Otters vs. fishermen: Stakeholders’ perceptions of otter predation and damage compensation in the Czech Republic

Abstract

Habitat destruction and extensive hunting drove the population of Eurasian otter ( Lutra lutra L.) in Central Europe nearly to extinction. Due to conservation efforts, otters are now returning to their original habitats, including fishpond areas in the Czech Republic. As their populations grow, conflicts with fishermen arise due to significant losses of commercial fish stocks caused by otter predation. Since 2000, Czech fisheries may claim compensation for otter damages under legislative Act No. 115/2000. However, negative attitudes towards otters persist and their illegal killing remains common. In order to provide decision-support material for conflict reconciliation, we conducted a questionnaire survey among fishermen ( n = 125) and conservationists ( n = 36) to investigate stakeholders’ perceptions of otter predation and the damage compensation scheme in the Czech Republic. Results suggest that although otter damages on fish stocks were smaller than those caused by other piscivorous predators, fishermen perceived them as a significant hardship and demanded active control of otter populations. However, only one quarter of fish farmers actively protected their ponds from otter predation and not all conservationists were able to provide advice on preventive measures. Most respondents were aware of the current compensation scheme but its actual utilisation, especially by small private fish farmers, was low due to a perceived bureaucratic burden. All stakeholders considered current compensations to be insufficient and expressed a need for additional measures. We identified deficiencies in communication between both groups of stakeholders, and a lack of knowledge and use of available damage mitigation options. Our findings show prevailing gaps in the conservation plan for L. lutra and suggest areas into which the effort of conservation planning, public relations, and environmental awareness campaigns should be targeted. Understanding stakeholders’ attitudes towards mitigation strategies is crucial for their successful application and for future improvement of reconciliation policies focused on conflicts between human activities and protected species.