Beyond standard wildlife management: a pathway to encompass human dimension findings in wild boar management

Abstract

Around the Regional Nature Reserve Nazzano-Tevere-Farfa in Central Italy, wild boar ecological and economic impacts have increased over the last decade, creating the need for an integrated wildlife management approach. Since 2006, park authorities have used an average of 17 % of the yearly protected area budget for compensation and 5 % for preventive measures. Additionally, 14 wild boar/km2 were culled in 2009. While the management tools used in the protected area were effective in reducing the species’ impacts, they did not decrease human-wild boar controversies. To understand the reasons behind such conflicts, user opinions toward the wildlife management approaches used (i.e., preventive measures, compensation, capture, and removal) and planned (i.e., culls) in Nazzano-Tevere-Farfa were explored. Face-to-face interviews were carried out with the general public (n = 288), hunters (n = 57), and farmers (n = 107) in 2009–2010. Differences in attitudes toward preventive measures (χ2(8) = 40.35, p < .001), compensation (χ2(8) = 34.11, p < .001), capture and removal (χ2(8) = 98.23, p < .001), and culls (χ2(8) = 77.10, p < .001) were highlighted by Chi-square analysis. The Potential for Conflict Index showed that, overall, park users supported preventive measures and compensation, but not capture and removal and culls. Workshops organized with hunters and farmers in 2010 highlighted that park authorities had not considered user expectations when planning wild boar management. If decision makers want to address conflicts, they need to go beyond standard management by tailoring their practices to the specific social context in which they work. Effective management is not only about reducing impacts, it is also about listening to people living with wildlife.