Stakeholder-specific questions

In addition to joint questions in each country there was a possibility to include some stakeholder-specific questions as well as some country-specific questions to the interviews. Their results are presented in this section.

Landowners

All large landowners, forest companies and the State had been requested to let land for commercial hunting, some since the beginning of the 90’s. None of the interviewed smaller, private and commons landowners had ever been asked to let land for commercial hunting. They also thought it unlikely that they would consider letting land for this purpose since the owners want the hunting rights for them-selves and the compensation for each landowner would be negligible.

Today the proportion of land let for commercial hunting ranges from 0 to 2%. The most progressive for-est company in this aspect, Sveaskog (which is State-owned and has a mission from the state to develop commercial hunting tourism), has approximately 2% of their land in commercial hunting, the goal being a maximum of 5%. More is not considered realistic according to Sveaskog, as well as the other forest companies given the existing high pressure from the local hunters today. Instead of mass tourism they rather wish to see a small number of high quality companies, which the forest company will also have time to support. No un-leased grounds exist today, but when there some come up, they will prioritize hunting tourism companies, although decisions will be made on a case-to-case basis.

Lease prices for local hunting ranged from 5 Euros per hectare in the North to 80 Euros in the South for one of the forest companies. The price of the lease contract for the entrepreneurs is usually more expen-sive than for private hunting teams in all forest companies. The difference is challenging to estimate but one interviewed company mentioned doubling the price once the business had taken off, while initially it could be much lower. One company takes bids on the lease contracts, the bidding being open for everybody. Usually the hunting tourism companies can afford to pay more than private hunters. Even though the market shapes the prices, the highest bidder doesn’t always get the lease contract. High ethi-cal standards and a prioritization of hunting tourism companies are also taken into account. Public and other stakeholder opinions significantly affect at least the largest forest companies. It is considered very important that the rural community is not affected negatively due to commercial hunting. Forest compa-nies do not, for example, withdraw hunting grounds from local teams that are not misbehaving in order to let to hunting tourism companies. The local hunting teams are important for the forest companies as well in their moose management. One interviewed company claimed they were not especially interested to increase commercial hunting too much since the local hunters are easier to manage when it comes to which type and how many moose need to be shot. Yet another company has a list of how to prioritize between different interest groups, prioritizing their personnel first, then local people, customers con-nected to the forestry and finally other commercial business. However, as mentioned before, none of the interviewed forest companies had anything against hunting tourism; some even prioritize entrepreneurs before local hunters in letting land, often with the argument that it is positive for the development of the local community and can create some job opportunities.

The commercial hunting taking place on forest company land usually aims at packaged products and high quality. All interviewed companies have (or have had if not active today) at least one meeting with the entrepreneurs each year. Typically they have continuous contact over the year. The cooperation can be very intense, where the forest companies try to help the hunting tourism SMEs with for example marketing. The forest companies have high ethical demands on the entrepreneurs leasing land, where having high social skills for interacting with the local hunters is seen as very important, and having a good ecological education is also considered positive.

Policy makers

Hunting tourism does not have any big role in the rural development plans today. However, hunting tourism and/or nature tourism are mentioned in several organizational plans and strategies of the Coun-ty Administrative Boards. According to the results, the counCoun-ty boards are not against a development of hunting tourism on the state owned land, and several of them would, in fact, welcome an expansion.

If having to choose between recreational hunting of private persons and hunting tourism though, they prioritize recreational hunting. Most interviewed policy makers believed however, that it is quite possible to combine commercial and recreational hunting in a sustainable way. Most policy makers also said their organization will support enhancing hunting tourism, although most do not see that it is their role to lead the development: “this is up to the hunting tourism industry” (P1). The respondents mentioned that they will, however, listen and when possible also help with the development as long as it doesn’t intrude with other types of nature activities, such as reindeer husbandry or recreational hunting.

Entrepreneurs

All interviewed entrepreneurs saw landowners (forest companies or the State in the mountain range) as their main stakeholder group. Most entrepreneurs felt that their cooperation with the landowner worked very well once they got hold of a hunting area. If there were local hunters in the neighbouring areas, these were also considered as a very important stakeholder group. A good relationship with the local community was seen as the key to success. Other important stakeholders put forth in the inter-views were reindeer herders, power plant companies, mining companies and the public. Nevertheless, all involved stakeholders were considered important. The business may work with only a landowner–

entrepreneur relationship, but will function much better involving also the local community as well as other stakeholders, in a positive relationship. In addition to the stakeholder relationships, entrepreneurs highlighted the importance of focusing on the institutional environment of hunting tourism and the current laws and regulations in the future.

Recreational hunters

The recreational hunters considered themselves being partly involved in the hunting tourism business, for example by mediating hunting opportunities through their hunting magazine. The main purpose of this mediation is to provide their members with hunting possibilities, preferably cheap. It is increasingly popular to go to other places to hunt which makes many members of hunters’ organisations hunting tourists. Also hunting entrepreneurs are using hunting magazines to promote their companies. This is in general considered acceptable by the hunter’s organisations as long as it does not influence their members’ or the local hunting teams’ possibilities to hunt. Usually the relationship between local hunt-ers and hunting tourism enterprises is very good. According to the interviewees hunthunt-ers in the forest land are usually more positive towards hunting tourism than hunters in the mountain areas. Most of the interviewees felt that the hunters’ attitude towards hunting tourism is more positive today than it was 20 years ago. Most controversies between recreational hunters and hunting tourism today take place on State-owned land in the mountain area, where willow ptarmigan is hunted. If, however, the commer-cial hunting of moose were to increase, many interviewees believed there would be conflicts since the moose is considered much more valuable, both economically and socially. Other sources of controversy were believed to depend on where the customers come from and how they act towards the locals. Pure

“jealousy” was also seen as one potential source of discrepancy. Finally, controversies were seen to arise, if the local hunters would lose their hunting opportunities, if the cost of hunting for the locals would increase, or if the game resource would decrease due to the commercial hunting.