Search

Stakeholders fundamentally shape the success of wildlife management, yet little is known about how one of the most important stakeholder groups, wildlife agency decision makers, view emerging conservation challenges. Wildlife agency decision makers collectively shape how wildlife conservation unfolds in North America, but their perspectives are generally absent in the literature. Challenges including climate change, conservation funding models, and wildlife disease make understanding how wildlife decision makers view the future of wildlife conservation essential. We interviewed 48 directors and supervisory board members of wildlife agencies in the southeast United States from July 2019 to January 2020 to gauge their assessment of future conservation challenges and preferred response strategies. Declining agency relevancy and insufficient funding were the 2 most commonly identified challenges, while climate change was rarely mentioned as an issue because decision makers believed it was a relatively slow‐moving background condition. Decision makers described improving relevance through education and outreach as their primary response to conservation challenges. Our results suggest that climate change‐informed wildlife management may benefit from a 2‐pronged approach. First, we suggest decision makers should be informed about the challenges posed by climate change, and second, existing efforts to promote diversity among constituents should include engaging groups who support tackling the threat climate change poses to wildlife conservation. Increasing the priority given to climate change adaptation efforts in wildlife agencies will likely require future research to discern which approaches can most improve the perceived salience of climate change to decision makers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acquisition of public land is critical for wildlife conservation and can impact local tax bases and property values. Those impacts reflect the capitalized value of benefits (e.g., recreational opportunities) and costs (e.g., nuisance wildlife) of living near protected areas. We employed the hedonic price framework to determine how proximity and adjacency to public hunting land in North Carolina were capitalized into housing prices. We modeled sale price as the composite value of structural, neighborhood, and environmental characteristics. Proximity to public hunting land had positive effects on sale price in some locations, whereas adjacency had negative effects in some locations. These relationships were dependent on the sociocultural context of the public hunting land, including proximity to other forms of public land. This research may help facilitate negotiations among stakeholders impacted by protected areas, including land dedicated to wildlife-based recreation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conservation is intended to protect species for future generations, so therefore conservationists should understand which species children want to protect. This may be particularly important in biodiversity hotspots, like islands, where resources are scarce, but biodiversity conservation needs are acute. We surveyed children (ages 7-12) on the island of Trinidad to determine how they prioritized wildlife species attributes for conservation. Species that are important in nature, and animals whose numbers are declining fast were seen as the most important attributes for prioritizing species conservation. Animals that can be hunted and fished for and animals that you can see around the home were considered the least important attributes for conservation. Our results suggest an emerging pattern of children's species preferences that is linked to geography and parallels those of conservation biologists. Species attribute ranking by children in Trinidad shared similarities with both children from a more remote island, who prioritized endemic species, and children from a continental location, who prioritized species that were ecologically important. These findings support an encouraging narrative where children's priorities for wildlife conservation are well positioned to support wildlife conservation. La conservación está destinada a proteger las especies para las generaciones futuras, por lo que los conservacionistas deben saber qué especies quieren proteger los niños. Esto puede ser particularmente importante en puntos críticos de biodiversidad, como islas, donde los recursos son escasos, pero las necesidades de conservación de la biodiversidad son agudas. Encuestamos a niños (de 7 a 12 años) en la isla de Trinidad para determinar cómo priorizaban los atributos de las especies de vida silvestre para la conservación. Las especies que son importantes en la naturaleza y los animales cuyo número está disminuyendo rápidamente se consideraron los atributos más importantes para priorizar la conservación de especies. Los animales que se pueden cazar y pescar y los animales que se pueden ver en el hogar se consideraron los atributos menos importantes para la conservación. Nuestros resultados sugieren un patrón emergente de las preferencias de especies de los niños que está vinculado a la geografía y es paralelo al de los biólogos conservacionistas. La clasificación de los atributos de las especies por parte de los niños en Trinidad compartió similitudes tanto con los niños de una isla más remota, que priorizaron las especies endémicas, como con los niños de una ubicación continental, que priorizaron las especies que eran ecológicamente importantes. Estos hallazgos respaldan una narrativa alentadora donde las prioridades de los niños para la conservación de la vida silvestre están bien posicionadas para apoyar la conservación de la vida silvestre. La conservation a pour but de protéger les espèces pour les générations futures, c'est pourquoi les défenseurs de l'environnement doivent comprendre quelles espèces les enfants veulent protéger. Cela peut être particulièrement important dans les points chauds de la biodiversité, comme les îles, où les ressources sont rares, mais les besoins de conservation de la biodiversité sont aigus. Nous avons interrogé des enfants (âgés de 7 à 12 ans) sur l›île de Trinidad pour déterminer comment ils accordaient la priorité aux attributs des espèces sauvages pour la conservation. Les espèces qui sont importantes dans la nature et les animaux dont le nombre diminue rapidement ont été considérés comme les attributs les plus importants pour donner la priorité à la conservation des espèces. Les animaux qui peuvent être chassés et pêchés et les animaux que vous pouvez voir autour de la maison étaient considérés comme les attributs les moins importants pour la conservation. Nos résultats suggèrent un modèle émergent de préférences des enfants en matière d'espèces qui est lié à la géographie et correspond à ceux des biologistes de la conservation. Le classement des attributs des espèces par les enfants de Trinidad partageait des similitudes avec les enfants d'une île plus éloignée, qui donnaient la priorité aux espèces endémiques, et les enfants d'une zone continentale, qui donnaient la priorité aux espèces écologiquement importantes. Ces résultats soutiennent un récit encourageant où les priorités des enfants pour la conservation de la faune sont bien placées pour soutenir la conservation de la faune. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Summary: Public preferences for wildlife protection can dictate the success or failure of conservation interventions. However, little research has focused on wildlife preferences among youth or how youth prioritize species-based conservation. We conducted a study of youth between 7 and 20 years old (n = 128) at five local schools situated near critical hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) nesting beaches in El Salvador to determine their wildlife preferences and how they prioritize species for conservation based on five attributes: endemism; use for hunting and fishing; rapid decline in population size; presence around their home; and ecological significance. These Salvadoran youth showed preferences for native over non-native species and tended to rank rapid population decline as the most important attribute for prioritizing wildlife for protection, followed by use for hunting and fishing. Participants in local environmental education activities placed greater importance on species in rapid decline than non-participants, who considered endemism as most important. Overall, these findings reveal how environmental education may successfully promote increased prioritization of imperilled species among youth. Economic payments for conserving hawksbill turtles may link the two top reasons that Salvadoran youth provided for protecting species by compensating for the reduced hunting required to facilitate population stabilization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Effective conservation of group-living forest wildlife requires information on how forest age moderates population parameters. Relationships between forest age and demographics can guide long-term management for wildlife populations that are expanding in relatively young second-growth forests in response to ongoing habitat management. We examined how forest age moderates effects of group density on long-term trends in group size and fledgling production in the endangered red-cockaded woodpecker Dryobates borealis (RCW) on the Savannah River Site, SC (SRS). We used 32 years of RCW monitoring data and generalized additive models to: 1) model long-term changes in average RCW group size and fledgling production; and 2) model effects of neighboring group density and neighboring group sizes across a gradient of forest age within 800 m of a group's cavity tree cluster. Average fledgling production oscillated over 2–3 year periods, but longer term evaluation indicated oscillations dampened and average fledgling production slightly decreased over time. Average group size fluctuated abruptly over 2–3 year periods from 1985 to 1994, but longer term evaluation indicated a general increase in group sizes from 1985 to 1994, followed by declines from 1995 to 2007, and a steady increase after 2010. Average fledgling production increased in response to neighboring group density but decreased as neighboring group sizes increased. In contrast, average group sizes increased in response to greater neighboring group density and neighboring group sizes. Stand age did not affect these relationships. Collectively, these results suggest forest age does not directly moderate effects of neighboring group density or group sizes on long-term average group size and fledgling production in the SRS RCW population. Although forest structure has been linked to increased RCW group sizes and productivity, our results suggest that with ongoing habitat management, long-term changes in group size and fledgling production will be driven primarily by group density conditions rather than changing forest age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research suggests hunting participation interacts with other variables (e.g., bird‐watching participation) to shape attitudes about wildlife. We build on this research by evaluating how hunting participation interacted with key variables to predict affectual attitudes toward coyotes (Canis latrans), support for coyotes on the landscape, and support for coyote management approaches in urban North Carolina, USA. We conducted surveys of urban hunters and nonhunting urban residents during 2015, and modeled relationships between respondent attributes and perceptions of coyotes. Among nonhunters, men liked coyotes more than women did, but the relationship was reversed among hunters. Similarly, men supported killing coyotes more than women did, but the difference was less pronounced among hunters. Pet owners liked coyotes and opposed killing coyotes more than non–pet owners did, but those differences disappeared among hunters. Having a rural background predicted lower tolerance for coyotes among hunters but not nonhunters. Finally, age was negatively related to support for lethal coyote management among hunters but positively related to support among nonhunters. Participation in hunting may moderate how socio‐demographic variables predict perceptions of coyotes and change or reverse previously described relationships between these variables and perceptions of wildlife. © 2019 The Wildlife Society. The hunting community is deeply tied to wildlife conservation in the United States and their perceptions of carnivores are important for shaping management policy. In a survey of urban and non‐urban hunters, we detected several interactions between participation in hunting and other demographic categories on perceptions of coyotes, indicating that hunting may moderate how socio‐demographic variables predict wildlife perceptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Environmental problems can be resolved when the public is no longer willing to accept their risks and demands change (i.e., Reflexive Modernization). Notable examples include responses to the ozone hole and acid rain, but in an emerging post-truth world, politicization of conservation can result in adults ignoring risks and accepting the status quo (i.e., Anti-Reflexivity). This problem is particularly acute for conservation biology challenges linked to climate change. Although strategic framing of conservation messages can help overcome ideological barriers to conservation actions, additional methods are needed to engage citizens in addressing loss of biodiversity. We argue that child to parent intergenerational learning is an understudied but promising pathway to incite biodiversity conservation actions among children and adults. Children have unique perspectives on wildlife and conservation, are easily reached in schools, and are likely the best equipped to help parents navigate ideologically fraught topics in ways that create action. We review key practices of intergenerational learning and outline how its best practices may be integrated in conservation biology programming and research. • Conservation solutions must overcome ideological barriers. • Child to parent intergenerational learning (IGL) can promote biodiversity conservation among adults. • We review IGL best practices for biodiversity conservation contexts. • We review future research needs for applying IGL to biodiversity conservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT: Wildlife‐related tourism represents an important and growing economic sector for many rural communities and may be inadequately considered during regional planning. Providing robust estimates of wildlife values can help address this challenge. We used both market and nonmarket valuation methods to estimate the value of tundra swans (Cygnus columbianus) in North Carolina, USA, and compared tundra swan values among hunters, wildlife watchers, and general public. Wildlife watchers reported the greatest willingness‐to‐pay (US$35.2/wildlife watcher/yr), followed by hunters (US$30.53/hunter/yr), and residents (US$16.27/resident/yr). We used the Impact Analysis for Planning system software to estimate market values or economic activity associated with tundra swans. Tundra swan hunters spent an average of US$408.34/hunter/year. Depending on assumptions over the substitutability of tundra swan hunting, we estimate that it generates value added of between US$306,155/year and US$920,161/year for the state economy. Wildlife watchers spent an average of US$171.25/wildlife watcher/year. We estimate that this generates value added of between US$14 million/year and US$42.9 million/year for the state economy, again depending on assumptions about whether watching tundra swans would be substituted with other leisure activities in eastern North Carolina or out‐of‐state. Compared with studies of international nature tourism, we found relatively low leakage rates (i.e., loss of economic benefits outside the study region), suggesting that enhancing opportunities for hunting and wildlife‐viewing may be an effective economic development strategy for rural areas in the United States. Presenting both market and nonmarket values provides a more complete picture of the value of wildlife and may facilitate more effective management decisions; therefore, we recommend that both market and nonmarket values be considered to optimize tradeoffs between development and wildlife recreation. © 2018 The Wildlife Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Efforts to prioritize wildlife for conservation benefit from an understanding of public preferences for particular species, yet no studies have integrated species preferences with key attributes of the conservation landscape such as whether species occur on islands (where invasive exotics are the primary extinction threat) or continents (where land use change is the primary extinction threat). In this paper, we compare wildlife species preferences among children from a continental location (North Carolina, USA, n = 433) and an island location (Andros Island, The Bahamas, n = 197). Children on the island preferred feral domesticated species and different types of taxa than mainland children, perhaps due to the strongly divergent species richness between the regions (e.g. island children showed greater preferences for invertebrates, lizards and aquatic species). Boys preferred fish, birds and lizards more than girls, whereas girls preferredmammals. The fact that island children showed strong preferences for invasive species suggests challenges for conservation efforts on islands, where controlling invasive exotic species is often of paramount importance, but can conflict with cultural preferences for these same species. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation (NAM) is a slippery construct, used both to explain how North American wildlife conservation developed and as a prescriptive framework. We argue both applications of the NAM are problematic. The roots of wildlife conservation in North America are more complex than those associated with the NAM, and minimizing contributions from diverse sources makes building a diverse wildlife conservation community more difficult than it would otherwise be. The NAM is not inclusive enough of diversity among wildlife species or stakeholders. Principles labeled the bedrock foundation of the NAM exist in flux and at the whim of political systems. Belief that the NAM reflects a foundation of laws more stable than the milieu of governance structures shaping wildlife management can encourage complacency among wildlife conservation advocates. Wildlife management exists in systems too complex to be beneficially defined by a terse list of principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conflicts over wildlife conservation in protected areas can occur because stakeholders hold divergent values and value orientations. In this exploratory study, differences in value orientations among visitors to Chile’s Tamango National Reserve (TNR) were examined. Questionnaires were completed by visitors (n= 97) during the Chilean summer of 2012. Respondents were grouped into strong protection (63%) and mixed protection–use (37%) value orientation groups using cluster analysis. Mixed protection–use group members were more likely to be local residents, less formally educated, less likely to pay the reserve entry fee, and less supportive of huemul (Hippocamelus bisulcus) conservation policies compared to the strong protection group. Most TNR visitors would support policies that protect wildlife in the reserve, and development with deleterious effects on the huemul would be viewed less favorably. It is suggested that a post-material shift and place relations moderate relationships between value orientations and Chilean wildlife conservation policy preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Conserving biodiversity requires productive management of conflict. Currently, wildlife are often portrayed as conscious human antagonists, which must be fought. We suggest using the 'comic corrective' to experiment with ways to reframe human-human conflicts over wildlife management and wildlife damage. This requires a deep commitment to change, often made more palatable through humour. This effort to fight the use of the term human-wildlife conflict should not be interpreted as a call to reject human-human conflict as a useful conservation tool. Conservationists, who value wildlife, often misleadingly suggest that conservation can sidestep irreducible value differences and political processes that see proponents of different views as antagonists. Because democracies cannot function without dissent, we suggest that conservation biologists should embrace stakeholder conflicts over wildlife conservation as a way to improve decision making. In particular, we should challenge the view that wildlife are willfully antagonistic to people while recognizing conflict among humans over how biodiversity conservation should occur. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nongame conservation is insufficiently funded at local, national, and global levels. Despite campaigns and reforms over the past 30 years in the United States, adequate and consistent federal funding has failed to materialize and shifted the focus to state-level initiatives. We surveyed North Carolina residents during April-May 2010, to assess public willingness to fund nongame conservation, preferred nongame conservation funding mechanisms, and key predictors of support for nongame funding. We estimated a model of willingness-to-pay (WTP) using interval-censored data modeling and compared models using the Akaike Information Criterion. The mean WTP was US$98.80/year/household when respondents were allowed to choose their own tax vehicle, thus removing any payment vehicle bias; an additional sales tax on outdoor recreation equipment was the most preferred funding mechanism. In a follow-up question, respondents indicated a mean WTP of US$32.92/employed adult (equivalent to about $65/household) annually via a flat income tax. The importance of nongame conservation to respondents, frequency of watching and/or enjoying wildlife, and education were positively related to WTP, whereas age was negatively related to WTP. Prisons were the most popular source from which to reallocate funds to nongame conservation (48%), and respondents believed an average of US$545,000 should be reallocated. Our findings suggested that while the general public indicated that they valued nongame conservation and were amenable to tax increases or reallocations for nongame conservation, they believed that taxes should be user-based and specialized (e.g., outdoor equipment taxes). These findings highlighted public WTP for nongame conservation even during an economic recession. © 2012 The Wildlife Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

More than 75% of endangered species in the United States rely on private lands for habitat. Although this habitat has long been regulated under the Endangered Species Act, there is now broad agreement that economic incentives are also needed for effective protection on private land. Many different mechanisms for incentive programs have been proposed and tested. For example, recovery credit systems use term-duration market-based contracts to engage landowners in endangered species conservation. We examined how market-mechanism design influences interest in endangered species habitat conservation using a survey of North Carolina Farm Bureau county advisory board members in 93 of the 100 North Carolina counties ( n = 735) in 2009. Respondents preferred contracts (57% were interested) over easements (39% were interested). Endangered species conservation ranked low in importance relative to other conservation issues, but 45% of respondents were interested in contracts to conserve endangered species habitat on their property. The preferred contract duration was 10 years, and respondents preferred state- and agricultural-related organizations over federal and wildlife conservation-related organizations for managing contracts. Younger respondents, respondents who had previously participated in conservation programs, respondents who perceived endangered species conservation as important, and respondents who had lower property-rights orientation scores, were most likely to be interested in contracts to restore and maintain endangered species habitat on their lands. Our results suggest that market mechanisms could drive down costs and drive up durations for endangered species habitat conservation contracts. Further, term contracts may prove critical for endangered species conservation efforts that require high levels of landowner support and spatial flexibility within relatively short-time frames. © 2012 The Wildlife Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human–wildlife conflict has emerged as the central vocabulary for cases requiring balance between resource demands of humans and wildlife. This phrase is problematic because, given traditional definitions of conflict, it positions wildlife as conscious human antagonists. We used content analysis of wildlife conservation publications and professional meeting presentations to explore the use of the phrase, human–wildlife conflict, and compared competing models explaining its usage. Of the 422 publications and presentations using human–wildlife conflict, only 1 reflected a traditional definition of conflict, >95% referred to reports of animal damage to entities human care about, and <4% referred to human–human conflict. Usage of human–wildlife conflict was related to species type (herbivores with human food, carnivores with human safety, meso-mammals with property), development level of the nation where the study occurred (less developed nations with human food and more developed nations with human safety and property damage), and whether the study occurred on private lands or protected areas (protected areas with human–human conflict and other areas with property damage). We argue that the phrase, human–wildlife conflict, is detrimental to coexistence between humans and wildlife, and suggest comic reframing to facilitate a more productive interpretation of human–wildlife relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Society faces a growing challenge in the management of zoonotic wildlife diseases. Unique attributes of zoonotic diseases and the shitting sociocultural contexts within which diseases are experienced create serious challenges for managers. We address 2 critical questions: how do uncertainty and severity associated with a zoonotic disease relate to public management attitudes and preferences, and do immigrant attitudes and preferences differ from those of long-term residents in rural areas of the Intermountain West? We addressed these questions using a personally administered questionnaire in Teton County, Idaho, USA. Based on 2 hypothetical zoonotic wildlife diseases, one less severe and more known (type A) and one more severe and less known (type B), we asked respondents to indicate their agreement with 13 statements regarding their perception of the disease and management preferences. We also asked respondents to indicate their support for different groups controlling management. Our compliance rate was 95% (n = 416, sampling error ± 4.8%). Respondents considered type B a greater risk to human and livestock health, and supported using lethal control methods, except hunting, to control it. Disease type, however, had less impact on public support for management options involving fencing and supplemental feeding. With only 2 exceptions, longer-term residents (LTR) supported lethal management options more than newer residents (NR). Further, NR hunted less than LTR, thereby restricting lethal management options. Respondents indicated some level of support for all management control options except giving authority to local civic leaders. Newer residents showed higher support for wildlife scientists and federal agencies making management decisions, whereas LTR preferred state livestock agencies. Demographic change in rural areas may lead to higher levels of support for federal and scientific control over zoonotic disease management but lower support for lethal management and ability to enact lethal management. Our results suggest 2 critical management needs: solicitation and consideration of public input for type A zoonotic disease management and promotion of hunting or developing a viable lethal management alternative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Urban development in the Florida Keys, USA, mandates an understanding of how habitat requirements for Florida Key deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) interact with vegetation changes caused by development. Our study objectives were to (1) determine Key deer habitat use at different spatial scales, (2) evaluate vegetation changes and identify vegetation types most threatened by development, and (3) provide guidelines to direct land acquisition programs in the future. We identified 6 vegetation types: pineland, hammock, developed, freshwater marsh, buttonwood, and mangrove. Key deer (n = 180; 84 F, 96 M) preferred upland vegetation types (>1 m above mean sea level; pineland, hammock, developed) and avoided tidal or lower-elevation areas (>1 m above mean sea level; freshwater marsh, buttonwood, mangrove). Analyses of Geographic Information System (GIS) coverages suggested that historical development impacted near-shore habitats while recent trends pose a greater risk to upland areas (pineland, hammock). Because uplands are preferred by Key deer, conservation measures that include land acquisition and habitat protection of these areas may be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Light detection and ranging (LiDAR) technology has the potential to radically alter the way researchers and managers collect data on wildlife–habitat relationships. To date, the technology has fostered several novel approaches to characterizing avian habitat, but has been limited by the lack of detailed LiDAR-habitat attributes relevant to species across a continuum of spatial grain sizes and habitat requirements. We demonstrate a novel three-step approach for using LiDAR data to evaluate habitat based on multiple habitat attributes and accounting for their influence at multiple grain sizes using federally endangered red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW; Picoides borealis) foraging habitat data from the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina, USA. First, we used high density LiDAR data (10returns/m2) to predict detailed forest attributes at 20-m resolution across the entire SRS using a complementary application of nonlinear seemingly unrelated regression and multiple linear regression models. Next, we expanded on previous applications of LiDAR by constructing 95% joint prediction confidence intervals to quantify prediction error at various spatial aggregations and habitat thresholds to determine a biologically and statistically meaningful grain size. Finally, we used aggregations of 20-m cells and associated confidence interval boundaries to demonstrate a new approach to produce maps of RCW foraging habitat conditions based on the guidelines described in the species' recovery plan. Predictive power (R2 ) of regression models developed to populate raster layers ranged from 0.34 to 0.81, and prediction error decreased as aggregate size increased, but minimal reductions in prediction error were observed beyond 0.64-ha (4×4 20-m cells) aggregates. Mapping habitat quality while accounting for prediction error provided a robust method to determine the potential range of habitat conditions and specific attributes that were limiting in terms of the amount of suitable habitat. The sequential steps of our analytical approach provide a useful framework to extract detailed and reliable habitat attributes for a forest-dwelling habitat specialist, broadening the potential to apply LiDAR in conservation and management of wildlife populations. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]