Delo obravnava uporabo kontrolne metode pri nacrtovanju upravljanja prosto živecih parkljarjev v Sloveniji v primerjavi s sistemi v Evropi in pregled potencialnih kazalnikov za kontrolno metodo s priporocilom za obravnavo in uporabo v prihodnje. Primerjava sistemov nacrtovanja upravljanja parkljarjev med evropskimi državami razkriva zelo razlicne ureditve, med katerimi pa praviloma ne najdemo izrazitih razlik glede uspešnosti. Bolj kot sama ureditev se kot kvaliteta sistema izkazuje njegova sposobnost, da zagotovi ustrezno izvedbo ukrepov v populacijah parkljarjev. Štejejo le dejansko izvedeni ukrepi v naravi. Najpogosteje izpostavljeni upravljavski problemi so škode od divjadi, kjer so kot deležniki vpleteni predvsem lastniki zemljišc in lovci. Krajši ko je postopek sprejemanja ukrepov in z manj vpletenimi (relacija med njimi), manj so škode izpostavljene kot problem in obratno. Daljša ko je relacija med njimi, bolj mora biti administrativno okolje podrobno urejeno, nacrtovalci upravljanja parkljarjev pa morajo imeti širše znanje in nosijo vecjo odgovornost. Po drugi strani pa le relativno dolge relacije omogocajo uveljavljanje javnega interesa pri upravljanju divjadi. Pregled od gostote populacij odvisnih znakov, ki bi bili potencialno uporabni kot kazalniki pri upravljanju populacij parkljarjev, ponuja široko paleto možnosti. Omejitve so v nejasno izraženi in nekonsistentni odvisnosti, pri veliko znakih pa tudi v relativno nizki stopnji raziskanosti. Za nadaljnjo obravnavo priporocamo kazalnike (prilagojeno po živalskih vrstah in starostno spolnih kategorijah) odstrel, kilometrski indeks, telesno maso, delež s patogenimi organizmi napadenih živali, velikost celjustnice, dolžino rogov, plodnost, gostoto indikatorskih rastlinskih vrst, razvitost indikatorskih rastlinskih vrst, objedenost gozdnega mladja, gostota naletov z vozili in število škodnih dogodkov. O uporabi kontrolne metode lahko govorimo šele takrat, ko nacrtovanje upravljanja sledi principu povratne informacijske zanke in samo sebe stalno korigira. Samo uporaba bioloških kazalnikov ni dovolj. The following thesis deals with the use of adaptive management principles for wild ungulates management in Slovenia, and compares it to systems in other European countries. It also presents an overview of potetntial indicators for control method and proposes their use in the future. The comparison of planning and managements systems reveals that many different ungulates management systems exist throughout Europe. Nevertheless, no major differences have been found regarding success. The most important quality of ungulate management system lies in its ability to assure that the right measures are taken in populations. Only the measures implemented in the nature are the ones that really make the difference. Most frequent ungulate management issues are crop damage, where land owners and hunters are the most important stakeholders. The shorter the procedure of taking masures and the less people involved, the less is damage exposed as a problem, and vice versa. The longer the administrative distances, the more complex administrative environment is required wildlife managers need to have wider knowledge and take more responsibility. However, on the other hand, long administrative procedures enable public interest to be taken into account. The overview of density dependent statistical characters that could be used for ecological indicators reveals a wide range of possibilities. Unclear density dependence, inconsistent density dependence, and, in many cases, a low number of researches are the limitations. For further analysis, we recommend the following biological indicators hunting statistics, kilometric index, body mass, proportion of animals infected with pathogens, mandible size, antlers length, fertility, density of chosen plants, growth of chosen plants, browsing index, density of ungulate % vehicle collisions, and number of crop damage cases. Adaptive management principles are used only when managing populations follow the principle of information feedback and are constantly being moderated. The mere use of ecological indicators is not sufficient.