Eesti Elanikkonna Valmidus Kaitsta Ohustatud Linnuliike

Eesti Elanikkonna Valmidus Kaitsta Ohustatud Linnuliike

ATTITUDE OF ESTONIAN POPULATION TO THE RESTRICTIONS RELATED TO THE BIRD PROTECTION 2008 Hella Kaldaru Composing of current document is supported by EU LIFE programme (EAGLELIFE project) Kotkaklubi 1 RESEARCH METHOD This report bases on the survey about the endangered bird species that was carried out among the population by Omnibus 11/2008 15-74 yrs. aged Estonian population was the sample of the survey The sample size was 1000 respondents The results of the survey represent the opinions and behaviour of the whole population of this age The multistage random sample was the basis of the selection of the respondents The determined start address in a sample point and the rule of the youngest man at home were used for the respondents` selection The interviews were conducted in the households, one per a household The data have been weighted according to the official statistics of age and gender The allowed statistical error on the 95% reliability level is 3,1% The fieldwork of the research took place in 2008, November 6-19 The same questionnaire was used in 2004 Kotkaklubi 2 SUMMARY In general, the results of the surveys conducted in 2008 and 2004 differ little, although there is some notable progress in peoples awareness of endangered birds. The most positive changes have taken place in the understanding of those residents who have had contact with endangered birds and to whom the main focus of the current informing work has been directed. As compared to the earlier results, the role of eagles in Estonian nature and their endangered situation are now somewhat more recognized. They are seen as a threat to our fish and game resources less often than before. Among the respondents in whose home surroundings there are birds nesting, the attitude towards creating a protected area for eagles or black storks on their lands has become somewhat more concrete there are slightly more of those who would consent to that than before, but also those who are opposed. There are, nevertheless, very few direct opponents (8%). The main reasons why people do not want a protected area on their lands are the restrictions in economic activities. People, in whose home surroundings the named birds nest, expressed a keener interest in their lifestyles and wellbeing than before and would be more actively ready to do something for the benefit of the birds. The most important sources of information regarding the birds are still radio and television, but the role of the Internet has also become noticeably more important. Personal contacts, school, and thematic events have become more relevant than before. Nevertheless, 80% of the respondents admitted that they are insufficiently informed, of whom over half do not even want to learn anything more on that issue. Being uninformed and lacking the desire to receive information is considerably higher among non-Estonians, particularly among the non-Estonian speaking population of small towns in North Estonia, than among Estonians, although 40% of non-Estonians also have knowledge of and interest towards the given topic. Informing work continued to be held as the most important step that should be taken in the protection of the birds. Regarding conditions for which people would be ready to donate money, the protection and maintenance of nesting

areas and creating protected areas were emphasised. People would also be ready to give personal money for informing work and the conducting of necessary research. The respondents who had closer contacts with the birds also attached more importance to direct communication with the involved land owners and resolving issues related to compensations. In terms of knowledge regarding the birds, the younger and particularly the youngest generation was weaker than the older generation. By regions, the awareness and activity was lower in Tallinn and East-Viru County. Kotkaklubi 3 RESULTS IN CLOSER DETAIL Similarly to 2004, 40% of the respondents owned lands in 2008 as well. Out of the 9 bird species read out to the respondents, people continually thought that they would most easily recognise the white (89%) and black stork (72%). The storks were followed by the grey heron (40%). Things were more complicated with the eagles: the greatest proportion (30%) of the respondents thought that they would recognise the white-tailed eagle, with the least (5%) believing they would recognise the short-toed snake-eagle. 7% of the respondents were of the opinion that they would not recognise any of the named birds. Every tenth respondent out of the younger group (15-39 years) of respondents would not recognise any of the birds; the situation slightly improves with the older people. As compared to the survey conducted in 2004, the self-confidence of the respondents has somewhat decreased, but the ranking according to the recognisability has remained almost the same the storks still hold the first positions. By regions, the recognisability of birds varied more in terms of certain species: black stork, grey heron, short-eared owl. The black stork is most frequently recognised in North Estonia and most rarely in East-Viru County. In the case of the grey heron, the tendency is exactly the opposite. In East-Viru County, the short-eared owls have been marked significantly more often than usual, just as they were in 2004. The number of those who did not recognise any of the species is above average in Tallinn and East-Viru County. The respondents were asked to name the 3 most threatened bird species on the list in question. The ranking that had been drawn out already in 2004, was also repeated in this question: the respondents considered the following species, by far, to be the most threatened species: the black stork (51%) the white-tailed eagle (29%) the golden eagle (28%) 35% of the respondents could not point out any species this number has grown (17% in 2004). Kotkaklubi 4 RESULTS IN CLOSER DETAIL Respondents who have seen eagles near their homes considered the golden eagle endangered much more frequently than the white-tailed eagle. As compared to other respondents, they noticeably more often classified the osprey and the spotted eagle among the most threatened species. Similar tendencies could also be noticed in the survey conducted in 2004. By regions, the most daring bird-determiners were the respondents in South and Middle Estonia, while those of Tallinn and East-Viru County were the most modest ones, similarly to 2004. The proportion of those respondents who have had personal contacts with a black stork or eagle is small and almost the same as it was in 2004. 80% of the respondents have not seen eagles in their immediate vicinity, 72% have not seen a black stork. Only a very low percentage of the population is aware of a nesting spot. 38% of the land owners nevertheless have some contact with the black stork. 27% of the land owners know that there are eagles nesting in their immediate vicinity. In both cases, 1% of the land owners are aware that there are nests on their lands. The respondents who have seen the named birds in their surroundings were asked how they would feel towards creating a protected area for these species on their lands. 36% of such respondents would unconditionally consent to the protected area, 26% on certain conditions. 8% were clearly opposed to it and 30% could not form an opinion on that matter. The main conditions were that the protected area would not hinder the owners economic activities. The responses differed from the results of 2004 by only a few per cent.

Kotkaklubi 5 RESULTS IN CLOSER DETAIL Opinions on the situation and role of eagles in Estonian nature differed very little from those of 2004. Almost all residents were continually of the opinion that the eagles play an important role in nature and that they are the symbols of nature conservation. As compared to the data of the survey conducted in 2004, the average assessment has nevertheless slightly improved. The people are also slightly more conscious that the number of eagles is low and dropping. The proportion of those who think that the protection of the nesting spots of eagles damages the interests of land owners has slightly decreased; earlier, too, this was suspected only by a small part of the residents. The attitude of land owners towards the issue was more positive than the average attitude, even regarding the question of the damage caused by the eagles. The two most important measures that should be put into practice, first and foremost, for the protection of the eagle and the black stork, continue to be the more efficient informing of people and creating protected areas. Both measures were mentioned by over half of the respondents. When compared to 2004, the aspect of informing has received a slight priority. The opinions on the sufficiency of information related to eagles divided almost exactly the same as it did in 2004: 44% of the residents do not know anything and are not interested in any information, 20% are sufficiently informed, and 36% are not sufficiently informed, but they would like to be. Just as before, the main sources of information related to the topic are the television and radio (49%), which is followed by the press (26%) and books (22%). Nevertheless, the role of television and radio has slightly diminished, while the role of the Internet, in particular, has grown (from 10% to 20%), and, to some extent, the role of personal contacts, school and training, and nature-themed events as well. 26% of the respondents have not received information from anywhere. Among Estonians there were 20%, and among non-Estonians there were 39% of such people. The Internet has climbed to second place, following school, among the youngest respondents. In the case of respondents who are aware of eagles nesting in their immediate vicinity, books (42%) as well as personal contacts (37%) are significantly more important than for other respondents. Kotkaklubi 6 RESULTS IN CLOSER DETAIL According to the opinion of the residents, the impact of joining the European Union was mainly positive for the protection of Estonian nature both in 2008 and 2004 particularly due to the increased attention on nature conservation. The willingness of the residents to donate a portion of their annual income for the protection of eagles or black storks has become slightly more severe when compared to 2004. Although those who would not want to pay at all form nearly one third of the respondents (31%), and 13% can not or do not want to give any promises, over half of the population is willing to pay, but mainly when there is the right appeal. In general, the proportions nevertheless coincide with the attitudes of 2004. The willingness to donate without any conditions is considerably higher among the respondents who have had contacts with endangered birds than among other respondents. On the basis of free responses regarding the specific activities, in the case of which people would be willing to donate, the first position was held by everything related to building and maintenance of nests (59 times), which was followed by creating or maintenance of protected areas (34 times), and feeding the birds (20 times). Informing, cleaning up pollution, conducting research and other similar activities were also mentioned. Some people indicated the need to keep the flow of money transparent. It is difficult to bring out fixed sums regarding the amount of donations, but the proportions are not very different from the results of 2004. Most frequently, the donated amount remained between EEK 50-100 (21%), just as it did in 2004. Nearly half of the respondents did not give any response or would not pay anything. The people in whose close surroundings there are endangered birds nesting were more generous in their donations. Kotkaklubi 7 1. Structure of the sample.

male female * 15- 19 y. 20- 29 y. 30- 39 y. 40- 49 y. 50- 59 y. 60+ y. * up to basic (9 c l.) gymnasium, professional university degree * Estonian non- Estonian * up to 3000 kr. 3001- 4000 kr. 4001- 6000 kr. 6001- 8000 kr. 8001- 10 000 kr. above10 000 kr. refusal c annot say * T allinn Northern Estonia East ern Virumaa Western Estonia Cent ral Estonia Southern Estonia * Capital City Small town Rural area * land owner do not own land n=all respondents 47 10 53 19 17 18 17 19 25 55

20 69 31 10 8 7 13 24 12 10 8 16 30 14 13 12 23 20 30 32 18 40 0 10 20 30 40 60 50 % 60 70 80

Kotkaklubi 90 100 8 2. Percentage of the respondents considering to recognize the bird species. n=all respondents 89 White Stork 98 72 74 Black Stork 40 Heron 30 White-tailed Eagle 35 29 Golden Eagle 16 Osprey 50 41 2008 22 16 18 Short-eared Owl 8 Spotted Eagle 5 Short-toed Eagle Do not know any/ cannot say

1 0 2004 10 7 7 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 % Kotkaklubi 9 100 3. The most endangered three bird species n=all respondents 51 Black Stork 29 White-tailed Eagle 43 28 Golden Eagle 11 Heron 17

9 Osprey 9 Spotted Eagle 7 Short-eared Owl 2008 2004 10 Short-toes Eagle 17 15 13 11 Cannot say 35 17 0 39 20 11 White Stork 62 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

80 90 100 % Kotkaklubi 10 4. Personal contacts with black storks and eagles. n=all respondents BLACK STORK 3 4 There is a nest nearby but not on Your land Do not know the location of the nest but have seen the birds often 2 2 Do not know the location of the nest but have seen the birds some times during the last years 22 19 72 74 Have not seen/ do not know EAGLES 0 0 There is a nest on Your land There is a nest nearby but not on Your land 2 2 Do not know the location of the nest but have seen the birds often 2 1

2008 n=1004 2004 n=980 Do not know the location of the nest but have seen the birds some times during the last years 15 22 Have not seen/ do not know 75 0 10 20 30 40 Kotkaklubi 50 60 70 80 80 11 90 100 % 5. Land ownersattitude to the creation of new protected areas on their lands n=have a nest nearby or see eagles and black storks often 2008.y. n=73 2004.y. n=89 33% 35% 30% 36% totally agree

agree on some conditions do not agree cannot say 8% 2% 30% 26% Kotkaklubi 12 6. Have had contacts with the birds during the last years. n=respondents in a region 27 26 Western Estonia 23 Southern Estonia 34 Eagle 19 Central Estonia Black Stork 26 19 Tallinn 27 16 Eastern Virumaa 22 13 Northern Estonia 31 0 20

40 % 60 80 Kotkaklubi 100 13 7. Opinions of the situation of eagles n=all respondents y.2008 Rather disagree (2) Fully dis agre e (1) Rather agree (3) Fully agree (4) Eagles play an important role in nature As the powerful inhabitants of deep forests they symbolize the wild- life protec tion T he number of eagles is too small in Estonia T he number of eagles is dec reasing in Estonia Protec tion of the eagles nests damages the landowners interests Eagles damage our fis h and game reserves - 100 % -20 -26 - 80 - 60 34 54 11 3,59 -2 0 36 48

14 31 -1 -5 29 - 20 35 94 0 3,53 3,43 30 25 11 8 -31 - 40 Average on scale 1-4 -1 0 -1 -3 -25 Cannot s ay 3,29 40 2,10 37 1,88 30 20 40

60 80 100 Comparison of the scale averages y. 2004 y. 2008 Eagles play an important role in nature As the powerful inhabitants of deep forests they symboliz e the wildlife protection The number of eagles is too small in Estonia The number of eagles is decreasing in Estonia Protection of the eagles nests damages the landowners interests Eagles damage our fis h and game reserves 1 2 3 Average on scale 1-4 (4=fully agree...1=fully dis agree) Kotkaklubi 14 4 8. Opinions of the situation of eagles in breakdown of nationalities Estonians Non- Estonians Eagles play an important role in nature As the powerful inhabitants of deep forests they symboliz e the w ild- life protection The number of eagles is to o small in Estonia The number of eagles is decreasing in Estonia Protection of the eagles nests damages the landowners interests

Eagles damage our fis h and game reserves 1 2 3 4 Average on scale 1-4 (1=fully dis agree...4=fylly agree) Kotkaklubi 15 9. The most important measures to protect the endangered birds. n=all respondents 55 Distribute nature protection information, training 62 53 Create more areas to protect the nests 63 35 Maintain feeding areas 41 Have personal contacts with the landowners having restrictions 31 36 2008 24 Strenghten the control over fulfilling the regulations 34 2004

13 Work out the compensation system for the landowners 20 7 Nothing special-the birds can manage themselves 7 13 Cannot say 6 0 10 20 30 40 % 50 60 Kotkaklubi 70 80 90 16 100 10. Sufficiency of the information about eagles n=all respondents y.2008 y.2004 Y es Yes

No and I am interested in the inf ormation 21% No and I am interested in the information No but I am not interested in the inf ormation No but I am not interested in the information 44% 20% 44% 35% 36% Kotkaklubi 17 11. Sources of information about eagles n=all respondents 49 TV, radio 26 Newspapers, m agazines 58 35 22 21 Books I nternet 20 10 School, training

9 Personal contacts 2008.a. 2004.a. 7 2 Nature events 13 5 7 1 1 Booklets Have not got any information 23 0 10 20 26 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % Kotkaklubi

18 12. Impact of joining the European Union on the protection of Estonian nature n=all respondents Positive because more attention is paid to the nature protection now and it is good for everybody 51 56 Positive because the big sums of European money are used for the environmental protection 35 44 19 Positive because the subsidies are paid to the landowners 24 9 Negative because a lot is depending on the offi cials` will now y.2008 16 y.2004 Negative because the landowners` rights are restricted 5 Negative because almost the whole Estonia is getting a protected area 4 7 8 26 cannot say 19 0

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % Kotkaklubi 19 13. Readyness to donate for the protection of eagles or black storks All respondents n=980 y.2004 y.2008 Yes 12% 21% May be, it depends on the real call No 13% 14% Yes Cannot say 29% May be, it depends on the real call No 38% Cannot say

31% 42% Kotkaklubi 20 14. How much money are the people going to donate for the protection of eagles or black stork? n=all respondents 9 1-50 kr. 16 21 51-100 kr. 21 17 101-500 kr. 12 y.2008 3 501-1000 kr. y.2004 4 3 1001-6000 kr. 4 46 0 kroons/ no answer 43 0 10 20 30

40 50 60 70 80 90 100 % Kotkaklubi 21 Project team Questionnaire and report: Hella Kaldaru Field work managers: Marina Karpitenko, Rutt Vihtla, Kristel Toom Data processing: Kaire Siimon Graphs: Hella Kaldaru Contacts: Phone: Fax: E-post: Homepage: Address: 6 684 859 6 277 584 [email protected] www.turu-uuringute.ee Tatari 6, 10 116 Tallinn Kotkaklubi 22

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Titrations - TECC Science

    Titrations - TECC Science

    Identify concordant results. Aiming for 6: Calculate a titre. Describe how an indicator can be used to determine the end point. Explain how accuracy can be improved in a titration. Aiming for 8: Justify the use of a pipette and...
  • Présentation PowerPoint - riss2015.ch

    Présentation PowerPoint - riss2015.ch

    The leader coordinate the exercise Before the end of eighties : With the Italian Knot we have releasable pulley We use several knots for anchorage We test new prototype of pulley and agree the system hauling with counterweight We use...
  • PHACE syndrome in infantile hemangiomas

    PHACE syndrome in infantile hemangiomas

    It is an acronym that stands for the medical names of the parts of the body it often impacts: P = Posterior fossa (This refers to possible abnormal structures in the brain, especially the cerebellum.) H = Hemangioma. A =...
  • Getting Ready for High School (and beyond) Dave

    Getting Ready for High School (and beyond) Dave

    Getting Ready for High School (and beyond…) Dave Royhab, BWHS Guidance Director Today's Agenda What to Expect in High School Getting Ready for High School or a "Lesson in Balance" Beyond High School…
  • Remco Solid State Lighting Inc. - GLOBAL OCEAN

    Remco Solid State Lighting Inc. - GLOBAL OCEAN

    Calculation: Each (one) Remco LED Street Light would save 300 KWH per year. (See attached). If Calgary replaces 110,000 street lights x 300 KWH per year savings = 33 Million KWH saved each year or 462 Million KWH over the...
  • Accessing Insurance Coverage for Substance Use & Mental ...

    Accessing Insurance Coverage for Substance Use & Mental ...

    So, even though the standard results in an overall difference in the application of concurrent review for MH/SUD and for medical/surgical conditions, it does not violate parity law, because standard is not applied more stringently to MH/SUD than to medical/surgical...
  • Introduction to Computer Graphics Ed Angel Professor of

    Introduction to Computer Graphics Ed Angel Professor of

    Introduction to Computer Graphics Ed Angel Professor of Computer Science, Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Media Arts Director, Arts Technology Center
  • Promotional Concepts and Strategies

    Promotional Concepts and Strategies

    Types of Promotion in the Promotional Mix. Put the number of users and nonusers in the appropriate spaces on the graphic organizer. Why or why not do you use these sites? The Promotional Mix. The Concept of Promotional Mix.