Acceptability of Lethal Control of Wildlife that Damage Agriculture in the Netherlands

Abstract

The use of lethal control of wildlife is controversial. We examined the acceptability of using lethal control to minimize the impacts of geese and deer on agricultural crops in the Netherlands. Two sets of predictors were examined: wildlife value orientations (WVOs) and demographics. The two wildlife value orientations—domination and mutualism—were based on prior theorizing and research in the United States. Demographic variables included age, gender, education, and current residence. We used data from a mailed survey (n = 353) sent to randomly selected individuals in the Netherlands. We examined six separate logistic regression models. As predicted, only the value orientations were statistically significant, accounting for 39% (geese) and 37% (deer) of the variance. Of the two WVOs, domination was a better predictor of acceptability ratings than mutualism. Results suggest that WVOs have predictive validity outside the United States.

Keywords:

• acceptability of lethal control
• human–wildlife conflict
• wildlife value orientations

Notes

^a Variables coded on 7-point scales ranging from −3 (strongly disagree) to +3 (strongly agree).

^b Item was reverse coded prior to analysis.

^c χ² = 364.67, df = 142, χ²/df = 2.57, CFI = 0.97, NFI = 0.95, RMR = 0.058.

^d All t values significant at p < .001.

Note. Analyses based on weighted data.

^a For these analyses, the wildlife value orientation was based on the K-means cluster analysis.

Note. Analyses based on weighted data.

^a The value orientations for these analyses were based on the continuous composite indices that ranged from −3 to +3.

Note. Analyses based on weighted data.

^a The value orientations for these analyses were based on the continuous composite indices that ranged from −3 to +3.