Collaborative Deer Management

1
Collaborative Deer Management
Research on Rural Resource Management and the
Rural Economy Addressing the Local Dimension
16th May 2007

• A RELU Sponsored Research Project

Justin Irvine
A joint Research Councils programme co-sponsored
by Defra and SEERAD
2
Structure

• Natural Resource Management
• Deer as a case study
• Collaborative Deer Management Project1.
  Venison2. Linking stakeholder academic
  knowledge3. Perceptions of the grazed landscape
• Outcomes

3
Natural Resource Management (NRM)

• Viewing NRM as a technical (ecological) or as an
  economic problem is too simplistic.
• Increasing recognition of the importance of
  individuals and local institutions (actors)
• Therefore we need to understand factors that
  affect local institutions - Crucial in
  developing NRM improvements
• Need to work at interface of biology and
  sociological forces
• Need to develop strategies for stakeholder
  involvement

4
Natural Resource Management (NRM)

• The need to manage and how to manage results
  because wildlife have impacts on the values of
  stakeholders.
• What are impacts?
• Beneficial or detrimental effects resulting from
  events or interactions involving humans and
  wildlife
• Impacts are effects that warrant management
  attention and are defined and weighted by human
  values
• Emerging problemscarcity to overabundance in a
  wildlife population -- leads to conflict with
  people

Riley et al., 2002 adapted from Holling 1978
5
Deer as a case study Resource or pest?
6
Distribution of Deer in the British Isles
Roe Deer Muntjac Deer
Fallow Deer

1960 2000
7
Call for bigger cull to check rise in wild deer
numbers Telegraph, 11/2002
Soaring deer population puts wildlife under
threat Telegraph, 02/2002
This rising number has to be addressed as it has
implications for everyone who works, lives and
enjoys the wildlife in rural Scotland. RSPB
Scotland (2003)
8
Deer Management as a Model System

• Controversy over the management of deer due to
  increases in deer numbers range expansion.
• This has led to changes in the direct indirect
  costs benefits to a wide range of stakeholders
  across society.
• increases in road traffic accidents,
• economic losses to forestry, agriculture
  horticulture,
• damage to biodiversity interests,
• potential risks to public health
• un-realised potential for income generation from
  stalking, venison production tourism.

9
Neighbouring businesses- different objectives
20 deer per km2 Hindsstags 1.31
5 deer per km2 Hindsstags 0.61
10
Deer Common pool resource

• Deer are res nullus
• Nobody owns them but owners have rights (but not
  necessarily responsibility) to hunt
  (control/cull).
• Landscape scale resource (not bounded by property
  ownership)
• Central to sustainable deer management is the
  degree of cooperation/collaboration among local
  organisations (such as deer management groups)
• We aim to investigate the relative importance of
  the main factors affecting local organisations-
• Ecology environment
• Characteristics of stakeholders (actors)
• Institutional arrangements

11
Collaborative Deer Management

• We aim to investigate how collaboration among
  stakeholders scientists and policy makers can
  facilitate sustainable deer management (national
  local level)
• Questions
• How does the collaborative process work ?
• What are the problems and barriers to success ?
• What existing factors encourage successful
  collaboration ?
• What new methods and information can be used to
  encourage successful collaboration?
• How can collaboration help to capture more value
  from the resource (deer) and achieve a
  sustainable deer population ?

12
Examples of ongoing work

• Does venison price influence management?(Sociolog
  ical impacts on economics)
• Can local knowledge be integrated with scientific
  knowledge?(Stakeholder engagement in research)
• Does information about deer impacts on
  biodiversity influences peoples evaluation of
  the landscape?(Sociological interaction with
  ecology )

13
1. Does venison price influence management?

• To establish whether collaboration within this
  chain (between processors and producers) can
  capture additional value from the resource.
• Is price a key driver?

A question of economics?
Using qualitative methods (game dealers and
estate stalkers)
Establish key motivations and barriers
14
Venison is a by-product of herd management
15
Stalking vs. venison revenues (Estate x)
stalking
Estate revenue ()
venison
200
Deer culled
100
2000
16
Venison price per kilo (1984-2006)
17
1. Does venison price influence
managementInterim findings

• Venison secondary to sport
• Tradition permeates the industry
• Little influence over price
• Practical collaboration possible, but of limited
  significance to wider deer issues?

18
2. Can local knowledge be integrated with
scientific knowledge
Participatory-GIS, what is it?
- Using maps to capture management information
and practitioner knowledge

• Can p-GIS facilitate improved understanding and
  consensus about deer?
• Will this influence collaboration?

Chrisman 1997
19
Participatory GIS (p-GIS)
Capture local knowledge
Collate scientific knowledge
Integrate to generate management scenarios
DeerMAP prediction of deer distribution
Collaboration tool

• Negotiation of possible compromises(Focus on
  communication, mediation, and negotiation rather
  than best solution )

20
p-GIS Implementation

• Theme 1 Spatial awareness
• What are the advantages or disadvantages for
  using maps to support management decisions?
• Theme 2 Deer management
• What are your preferences, objectives and
  strategies for managing deer on this estate?
• Theme 3 Deer use of the landscape
• Collect information regarding the deer population
  and its use of the estate as well as the wider
  region.

21
Theme 2 - Deer management habitat use
22
p-GIS Implementation

• Theme 1 Spatial awareness
• What are the advantages or disadvantages for
  using maps to support management decisions?
• Theme 2 Deer management
• What are your preferences, objectives and
  strategies for managing deer on this estate?
• Theme 3 Deer use of the landscape
• Collect information regarding the deer population
  and its use of the estate as well as the wider
  region.
• Theme 4 Evaluate DeerMAP
• Stakeholder evaluation of ecological predictions
  of deer distribution

23
Theme 4 Evaluate DeerMAP
24
2. p-GIS Emerging Themes-

• Estates have high autonomy for setting management
  objectives
• Stalkers have a well established knowledge of
  deer movement on their own estate and of movement
  to and from neighbouring estates
• Shelter and wind are very important factors in
  deer movement and habitat use
• Habitat is important, but other ecological
  variables (e.g. soil quality, characteristics of
  trees cover) need to be taking into account in
  ecological models

25
3. Does information about deer impacts on
biodiversity influences peoples evaluation of
the landscape

• Aim- To investigate public perceptions of
  biodiversity landscape value
• Qu. Does new information about deer impacts on
  (for example) woodland biodiversity influences
  peoples evaluation of the landscape (woodland
  understorey)?

26
Biodiversity and landscape
Blackcap
Robin
Species abundance
Breeding birds
Wood warbler
low
high
Understorey openness
27
Public perceptions of biodiversity landscape
value

• Design and conduct attitude study

To further our understanding of - Deer impacts
on biodiversity - Resilience of attitudes towards
landscape features To make progress with -
Integrating natural and social biodiversity
research - Providing a wider acceptance base for
deer management
28
Project Outcomes-

• Develop new methods for academics to engage with
  practitioners and policy makers to facilitate
  knowledge exchange and integration
• Test whether these approaches have the potential
  to increase value of deer that is captured by the
  stakeholders (Can collaboration be increased so
  that the objectives of all stakeholders are more
  satisfactorily met?)
• What kind of support is helpful in strengthening
  local organisations rather than undermining them.

29
Project skill base

• RELU Collaborative Deer Management Project
  involves researchers from
• The Macaulay Institute, Forest Research,
  University of St Andrews, University of York,
  University of Edinburgh, University of Kent
  (DICE).
• Disciplines involved
• Plant and animal Ecology, Economics, Social
  Anthropology, Sociology, Political science,
  Tourism and Sustainable Rural Development

http//www.macaulay.ac.uk/relu/ j.irvine_at_macaul
ay.ac.uk