Great cormorants have expanded dramatically across Europe and North America following legal protections, creating conflicts with commercial and recreational fisheries. Balancing the welfare of individual cormorants against impacts on fish populations and fishing livelihoods requires nuanced management.
Cormorant welfare in human-wildlife conflict contexts is frequently dismissed in debates dominated by fishery economics. Individual cormorants shot under licence experience genuine suffering if not killed instantly. Populations scared repeatedly from feeding sites experience sustained stress and reduced foraging success. Young birds in disturbed colonies may starve if adults are disrupted during the feeding period. The welfare of these individual birds is a legitimate consideration alongside the economic interests of fishery owners. Proportionate conflict management that prioritises non-lethal deterrence, uses lethal control as a last resort with humane execution standards, and maintains population viability represents the welfare-consistent approach to a genuine human-wildlife conflict rather than open persecution of a successfully recovered species.