Search

The success of conservation efforts for imperiled and endangered wildlife species relies on private landowners, yet a definitive model of landowner cooperation remains elusive. We use a case study to explore the multiple pathways by which demographics, rootedness, resource dependence, environmental attitudes, social influence, and program structure intersect to jointly explain participation in a federally funded cost‐share program to help prevent the Lesser Prairie‐Chicken from being listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. We conducted structured interviews across three ecoregions with 64 participants and 22 nonparticipants. We analyzed the data using fuzzy‐set qualitative comparative analysis, an approach that identifies the multiple combinations of conditions related to engagement in the program. We found that two concepts, landowner characteristics and social influence, were most commonly associated with participation while profiles representing typical landowner tropes performed poorly. Finally, the positive effect of encouragement by agency representatives suggests that agency staff play a central role in determining participation. It also suggests landowners' decision processes may not be as deliberative as the literature on private lands conservation suggests. The results of our case study suggest new avenues for research that explicitly consider the role of heuristics in decisions to participate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We used the Lesser Prairie-Chicken Initiative (LPCI) as a case study to explore the characteristics and motivations of private landowners who were willing or unwilling to enroll in a nearly decade-long program to protect the lesser prairie-chicken ( I Tympanuchus pallidicinctus i ). Program managers may be able to increase participation through increased outreach to landowners and NRCS staff training that focuses on communicating the benefits of the LPCI to landowners. The LPCI was launched in 2010 by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to help ranchers and farmers voluntarily enhance habitat and prevent an ESA listing while also aligning with ranching and agricultural operations (LPCI, [5]). The majority of species at risk of being listed under the United States (U.S.) Endangered Species Act (ESA) relies on habitat located on privately owned land (Turner & Rylander, [8]). [Extracted from the article]