Conditional social acceptability of lethal control of large carnivores in Germany

Abstract

Large carnivore coexistence in Europe is at a critical juncture. The European Commission’s decision to downlist wolves (Canis lupus) could potentially increase the use of lethal control. Political and media debates often reflect polarized positions among organized interest groups, but public acceptability remains underexplored despite its importance for effective and legitimate wildlife management policies. We surveyed a stratified sample of the German public (n = 1505) to assess acceptability of lethally controlling wolves, lynx (Lynx lynx) and bears (Ursus arctos). Using experimental vignettes, we varied carnivore species, incident type (scare or attack), victim (human, pet or livestock) and management response (targeted versus non-targeted lethal control). Acceptability was higher for bears, attacks, human victims, and when the management response would target the individual animal responsible. Acceptability was greater among men and those who would prioritize human interests over those of wild animals, and lower among participants with more knowledge of carnivores and their management. Rural–urban differences were minimal, and there was no evidence of strongly polarized perspectives on lethal control of large carnivores. These findings suggest that public views are more nuanced than often portrayed and highlight the need for evidence-based, context-sensitive management decisions and policies to improve coexistence with large carnivores.