landowners´ attitude to the restrictions related to the bird protection 2005

Eesti Ornitoloogiaühing 1

LANDOWNERS´ ATTITUDE TO THE RESTRICTIONS RELATED TO THE BIRD

PROTECTION 2005

Hella Kaldaru

Composing of current document is supported by EU LIFE programme (EAGLELIFE project)

http://www.turu-uuringute.ee/


Research method

The current report bases on the survey that was carried out among the landowners whose properties are under restrictions due to the protection of endangered bird species living there.

•The research was conducted by telephone

•The sample size was 200 respondents

•The database for the sample was provided by the client

•The sample contains as the private owners, so the representatives of the forest districts and enterprises

•The persons, competent in the land problems of the company, forest district or family, were selected to respond the questions

•The fieldwork of the research took place in 2005, May, 17-20



Structure of sample. All respondents n=200

19

4

9

14

17

70

29

5

15

18

35

0 20 40 60 80 100

Other (forest district manager etc.)

CEO of company

Owner

Company

Forest district

Private owner

more than 100 ha

51-100 ha

21-50 ha

11-20 ha

1-10 ha

%

Approximate area of forest

Respondent´s type

Working position



According to the current survey restrictions concerning the protection of endangered bird species most often cover Lesser Spotted Eagle and Black Stork, and at forest districts most often Capercaillie (Great Grouse).

The attitude of the vast majority of respondents to the restrictions is either rather or very positive, and only 4% are in straight opposition. The attitude mainly depends on economic interests, yet even the basic part of respondents from among enterprises and forest districts understand the need for restrictions.

However, nearly a half of respondents from forest districts do not consider it to be well justified to create reservation areas round the nests – a part of them would prefer reservation zones to reservation areas, and a part finds that the present tactics of Capercaillie protection is unreasonable.

When 4% of respondents can see nothing good in restrictions, 30% can see nothing bad in them. Obstacles to economic activities are seen as the primary negative aspect, particularly for enterprises.

Almost all respondents agree that eagles and Black Storks play important role in nature, yet a half of respondents don’t think there would be need for more reservation areas.

The majority of respondents think that the main ways to protect eagles and Black Storks should include developing of compensation systems, and promoting of nature protection education and information. 1/5 of landowners think that birds can manage by themselves, and there is no need to do anything special for them.

Although a half of respondents think they have enough general information about eagles and Black Storks, they are still expecting more actual information about “their own” protected bird species from the nature conservation organisations. A lot of landowners are disturbed by the fact that although the protected birds have left their territory, restrictions have not been renegotiated till today.

The state might, firsthand, offer compensations, a propos larger ones, for unmanaged lands, also subsidiaries and substitution of lands, as well as easier and quicker office business.

Enterprises are particularly interested in economical arrangements, and forest districts in receiving more detailed information. The private forest owners need, more than others, instruction materials how to manage their forests sparingly and maintain feeding areas.

ABSTRACT



Results-1

• Landowners recruited to the sample mentioned totally 18 endangered bird species due to which restrictions were set on their lands. Some respondents, especially those from forest districts, mentioned the total of 4-5 and even more species.

•All respondents knew which species caused the establishing of restrictions, a couple of them did not wish to reveal it for some reason though.

•The species that were most often mentioned as the reasons for restrictions were Lesser Spotted Eagle and Black Stork, and above average also Sea-Eagle and Capercaillie.

•Those mentioning most bird species under protection were custodians of large forest areas, mostly respondents from forest districts. Goshawk, Fish Hawk and Golden Eagle were mentioned almost only by forest district respondents. Also the nesting of Capercaillie was known mainly by respondents of forest districts, somewhat less by enterprises, and practically not by private landowners. Restrictions of forest districts were most often related to Capercaillie and Black Stork, of private forest owners with Lesser Spotted Eagle.

• Majority of respondents (3/4) stated positive attitude towards setting restrictions to protect endangered bird species. The average evaluation was highest by private persons, and lowest by representatives of enterprises, although there were not big differences between the attitudes of these groups. The group of forest districts had largest differences in opinions with a large amount of very positive respondents (36%), and slightly above average negative ones (9%). Although the principal idea of any enterprise (incl. forestry or real estate companies) is to earn profit, the majority of respondents in the group of enterprises (82%) had positive attitude to restrictions. However, the dominating answer here was “rather positive”.

•As for the attitude of private persons, there was some difference depending on the size of their forest property: the owners of small properties were slightly more negative than the owners of larger properties – but the difference was not very big though.

• More than a half of respondents (57%) thought it was justified to create reservation areas round the nests of Eagle or Black Stork, and only 25% was against it. A small part (5%) found, however, that such restriction was not justified on his/her property (mostly because the endangered species had already left it).

•The share of the respondents standing against restrictions was bigger in the group of forest districts (48%), but below average in the group of private landowners (19%). In the group of enterprises there were less people in straight opposition compared to forest districts, but several respondents here did not have any opinion (25%).



Results-2

• Almost all respondents seeing good sides in reservation areas saw their main strength in the fact that they help to maintain endangered species (88% of respondents). 9% of respondents could not say any positive side of restrictions.

•In the group of forest districts respondents mentioned several times that reservation areas also mean that forests there are extra invigilated.

• The main unpleasant sides of restrictions were obstacles to landowners’ economic activities (47% of respondents). This fact is especially disturbing for enterprises where it was mentioned by 75% of respondents of this group. Also nearly a half of private forest owners (47%) brought it out as a negative side, at the same time 40% of private persons said that there were no unpleasant sides of restrictions for them.

• The group of forest districts most of all disapproved the restrictions related to Capercaillie (30% of the group), most often saying that Capercaillie is not willing to reside in deficient forests and, thus, moves to managed forests. Both in the group of enterprises ad forest districts there were respondents who thought the restrictions to be too inflexible. Both at this question, as well as at any other possible moment during the interviews they pointed out that on certain reservation areas there have not been any protected species for years, yet the restrictions still are in effect. The owners of smaller properties found several times that if they cannot use or move in their own forest, the land charge should be compensated or nullified.

•The landowners, more than population in large, agreed that Eagles and Black Storks play an important role in nature – 93% agreed with it. 68% of respondents also agreed that protection of the nests of these species is a large obstacle for landowners earning profit. 25% of respondents disagreed with it, private landowners above average. 30% of forest districts did not have any opinion in this question.

•A really small amount of respondents believed that Eagles and Black Storks may affect fish and game reserves, 16% did not have any opinion.

•Respondents were most puzzled about the question of the amount of such birds in Estonia - 1/3 of all respondents could not give any answer about it, particularly those from enterprises. People from forest districts were more self-confident here, but their opinions differed a lot – maybe each of them proceeded from the current situation of his/her location. Private persons mostly offered the guess that their amount could be very small indeed.

•Opinions about the importance of the birds by those having positive or negative attitude to restrictions differed mainly in the question of the possible cause of economic loss that apparently is the major base for different attitudes.



Results-3

• The means to protect Eagles and Black Storks most often brought out were developing a compensation system, distributing nature protection information and maintaining feeding areas – each of them was pointed out as a main one by more than a half of respondents. The idea raising most objections was to create more reservation areas (48% against, 31% for). It was much more acceptable for private landowners (36%) than for the representatives of enterprises and forest districts (18%).

•In the group of forest districts information and trainings were considered the most important (91%) aspects. Compared to the others there were much less interested in compensation systems (52%). Compensations were significantly important in the group of enterprises (96%), but rather often for private persons as well (81%).

•Strengthening the control over fulfilling the regulations was a major request of 1/3 of respondents, the same amount did not have any opinion. 2/3 of representatives of forest districts did not consider such step necessary though.

•1/5 of respondents thought that birds could manage by themselves and there was no need to do anything special for them. Least people sharing this opinion were in the group of enterprises. Nearly a half of respondents did not have any opinion on this.

•If respondents were asked to select the 2 most important of the listed means, then the ranking remained the same. More than a half of respondents considered the developing of a compensation system to be the most important, it was mentioned most often by enterprises, and most seldom by forest districts.

•The state was expected, firsthand, to offer compensations for unmanaged lands (73%) – and rather a large than a moderate ones. More than a half of respondents wished to receive subsidiaries for feeding areas.

•15% of respondents (incl. 27% of the forest districts) didn’t expect any help from the state. No enterprise shared such an opinion, though.

• Enlargement of compensations is something that representatives of forest districts are interested in. Especially enterprises but also private persons are interested above average in possibility to sell the land to the state, or get substitution of land. Forest districts, more than other groups, expect additional information and flexibility from the state when setting restrictions.

•Respondents implicate to difficulties when applying for substitution of land, state bureaucracy, and expect understanding and regard to landowners.

•Nature protection organisations are, firsthand, expected to deliver information about each regions local birds (65%) – this is requested by all respondent groups almost equally. Private persons and enterprises are interested in instruction materials, especially how to manage forests without any damage to the wild-life.



1. Endangered species that have caused restrictions to areas. All respondents n=200

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

3

4

4

6

9

17

17

17

28

32

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

no answer

Great Snipe

Ural Owl

Long-bill Curlew

Heron

White-head Woodpecker

Roller

Corn Crake

Harrier

Kingfisher

Common Buzzard

Golden Eagle

Osprey

Greater Spotted Eagle

Goshawk

Eagle

Capercaillie

Spotted Eagle

White-tailed Eagle

Black Stork

Lesser Spotted Eagle

%



1.a Endangered species that have caused restrictions to areas. By the type of respondents, n=respondents in the group

0 20 40 60 80 100

no answer

Great Snipe

Ural Owl

Long-bill Curlew

Heron


Roller

Corn Crake

Harrier

Kingfisher

Common Buzzard

Golden Eagle

Osprey


Goshawk

Eagle

Capercaillie

Spotted Eagle

White-tailed Eagle

Black Stork


%

Enterprise (n=28)

Forest district (n=33)

Private owner (n=139)



1.b Endangered species that have caused restrictions to areas. By the attitude to the restrictions

0 20 40 60 80 100

no answer

Great Snipe

Ural Owl

Long-bill Curlew

Heron


Roller

Corn Crake

Harrier

Kingfisher

Common Buzzard

Golden Eagle

Osprey


Goshawk

Eagle

Capercaillie

Spotted Eagle

White-tailed Eagle

Black Stork


%

Positive attitude(n=148)

Negative attitude(n=39)



2. Respondents´ attitude to the restrictions

38

49

32

64

39

34

39

33

30

41

18

36

38

35

-16

-12

-18

-14

-12

-17

-16

-6

-5

-1

-4

-9

-3

-4

7

4

8

3

9

7 3,12

3,17

3,07

3,22

2,96

3,06

3,06

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

1-10 ha

Above 100 ha

11-100 ha

Enterprise

Forest district

Private owner

All respondents

%

Rather positive Completely positive (4) Rather negative

Completely negative (1) Cannot say Average on scale 1-4



3. The good aspects of the restrictions (summarised

answers to open question). n=all respondents

5

4

3

2

4

88

0 20 40 60 80 100

no answer

no good aspects

other

the compensations are paid to owners

it increases the value of my forest

the forest is better looked after

the restrictions help to save the endangeredspecies

%



4. The unpleasant aspects of the restrictions (summarised answers to open question). n=all respondents

1

30

7

2

2

2

3

3

3

4

4

5

5

5

12

13

47

0 20 40 60 80 100

No answer

No unpleasant aspects

Other

I do not like these species living on my forst

Restrictions could depend on season

Too much restrictions

It attracts too much attention to the forest

The owner is restricted, the strangers not

The sale, rent and privatisation of the land areprevented

The zone could be smaller

Compensation is unsufficient

Unsufficient information

To cancel or compensate the land tax

The restriction is in force though there are nobirds

The restrictions are too rigid

The restriction for the capercaillie is bad

It restrains the owner´ s right of judgement

It restrains the owner´ s right of motion in theforest

It restrains the owner´ s business

%



4.a The unpleasant aspects of the restrictions (summarised answers to open question). n=respondents in the group

0 20 40 60 80 100


Other






The sale, rent and privatisation of the land isprevented





The restriction is in force though there are no birds Restriction is too rigid





%

Enterprise (n=28)

Forest district(n=33)

Private owner(n=139)



4.b The unpleasant aspects of the restrictions (summarised answers to open question). By the attitude to the

restrictions, n=respondents in the group

0 20 40 60 80 100


Other






The sale, rent and privatisation of the land areprevented





The restriction is in force though there are no birds The restrictions are too rigid





%





5. Respondents´ opinion of the role of Black Stork and eagles. All respondents n=200

-10

-14

-11

-17

-4

-70

-13

-8

-7

-1

3

26

27

24

28

1

29

21

44

65

16

19

34

8

3

3,14

2,86

2,90

3,62

1,23

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Eagles and Black Storks damage our fishand game reserves

As the powerful inhabitants of deep foreststhey symbolize the wild-life protection

The number of eagles and Black Storks issmall in Estonia

Protection of the eagles´ and Black Storks`nests causes the landowners significant

economic loss

Eagles and Black Stork play an importantrole in the nature

%

Fairy disagree Fully disagree (1) Fairy agree Fully agree (4) Cannot say Average 1-4



5.a Respondents´ opinion of the role of Black Stork and eagles. By the type of respondents, n=respondents in the group

1 2 3 4

Eagles and Black Storks damage our fish andgame reserves

As the powerful inhabitants of deep forests theysymbolize the wild-life protection

The number of eagles and Black Storks is small inEstonia

Protection of the eagles´ and Black Storks` nestscauses the landowners significant economic loss

Eagles and Black Stork play an important role inthe nature

Average on scale 1-4 (1=fully disagree...4=fully agree)

Enterprise (n=28) Forest district (n=33) Private owner (n=139)



5.b Respondents´ opinion of the role of Black Stork and eagles. by attitude to the restrictions, n=respondents in the group

1 2 3 4

Eagles and Black Stork play an important role inthe nature

As the powerful inhabitants of deep forests theysymbolize the wild-life protection

The number of eagles and Black Storks is small inEstonia

Eagles and Black Storks damage our fish andgame reserves

Protection of the eagles´ and Black Storks` nestscauses the landowners significant economic loss

Average on scale 1-4 (1=fully disagree...4=fully agree)

Positive attitude (n=148) Negative attitude (n=39)



6. What has to be done to protect the eagles and Black Stork. n=200

-35

-48

-30

-23

-13

-7

21

31

36

53

70

78

45

22

35

25

17

16

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Nothing special-the birds can managethemselves

Create more areas to protect the nests

Strenghten the control over fulfilling theregulations

Maintain feeding areas

Distribute nature protection information,training

Work out the compensation system

%

No Yes Cannot say



6.a What has to be done to protect the eagles and Black Stork. By the respondents´groups

0 20 40 60 80 100

Nothing special-the birds can manage themselves




Distribute nature protection information, training


%




6.b What has to be done to protect the eagles and Black Stork. by attitude to the restrictions

0 20 40 60 80 100

Nothing special-the birds can manage themselves




Distribute nature protection information, training


%




7. Is it necessary to create protected areas round the nests?

46

45

62

57

7

3

4

5

-21

-48

-19

-25

25

3

14

14

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Enterprise

Forest district

Private owner

All respondents

%

Yes and I consider it is justified on my land as well Yes but it is not justified on my land No Cannot say



7.a Is it necessary to create protected areas round the nests? By attitude to the restrictions

38

64

8

4

31

23

23

9

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100



%

Yes and I consider it is justified on my kand as well Yes but it is not justified on my land No Cannot say



8. Are You sufficiently informed about the eagles and Black Stork?

36

70

40

45

46

27

55

50

7

4

4

11

3

2

0 20 40 60 80 100

Enterprise

Forest district

Private owner

All respondents

%

YesNo, though I am interested in such an informationI am not interested in such an information No answer



9. Which kind of help is expected from the state. n=200

-50

-35

-33

-15

-14

38

15

41

47

51

72

63

36

25

21

35

14

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100

Other

Nothing special

Possibility to sell the land to the state

Substitution of the (forest) land

Subsidiaries for the maintained feeding areas

Moderate compensation for the unmanaged land

%

No Yes Cannot say



10. The most expected help from the state. n=200

8

2

2

3

3

4

6

8

38

15

41

47

51

73

0 20 40 60 80 100

Other

Proceed from the market prices

Exempt from the land tax

Understanding and regard for the owners,negotiations

Facilitate the applying for compensation etc.

More flexibility when setting regulations

Solve the problems with the substitution of theland

Improve the distribution of the information

Enlarge the compensation

Nothing special


Substitution of (forest) land



%

Prompted answers

The answers, added by the respondents (summarised)



10.a The most expected help from the state. n=respondents in the groups

0 20 40 60 80 100

Other

Proceed from the market prices

Exempt from the land tax

Understanding and regard for the owners,negotiations

Facilitate the applying for compensation etc.

More flexibility when setting regulations

Solve the problems with the substitution of theland

Improve the distribution of the information

Enlarge the compensation

Nothing special


Substitution of (forest) land



%


Other (summary of the verbatim):



11. The expected help from the nature protection organisations. All respondents n=200

3

2

2

10

15

25

39

39

65

0 20 40 60 80 100

Other

Cooperation with the owners

Replacement of the protected areas withprotected zones

More information

Other

Nothing special

Need of instructions how to manage the forestprotecting the nature

Need of instructions how to manage the feedingareas

Every- year information of the eagle or blackstork living near- by

%

Other (summary of verbatim):



11.a The expected help from the nature protection organisations. n=respondents in the groups

0 20 40 60 80 100

Cooperation with the owners

Replacement of the protected areas withprotected zones

More information

Nothing special

Need of instructions how to manage the forestprotecting the nature

Need of instructions how to manage the feedingareas

Every-year information of the eagle or blackstork living near-by

%


Other (summary of verbatim):



12. The structure of the expectations and considerations, added by the respondents. All respondents n=200

3

1

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

7

12

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Other

Restrictions according to season

Too strict restrictions

Cooperation

Replace the protected areas with protected zones

No reason to restrict

Glad for the protected area

Difficulties while communicating with the state

More and reasonable protection

Out-dated restriction

More information

%



12.a The structure of the expectations and considerations, added by the respondents. by attitude to the restrictions.

0 20 40 60 80 100

Other

Restrictions according to season

Too strict restrictions

Cooperation

Replace the protected areas with protected zones

No reason to restrict

Glad for the protected area

Difficulties while communicating with the state

More and reasonable protection

Out-dated restriction

More information

%



landowners´ attitude to the restrictions related to the bird protection 2005

Documents