercial fishers were male (81% and 89%, respectively) and
between 35–54 years old (44% and 45%, respectively; Table 1).

Acceptability and Consensus

Overall, respondent means were relatively neutral for “no action” (M = – .20 ± 1.10 SD)
and “fencing” (M = – .12 ± 1.25), moderately acceptable for “compensation”
(M = .55 ± 1.15), moderately unacceptable for “nonlethal” (M = – .73 ± 1.22), and highly
unacceptable for “lethal” (M = – 1.35 ± .84) management, with differences being sig-
nificant (F = 160.53, df = 4,2565, p < .001, η = .49). Mean acceptability differed signifi-
cantly among approaches (p < .001; Tamhane post-hoc tests with Bonferroni correction),
except between “no action” and “fencing".
On average, the general public (M = – .07) and recreational fishers (M = – .08) were relatively
neutral toward the “no action” approach, whereas commercial fishers felt this was more
unacceptable (M = – .61; Table 2, Figure 2). Mean responses from the general public and
recreational fishers significantly differed from commercial fishers (p < .017). All stakeholder
groups agreed that “compensation” was acceptable, although this was more acceptable among
commercial fishers (M = 1.15) than it was among the general public (M = .38) and recreational
fishers (M = .29; p < .017). The “fencing” management approach was slightly unacceptable for the
general public (M = – .38) and recreational fishers (M = – .33), but moderately acceptable for
commercial fishers (M = .64). Mean responses from the general public and recreational fishers
 HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 9

Figure 2. Mean response scores with potential for conflict indices (PCI2) by stakeholder group, regard-
ing the acceptability of five approaches for managing Eurasian otters (n = 514) in Greece. For each
management approach, mean responses (bubble position along vertical axis) not sharing an uppercase
(A, B, or C), and PCI2 values (bubble size) not sharing a lowercase (a, b, or c) letter are significantly
different (p < .017).

significantly differed from commercial fishers (p < .017). The “nonlethal control” management
approach was moderately unacceptable among the general public (M = – .84) and recreational
fishers (M = – .90), and slightly unacceptable for commercial fishers (M = – .32), with differences
being significant between commercial fishers and the other two groups (p < .017). All stakeholder
groups believed that “lethal control” was highly unacceptable (general public M = – 1.35,
recreational fishers M = – 1.25, commercial fishers M = – 1.41).
The level of consensus was moderate to high (i.e., low PCI2 values) for “no action”
(PCI2 range = .16-.27) and “compensation” (PCI2 range = .13-.27), with consensus for
both approaches significantly higher for recreational fishers (PCI2 = .16 and .13) than for
the general public (PCI2 = .27; p < .017; Figure 2). Consensus for “fencing” (PCI2
range = .19-.37) was significantly higher for recreational fishers (PCI2 = .19) than for
commercial fishers (PCI2 = .37; p < .017). Consensus for “nonlethal control” also varied
among groups with it significantly higher for the general public (PCI2 = .26) and recrea-
tional fishers (PCI2 = .18) than for commercial fishers (PCI2 = .56; p < .017). Consensus
for “lethal control” was the highest among management approaches with no significant
differences among stakeholder groups (PCI2 range = .07-.13).
Taken together, with the exception of the “no action” approach, mean acceptability, but not
consensus, decreased with increased invasiveness of approaches, partially supporting hypoth-
esis 1. Mean acceptability and consensus associated with each management approach, except
“lethal control,” also differed among stakeholder groups, supporting hypothesis 2.

Relationship between Factual Knowledge and Support for Potential Otter

Management
The EFA determined one “knowledge” factor (mean score = .56 ± .67 SD) that included all
factual knowledge statements, an eigenvalue of 2.7, and accounted for 67% of the variance
with an acceptable Cronbach’s alpha value of .737 (Table 3). Respondent factual knowledge
10 V. LIORDOS ET AL.

about the endangered status of otters and its taxonomy, body weight, and daily food intake
was moderately above average. Factual knowledge significantly differed among stakeholder
groups (F = 316.71, df = 2,511, p < .001, η = .35), as it was significantly higher for commercial
fishers (M = .97 ± .76 SD) than both the general public (.41 ± .59) and recreational fishers
(.44 ± .57) (p < .001; Tamhane post-hoc tests with Bonferroni correction). Standardized factor
scores were used in subsequent analysis.
Support for the “no action” and “fencing” approaches significantly increased with more
factual knowledge about the otter for all stakeholder groups (β > .14 p < .017; both
approaches; Table 4). Factual knowledge had no relationship with “compensation.”
Support for “nonlethal control” significantly decreased with more factual knowledge
about this species for the general public (β = – .17, p = .012) and for recreational fishers
(β = – .16, p = .013). Support for “lethal control” significantly decreased with more factual
knowledge only for the general public (β = – .24, p < .001). These results partially support
hypothesis 3.

Discussion
In our study, the acceptability of management approaches for preventing or mitigating
potential damage to fish stocks by otters decreased with increasing invasiveness of the
approach. Respondents felt relatively neutral about taking no action and fencing, but they
accepted compensation and did not accept nonlethal (e.g., immunocontraception, exclu-
sion from breeding sites, trapping and relocating) and lethal management approaches.
Špur et al. (2018) found their respondents were reluctant to support measures such as
scaring with noise, fencing, hunting, and eradication for managing otters in Slovenia. They
also reported that slightly more participants supported nonlethal measures than lethal
measures. Liordos et al. (2017) studied the acceptability of wildlife management

Table 4. Linear regression results testing the relationship,

for each stakeholder group, between the acceptability of
management approaches and the degree of factual
knowledge about Eurasian otters.
β p adjusted R2
No action
General public .35 <.001 .12
Recreational fishers .48 <.001 .22
Commercial fishers .21 .016 .09
Compensation
General public .01 .922 .01
Recreational fishers .12 .195 .02
Commercial fishers .11 .231 .01
Fencing
General public .14 .017 .05
Recreational fishers .18 .013 .09
Commercial fishers .28 <.001 .10
Nonlethal control
General public –.17 .012 .06
Recreational fishers –.16 .013 .07
Commercial fishers .12 .223 .02
Lethal control
General public –.24 <.001 .11
Recreational fishers –.10 .377 .02
Commercial fishers –.08 .341 .01
 HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 11

approaches in Eastern Macedonia and Thrace, which is located within our study area.
Their study involved corvids, European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris), and coypus
(Myocastor coypus). Respondents opposed doing nothing and preferred nonlethal control
approaches under all of their proposed conflict scenarios. Furthermore, although lethal
control was generally unacceptable, it became increasingly more acceptable as the severity
of scenarios increased, from the fouling of urban structures and crop raiding to disease
transmission. Other similar studies have also reported that acceptability of management
approaches decreased with increasing invasiveness of the approach and that support for
lethal management was higher in situations involving higher incident severity (e.g., human
and animal health and safety) than in situations of lower severity (e.g., economic damage,
aesthetic deterioration, nuisance; Decker, Jacobson, & Brown, 2006; Don Carlos, Bright,
Teel, & Vaske, 2009; Jacobs, Vaske, & Sijtsma, 2014; Sponarski et al., 2015). The general
reluctance of respondents in our study to accept invasive management approaches
coupled with the higher acceptability of taking no action for conflict management
compared to those reported in other studies (see Liordos et al., 2017) could potentially
be explained by the charismatic and symbolic value of otters to Greeks (Granitsas, 1921),
or by respondents’ perceived severity of otter impacts on fisheries.
The analysis of public opinions in terms of acceptability and consensus for otter
management revealed differences among the three stakeholder groups. Compensation
was accepted and both nonlethal and lethal management approaches were rejected by
all stakeholder groups, whereas fencing was accepted only by commercial fishers.
Compensation, fencing, and nonlethal management were more acceptable and taking no
action was less acceptable for commercial fishers than for the general public and recrea-
tional fishers. Consensus for these approaches was also low among groups and perceived
as more controversial by commercial fishers, whereas it was highest for lethal management
among all groups. A potential explanation for differences in the acceptability and con-
sensus among stakeholder groups is that the general public and recreational fishers might
not perceive otters as direct competitors because, although recreational anglers’ pastimes
might be adversely affected by reduced availability of fish with recreational value, their
livelihood is not often threatened. However, Lyach and Čech (2017) found that fish
stocked in a stream for angling constituted 13%, by prey biomass, of otters’ diet, and
also that otters targeted significantly different fish species of different sizes than did
anglers. On the other hand, damage to fish stocks by otters directly affects the income
of commercial fishers, thus leading to negative attitudes toward otters and a stronger
demand for management action. Kloskowski (2005) studied otter predation in a common
carp fish farm and found that carp dominated the diet of otters with 43% by prey biomass
on an annual basis with this higher from autumn to early spring. Marques, Rosalino, and
Santos-Reis (2007) studied otter predation in a trout farm and found that they mostly
consumed rainbow trout (87% by prey biomass). Špur et al. (2018) found, similar to our
results, that those who have a professional interest in fish breeding were more likely to
support measures for otter management compared to those who did not have such
interests. Other stakeholders such as farmers, whose livelihoods are threatened by crop
raiders, have also been found to have more positive responses toward invasive manage-
ment approaches than public groups not affected by crop raiders (Frank et al., 2015;
Liordos et al., 2017; Treves et al., 2006).
12 V. LIORDOS ET AL.

Factual knowledge about the feeding requirements, taxonomy, and conservation status
of otters was positively related to stakeholder support for using fencing as a management
tool and negatively related to support for more invasive approaches (both nonlethal and
lethal). According to Dickman (2010), a “hyper-awareness” of risk arises where respon-
dents intentionally or unintentionally exaggerate the damage incurred by wildlife on their
livelihoods and where damage suffered by one person elevates the fear of damage in other
people, even if they have never personally experienced damage. Local anglers at the
Amvrakikos Delta in western Greece reported that hundreds of thousands of great
cormorants (Phalacrocorax carbo) (mean 320,000; range 500–2,000,000) were significantly
affecting local fisheries in winter by consuming an average of 4.4 kg of fish per day, almost
entirely of high commercial value (Liordos, Zogaris, & Papandropoulos, 2011). In reality,
2,500 to 9,000 great cormorants were in this delta during the winter of 2001–2002 when
the study was carried out, consuming on average 0.3 kg of fish per day, 18.2% of which
had a high commercial value. This hyper-awareness of risk led to protests by anglers,
demanding immediate action to resolve the issue, with extermination and hunting being
their preferred management approaches. In a study of public attitudes toward snakes in
Eastern Macedonia and Thrace, Liordos et al. (2018) reported that people who knew that
most snake species in Greece were not poisonous and only bite when threatened were also
more willing to coexist with snakes and protect snake populations compared to those who
did not possess such knowledge. As knowledge has a generally positive effect on how
a species would be perceived, it is expected that further increases in factual knowledge
about the feeding requirements, taxonomy, and conservation status of otters would
improve public preferences toward noninvasive otter management (Tisdell et al., 2007).
Greece has not yet undertaken any mitigation measures to alleviate potential impacts of
otters on fisheries. However, affected anglers and fish farmers could claim reimbursement
for otter-induced damage on commercial fish stocks from the Hellenic Organization of
Agricultural Insurances (ELGA), under the framework of reimbursements of damage to
crops by wildlife. Following such claims, otter presence and damage should be determined
by ELGA experts before a compensation scheme could be set up and reimbursements
made available to successful applicants. In some areas, funding for erecting fences around
fish farms has been provided by National Park Authorities as a measure to alleviate
pressure and protect otter populations (e.g., Rodopi Mountain Range National Park,
Eastern Macedonia; S. Kehagioglou, personal communication, 30 August, 2018).
Compensation and fencing are two of the most commonly used approaches for otter
management in Europe and, according to Jay (2008) and Leblanc (2003), placing an
electric fence around lakes and ponds is the most effective measure for otter deterrence.
Václavíková et al. (2011) reported that Czech fisheries may claim compensation for otter
damage, but its actual utilization, especially by small private fish farmers, was low due to
perceived bureaucratic burden, adding that negative attitudes toward otters persisted and
their illegal killing remained common. Polish fish farmers who used electric fences around
ponds holding overwintering fish considered these fences effective, whereas others indir-
ectly indicated that they killed otters illegally because obtaining permits for culling the
strictly protected species was complicated (Kloskowski, 2011).
The otter is a charismatic creature as well as a top predator reflecting a good ecological
status of its wetland and riverine habitats (Kruuk, 2006). Despite the endangered status of this
species in Greece, otter conservation plans have not been implemented. Claims by commercial
 HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 13

fishers that otters threaten their livelihoods indicated that a conservation conflict has emerged.
An appropriate process for managing conflict between otter conservation and fisher interests
should include engaging stakeholders in a conflict management group aiming at finding
shared solutions to reduce negative impacts (Redpath et al., 2013). Stakeholder groups
involved in the conflict are conservationists (e.g., nongovernmental organizations [NGOs]),
managing authorities of protected areas, commercial and recreational fishers, and fish farm-
ers. Other parties who could be involved in the process are humanitarians with an interest in
animal welfare and other members of the general public (Redpath et al., 2013). Third parties
that could improve engagement are government representatives and scientists acting as
neutral parties to evaluate impacts (Frodeman, Thompson Klein, & Pacheco, 2017).
Researchers should collect data on both perceived and actual damage caused by otters, and
then communicate findings to stakeholders. Information on the relationship between per-
ceived and actual damage could help mitigate conflict if it can be demonstrated that otters are
not as damaging as previously thought (Dickman, 2010). After the level of damage has been
established, parties involved in the process should agree on solutions to reduce impact,
otherwise conflict management might not be successful (Redpath et al., 2015).
Our results revealed that compensation for economic losses caused by otters was
favored by all stakeholder groups. As relevant compensation schemes are not currently
available in Greece, the possibility of their implementation could be explored during the
onset of the conflict management process. Furthermore, as our results also suggested, an
increase in factual knowledge about the feeding requirements, taxonomy, and conserva-
tion status of otters could possibly increase stakeholder support for using fencing to
reduce predation on fish, a management strategy that has proven to be successful else-
where (Jay, 2008; Leblanc, 2003).
Distrust is common between parties with conflicting interests (Redpath, Gutiérrez, Wood,
& Young, 2015). Building trust both between and within stakeholder groups, and for the
conflict management process, is likely to encourage engagement and negotiation. Young et al.
(2016) presented evidence that increased trust through fairness in public participation, mean-
ing that all relevant stakeholders are represented and that procedures enable them to have
input into the format and content of discussions, makes conflict resolution more likely.
However, Madden and McQuinn (2014) argued that while a management approach accep-
table by all parties could prove successful in reducing negative wildlife impacts, the conserva-
tion outcomes will not be durable before the deeper-rooted social conflict is addressed. Proper
implementation of the conflict management process should help achieve the long-term
conservation of otter populations and mitigate their potentially negative impacts on fish
populations and commercial fisher livelihoods.
There are limitations of our study that should be taken into account when implementing any
of these strategies. Limitations of face-to-face surveys include potential researcher bias and
elicitation of socially desirable answers to sensitive questions. Although anonymous, some
respondents to our survey might have given their perceived socially acceptable answers,
especially to questions involving lethal approaches. Although we distributed our questionnaires
to achieve large coverage and include areas with different socio-economic status, generalization
of our results to the population level should consider possible coverage bias issues. The general
public’s gender and age in our sample, however, did not differ from the total population. Future
research should also identify and reconcile other potential social and psychological drivers of
human conflict with otters, such as status and recognition, dignity and respect, empowerment,
14 V. LIORDOS ET AL.

freedom, voice and control, meaning and personal fulfillment, identity, belonging and connect-
edness, and social, emotional, cultural, and spiritual security (Madden & McQuinn, 2014).

Conclusion
Our findings gave insights on the acceptability and consensus associated with management
approaches for reducing the potential impacts of otter predation on fisheries. The opinions of
stakeholder groups whose livelihoods were not directly affected by fish stock levels, such as the
general public and recreational fishers, was relatively neutral for taking no action for mana-
ging otter populations. On the contrary, commercial fishers were proponents of management
interventions. Similar to other studies, mean acceptability decreased with increasing invasive-
ness of the management approach. Research from other areas also indicated that damage
compensation schemes and the use of regular or electric fences around lakes and ponds were
the most commonly used legal approaches. Compensation for otter damage to fish stocks was
favored by all stakeholder groups here, whereas fencing was accepted only by commercial
fishers. Invasive lethal and nonlethal approaches were largely rejected, and fencing and
nonlethal control were more controversial among commercial fishers. Factual knowledge
about otters increased the acceptability of some noninvasive management approaches.
Findings from this study offer an important guide for the process of managing conflicts
between otter conservation and fisher interests, as the most preferred and least controversial
management approaches have been identified. In addition, the implementation of education
and outreach programs aimed at increasing factual knowledge about otters and the suitability
of management approaches are expected to reduce controversy and increase the acceptability
of compensation for loss of income and fencing of fish farms.

Acknowledgments
We thank participants for sharing their time and opinion with us. We also thank two anonymous
reviewers whose comments and suggestions helped to greatly improve the manuscript.

ORCID
Vasilios Liordos http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8985-4253

References
Clavero, M., Prenda, J., & Delibes, M. (2003). Trophic diversity of the otter (Lutra lutra L.) in
temperate and Mediterranean freshwater habitats. Journal of Biogeography, 30, 761–769.
doi:10.1046/j.1365-2699.2003.00865.x
Decker, D. J., Jacobson, C. A., & Brown, T. L. (2006). Situation-specific “impact dependency” as
a determinant of management acceptability: Insights from wolf and grizzly bear management in
Alaska. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 34, 426–432. doi:10.2193/0091-7648(2006)34[426:SIDAAD]2.0.CO;2
Dickman, A. J. (2010). Complexities of conflict: The importance of considering social factors for
effectively resolving human–Wildlife conflict. Animal Conservation, 13, 458–466. doi:10.1111/
acv.2010.13.issue-5
Don Carlos, A. W., Bright, A. D., Teel, T. L., & Vaske, J. J. (2009). Human-black bear conflict in
urban areas: An integrated approach to management response. Human Dimensions of Wildlife,
14, 174–184. doi:10.1080/10871200902839316
 HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 15

Engel, M. T., Vaske, J. J., Bath, A. J., & Marchini, S. (2017). Attitudes toward jaguars and pumas and
the acceptability of killing big cats in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest: An application of the potential
for conflict index. Ambio, 46, 604–612. doi:10.1007/s13280-017-0898-6
Frank, B., Monaco, A., & Bath, A. J. (2015). Beyond standard wildlife management: A pathway to
encompass human dimension findings in wild boar management. European Journal of Wildlife
Research, 61, 723–730. doi:10.1007/s10344-015-0948-y
Frodeman, R., Thompson Klein, J., & Pacheco, R. C. S. (2017). The Oxford handbook of inter-
disciplinarity (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Gaethlich, M. (1988). Otters in western Greece and Corfu. IUCN Otter Specialist Group Bulletin, 3, 17–23.
Galanaki, A., & Gaethlich, M. (2009). Lutra lutra (Linnaeus, 1758). In A. Legakis & P. Maragou
(Eds.), The red data book of threatened animals of Greece (pp. 380–382). Athens, Greece: Hellenic
Zoological Society.
Granitsas, G. (1921). The wild and tame of mountain and thicket. [in Greek]. Athens, Greece:
Eleftheroudakis Publications.
Greek Statistical Authority. (2011). Population census 2011. Retrieved from http://www.statistics.gr/
portal/page/portal/ESYE/PAGE-census2011
Heneghan, M. D., & Morse, W. C. (2019). Acceptability of management actions and the potential
for conflict following human-black bear encounters. Society and Natural Resources, 32, 434–451.
doi:10.1080/08941920.2018.1556756
IBM Corp. (2012). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
Jacobs, M. H., Vaske, J. J., & Sijtsma, M. T. J. (2014). Predictive potential of wildlife value
orientations for acceptability of management interventions. Journal for Nature Conservation,
22, 377–383. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2014.03.005
Jay, S. (2008). Otters and stillwater fisheries. Retrieved from www.anglingtrust.net/core/core_picker/
download.asp?id=2526
Kaiser, F. G., & Fuhrer, U. (2003). Ecological behavior’s dependency on different forms of knowl-
edge. Applied Psychology, 52, 598–613. doi:10.1111/apps.2003.52.issue-4
Karamanlidis, A. A., Hornigold, K., Krambokoukis, L., Papakostas, G., Stefanidis, K., &
Quaglietta, L. (2014). Occurrence, food habits, and activity patterns of Eurasian otters Lutra
lutra in northwestern Greece: Implications for research and conservation. Mammalia, 78,
239–243. doi:10.1515/mammalia-2013-0096
Kloskowski, J. (2005). Otter Lutra lutra damage at farmed fisheries in southeastern Poland, I: An interview
survey. Wildlife Biology, 11, 201–206. doi:10.2981/0909-6396(2005)11[201:OLLDAF]2.0.CO;2
Kloskowski, J. (2011). Human–wildlife conflicts at pond fisheries in eastern Poland: Perceptions and
management of wildlife damage. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 57, 295–304. doi:10.1007/
s10344-010-0426-5
Kranz, A. (2000). Otters (Lutra lutra) increasing in Central Europe: From the threat of extinction to
locally perceived overpopulation? Mammalia, 64, 357–368. doi:10.1515/mamm.2000.64.4.357
Kruuk, H. (2006). Otters: Ecology, behavior, and conservation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Krymkowski, D. H., Manning, R. E., & Valliere, W. A. (2009). Norm crystallization: Measurement
and comparative analysis. Leisure Sciences, 31, 403–416. doi:10.1080/01490400903199443
Leblanc, F. (2003). Protecting fish farms from predation by the Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra) in the
limousin region of central France: First results. IUCN Otter Specialist Group Bulletin, 20, 45–48.
Liordos, V., Kontsiotis, V. J., Georgari, M., Baltzi, K., & Baltzi, I. (2017). Public acceptance of
management methods under different human–wildlife conflict scenarios. Science of the Total
Environment, 579, 685–693. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.11.040
Liordos, V., Kontsiotis, V. J., Kokoris, S., & Pimenidou, M. (2018). The two faces of Janus, or the
dual mode of public attitudes towards snakes. Science of the Total Environment, 621, 670–678.
doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.11.311
Liordos, V., Zogaris, S., & Papandropoulos, D. (2011). Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo food
and human perceptions at the Amvrakikos Gulf, western Greece. In M. R. van Eerden, S. van
Rijn, & V. Keller (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th international conference on cormorants (pp.
102–111). Villeneuve, Switzerland: IUCN Cormorant Research Group, Wetlands International.
16 V. LIORDOS ET AL.

Lyach, R., & Čech, M. (2017). Do otters target the same fish species and sizes as anglers? A case
study from a lowland trout stream (Czech Republic). Aquatic Living Resources, 30, 11.
doi:10.1051/alr/2017011
Macdonald, S. M., & Mason, C. F. (1982). Otters in Greece. Oryx, 16, 240–244. doi:10.1017/
S0030605300017464
Madden, F. (2004). Creating coexistence between humans and wildlife: Global perspectives on local
efforts to address human-wildlife conflict. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 9, 247–257.
doi:10.1080/10871200490505675
Madden, F., & McQuinn, B. (2014). Conservation’s blind spot: The case for conflict transformation
in wildlife conservation. Biological Conservation, 178, 97–106. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.07.015
Marques, C., Rosalino, L. M., & Santos-Reis, M. (2007). Otter predation in a trout fish farm of
Central–East Portugal: Preference for ‘fast-food’? River Research and Applications, 23, 1147–1153.
doi:10.1002/(ISSN)1535-1467
Mason, C. F., & Macdonald, S. M. (1986). Otters, ecology and conservation. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Parker, D. M., Whittington-Jones, B. M., Bernard, R. T. F., & Davies-Mostert, H. T. (2014).
Attitudes of rural communities toward dispersing African wild dogs in South Africa. Human
Dimensions of Wildlife, 19, 512–522. doi:10.1080/10871209.2014.926575
Perry, E. E., Needham, M. D., Cramer, L. A., & Rosenberger, R. S. (2014). Coastal resident
knowledge of new marine reserves in Oregon: The impact of proximity and attachment. Ocean
& Coastal Management, 95, 107–116. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.04.011
Peterson, M. N., Birckhead, J. L., Leong, K., Peterson, M. J., & Peterson, T. R. (2010). Rearticulating the
myth of human-wildlife conflict. Conservation Letters, 3, 74–82. doi:10.1111/conl.2010.3.issue-2
Redpath, S. M., Bhatia, S., & Young, J. (2015). Tilting at wildlife: Reconsidering human–wildlife
conflict. Oryx, 49, 222–225. doi:10.1017/S0030605314000799
Redpath, S. M., Gutiérrez, R. J., Wood, K. A., & Young, J. C. (2015). Conflicts in conservation:
Navigating towards solutions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Redpath, S. M., Young, J., Evely, A., Adams, W. M., Sutherland, W. J., Whitehouse, A., …
Gutiérrez, R. J. (2013). Understanding and managing conservation conflicts. Trends in Ecology
and Evolution, 28, 100–109. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2012.08.021
Reid, N., Lundy, M. G., Hayden, B., Waterman, T., Looney, D., Lynn, D., … Montgomery, W. I.
(2014). Covering over the cracks in conservation assessments at EU interfaces: A
cross-jurisdictional ecoregion scale approach using the Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra). Ecological
Indicators, 45, 93–102. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.03.023
Roos, A., Loy, A., de Silva, P., Hajkova, P., & Zemanová, B. (2015). Lutra lutra. The IUCN red list of
threatened species 2015, e.T12419A21935287. Retrieved from doi:10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-2.
RLTS.T12419A21935287.en
Sponarski, C. C., Vaske, J. J., & Bath, A. J. (2015). Differences in management action acceptability
for coyotes in a national park. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 39, 239–247. doi:10.1002/wsb.v39.2
Špur, N., Žunič Gomboc, K., & Šorgo, A. (2018). Public acceptability of measures to prevent from
predation on commercial fish by the endangered Eurasian otter (Lutra lutra) in Natura 2000.
Journal for Nature Conservation, 44, 21–32. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2018.06.002
Teel, T. L., & Manfredo, M. J. (2010). Understanding the diversity of public interests in wildlife
conservation. Conservation Biology, 24, 128–139. doi:10.1111/cbi.2010.24.issue-1
Teel, T. L., Manfredo, M. J., & Stinchfield, H. M. (2007). The need and theoretical basis for
exploring wildlife value orientations cross-culturally. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 12,
297–305. doi:10.1080/10871200701555857
Tisdell, C., Swarna Nantha, H., & Wilson, C. (2007). Endangerment and likeability of wildlife
species: How important are they for payments proposed for conservation? Ecological Economics,
60, 627–633. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.01.007
Tisdell, C., Wilson, C., & Swarna Nantha, H. (2006). Public choice of species for the ‘Ark’:
Phylogenetic similarity and preferred wildlife species for survival. Journal for Nature
Conservation, 14, 97–105. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2005.11.001
 HUMAN DIMENSIONS OF WILDLIFE 17

Tkac, J. (1998). The effects of information on willingness-to-pay values of endangered species.

American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80, 1214–1220. doi:10.2307/1244227
Treves, A., Wallace, R. B., Naughton-Treves, L., & Morales, A. (2006). Co-managing human–wildlife
conflicts: A review. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 11, 383–396. doi:10.1080/10871200600984265
Václavíková, M., Václavík, T., & Kostkan, V. (2011). Otters vs. fishermen: Stakeholders’ perceptions
of otter predation and damage compensation in the Czech Republic. Journal for Nature
Conservation, 19, 95–102. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2010.07.001
Vaske, J. J. (2008). Survey research and analysis: Applications in parks, recreation and human
dimensions. State College, PA: Venture.
Vaske, J. J., Beaman, J., Barreto, H., & Shelby, L. B. (2010). An extension and further validation of
the potential for conflict index. Leisure Science, 32, 240–254. doi:10.1080/01490401003712648
Wilson, D. E., & Mittermeier, R. A. (Eds.). (2009). Handbook of the mammals of the world (Vol. 1:
Carnivores). Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions.
Woodroffe, R., Thirgood, S., & Rabinowitz, A. (Eds.). (2005). People and wildlife: Conflict or co-
existence? Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Young, J. C., Marzano, M., White, R. M., McCracken, D. I., Redpath, S. M., Carss, D. N., … Watt, A. D.
(2010). The emergence of biodiversity conflicts from biodiversity impacts: Characteristics and
management strategies. Biodiversity Conservation, 19, 3973–3990. doi:10.1007/s10531-010-9941-7
Young, J. C., Searle, K., Butler, A., Simmons, P., Watt, A. D., & Jordan, A. (2016). The role of trust
in the resolution of conservation conflicts. Biological Conservation, 195, 196–202. doi:10.1016/j.
biocon.2015.12.030