Mapping and modeling the components of human tolerance for black bears in eastern Oklahoma

Understanding behavioral intention of landowners to promote wildlife richness and biodiversity in the Southern Great Plains

Ranchers have been conducting traditional management practices such as mono-species grazing and limited burning that focus on stocking rate maximization. This has resulted in negative environmental consequences such as woody plant encroachment, land use change, and species diversity loss. Recently, there has been a growing appreciation for alternative range management that simultaneously promotes biodiversity and agricultural productivity through fire and grazing interactions. The purpose of the study was to investigate the influence of landowner values, attitudes, and norms on their behavioral intention to adopt best management practices (BMPs) that enhance wildlife abundance in the southern Great Plains. The required data was generated through a mail survey following the Tailored Design method. We utilized the structural equation path model to construct two latent variables for norms and attitudes and analyzed the relationship of the latent variables with value orientations and behavioral intentions. The study results indicated that the attitudes had a significant positive relationship with biocentric (β = 0.15, p-value<0.05) and a negative relationship with anthropocentric (β = -0.259, p-value<0.05) value orientations, however, the relationship of value orientations was statistically insignificant with norms. Further, the results indicated that both norms (β = 0.404, p-value<0.05) and attitudes (β = 0.508, p-value<0.05) had a positive and statistically significant relation with ranchers' intentions to increase wildlife abundance on their land. Study results emphasize the need for innovative communication and non-traditional outreach methods to educate rangeland owners on the importance of patch-burn grazing and other best management practices.

Public tolerance of lethal wildlife management in Japan: A best-worst scaling questionnaire analysis

Human-wildlife conflict is a major problem for sustainable development worldwide. Lethal management options play an essential role in wildlife management. However, assessing public tolerance of lethal options is crucial. While this has been studied for specific targets, variations in public tolerance by wildlife characteristics such as biological class and nativeness remain unexplored. Accordingly, we administered a questionnaire survey (n = 1000) using best-worst scaling to reveal the comparative tolerance of lethal wildlife management for 10 wildlife species (including mammals, birds, fish, and plants) in Japan. We found that public tolerance of lethal wildlife management differed by species rather than biological class and nativeness. We then used cluster analysis to group respondents with similar lethal wildlife management tolerances and found commonalities based on age, sex, and beliefs. This study offers theoretical insights for understanding public tolerance of lethal wildlife management as well as practical recommendations for wildlife managers.

Perception and trust influence acceptance for black bears more than bear density or conflicts

Introduction

To sustain black bear (Ursus americanus) populations, wildlife managers should understand the coupled socio-ecological systems that influence acceptance capacity for bears.

Method

In a study area encompassing a portion of New York State, we spatially matched datasets from three sources: human-bear conflict reports between 2006 and 2018, estimates of local bear density in 2017–2018, and responses to a 2018 property owner survey (n=1,772). We used structural equation modeling to test hypothesized relationships between local human-bear conflict, local bear density, and psychological variables.

Results

The final model explained 57% of the variance in acceptance. The effect of bear population density on acceptance capacity for bears was relatively small and was mediated by a third variable: perception of proximity to the effects of human-bear interactions. The variables that exerted a direct effect on acceptance were perception of bear-related benefits, perception of bear-related risks, perceived proximity to effects of human-bear interactions, and being a hunter. Perception of bear-related benefits had a greater effect on acceptance than perception of bear-related risks. Perceived proximity to effects of human-bear interactions was affected by local bear density, but also was affected by social trust. Increased social trust had nearly the same effect on perceived proximity as decreased bear density. Social trust had the greatest indirect effect on acceptance of any variable in the model.

Discussion

Findings suggest wildlife agencies could maintain public acceptance for bears through an integrated approach that combines actions to address bear-related perceptions and social trust along with active management of bear populations.