Using Q‐methodology to understand stakeholder perspectives on a carnivore translocation

Abstract

Abstract Reversing global declines in predator populations is a major conservation objective, though people frequently come into conflict over carnivore conservation. As part of a national recovery programme for the pine marten Martes martes, a protected mesocarnivore in the UK, we used Q‐methodology to understand the perspectives of residents living in an area in which a pine marten translocation project was planned. In contrast to binary ‘for or against’ characterizations of debates surrounding such projects, we identified four perspectives with distinct priorities and concerns. A single perspective, ‘Concerned Manager’, opposed the translocation and marten recovery more generally, was apprehensive about impacts and favoured traditional predator management practices. Support was characterized by three perspectives: ‘Environmental Protectionist’, ‘Natural Resource Steward’ and ‘Cautious Pragmatist’. Two explicitly supported the translocation but differed in their priorities: Environmental Protectionist framed marten restoration as an ethical imperative, whereas Natural Resource Steward emphasized ecological and economic benefits. Cautious Pragmatist supported marten recovery, but expressed ambivalence about the translocation. We identified areas of divergence between the four perspectives, particularly surrounding risks posed by martens and need for predator control. We identified two areas of consensus among the four perspectives: support for a biodiverse environment and translocations as a means of achieving this (though this was contingent on the species), and agreement there would be economic and ecological benefits if martens controlled non‐native grey squirrels Sciurus carolinensis. We highlight that perspectives on this project were influenced by wider issues of wildlife management and conservation, particularly the impact and management of increasing populations of another mesocarnivore, the badger Meles meles. Negative experiences and perceptions of badgers were germane to the Concerned Manager perspective, and their fear that protected status would preclude marten population control. ‘Rewilding’ emerged as a divisive background issue, against which some participants evaluated the translocation. In facilitating understanding of perspectives and establishing the contexts through which they were formed, we found that Q‐methodology enabled us, as a team comprising conservation practitioners and researchers, to engage meaningfully with affected residents. We recommend the tool as a useful step in assessing social feasibility of conservation translocations. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.