The population of the continental race of the great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo sinensis) has significantly increased over the last few decades due to legal protection. This rise has led to intense conflicts with fishing interests because of the bird’s fish-eating habits. Effective conflict management requires an understanding of public attitudes. We collected data through interviews with 260 residents (50 fishers and 210 members of the general public) to examine the endorsement and prioritization of strategies to manage great cormorants in a fishery in northern Greece. First, we asked respondents to state their endorsement of implementing each of six management strategies, with possible responses being “endorsed” or “not endorsed.” Then, we asked them to select the one they would prioritize among the six strategies for implementation. The most endorsed management strategy among all residents was using nets to cover fish wintering channels (85.7%), followed by compensation for damage (66.7%), scaring devices (66.0%), destruction of breeding colonies (33.3%), taking no action (26.3%), and killing birds (20.7%). Taking no action was more endorsed by the general public, while scaring, colony destruction, and killing were more endorsed by fishers. Nets for cover were the most prioritized management strategy among all residents (47.3%), followed by compensation (29.3%), scaring (11.4%), taking no action (6.0%), colony destruction (4.0%), and killing (2.0%). Fishers prioritized nets for cover, colony destruction, and killing more than the general public, who prioritized taking no action, compensation, and scaring. These findings will be valuable for informing the management process of the great cormorant–fishery conflict.