Large carnivore reintroductions to Britain and Ireland: farmers' perspectives and management options
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potential reintroductions of wolves, lynx and bears to Britain and Ireland after absences of centuries, or even millennia, is one of the most controversial agri-environmental topics of the century. An application for a trial reintroduction of lynx in England was declined in 2018, with an unrelated project under discussion in Scotland. Yet with successful reintroductions of some non-carnivore species across these islands, from beavers to eagles, the idea is likely to grow in popularity and ambition. But despite the many social, economic and environmental benefits extolled by supporters of reintroductions, the costs and challenges are also significant, with many likely to be borne by livestock farmers. Few studies have considered their perspectives to date. On the other hand, there are numerous examples from around the world of large carnivore conservation successfully coexisting with a range of rural activities and stakeholders, including livestock farming. In multiple contexts, a wide variety of tools and methods are utilised to manage this coexistence with large carnivores, grouped into five main themes: deterrence, finance, force, enterprise and governance. In turn, these approaches, of which governance stands out as the most significant and important, influence and are influenced by various strategic factors. These include political, economic, social, technological, legal and environmental issues. This study explored farmers’ perspectives on the context, management and governance of coexistence between potential large carnivore reintroductions and livestock farming in Britain and Ireland through 10 interviews with agricultural and rewilding representatives. It also explored examples of coexistence from over 40 interviews in and/or visits to Switzerland, France, Belgium the Netherlands and the USA, which are presented as case studies. Finally, it developed a Reintroduction Coexistence Framework to encapsulate and visualise the varied dimensions of this topic. In summary, large carnivore reintroductions are likely to be complex, contested and costly endeavours, whether with lynx, or, to an even greater extent, with wolves and bears. The primary challenge with all three species is likely to be the management and governance of coexistence with livestock farming, particularly of sheep. The qualitative findings from this report suggest that there is a degree of consensus, among both farming and rewilding representatives alike, about the scope and scale of these challenges, with both groups citing the varied political, economic, social, legal and environmental dimensions. However, agricultural interviewees were more likely to stress the potential negative consequences of reintroductions. Case studies from Switzerland, the Netherlands, Wyoming, Montana and Colorado illustrate the complexities in relation to deterrence, finance, force, enterprise and governance options respectively. Overall, the strategic context for potential large carnivore reintroductions to Britain and Ireland is currently extremely challenging.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".