Advertisement

Ambio

, Volume 49, Issue 1, pp 271–280 | Cite as

Predicting acceptance of lethal management of wood bison in Alaska, USA

  • Ethan D. DoneyEmail author
  • Jerry J. Vaske
  • Alistair J. Bath
  • Monica T. Engel
  • Bethany Downer
Research Article

Abstract

Wood bison (Bison bison athabascae) were reintroduced into Alaska after a 170-year absence in the state. Wildlife reintroductions may cause problems by damaging property, spreading disease, increasing fear levels, and human injury and death. We examined the influence of urban Alaskan’s wildife value orientations (WVO; domination and mutualism), fear, and attitudes toward wood bison on their behavioral intention to support lethal management under specific situations. We hypothesized that: (a) domination, mutualism and fear would influence public attitudes toward wood bison, and (b) attitudes would predict an individual’s behavioral intention to support lethal management of the newly restored bison population. We collected data through a self-administered questionnaire randomly distributed to residents in Anchorage (n = 243) and Fairbanks (n = 272). Regression analyses indicated that both mutualism and domination positively correlated with attitudes, and fear negatively correlated with attitudes. Attitudes did not predict behavioral intention to support lethal management practices. Both WVOs and fear predicted behavioral intentions. The model helps to illustrate how cognitive and emotional components can influence acceptance of newly restored herbivore species. Our findings also suggested that for situations where an attitude may not exist, people may use more basic value orientations and emotions when thinking about how they would react in specific situations.

Keywords

Attitudes Behavioral intentions Fear Herbivores Reintroduction Value orientations 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Funding for this research was generously provided by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and Memorial University of Newfoundland. We would like to thank Tom Seaton and Laurie Boeck for their contribution and support for this research and the Alaska residents who agreed to participate and collaborate on this project.

References

  1. Ajzen, I., and M. Fishbein. 1977. Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin 84: 888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alaska Census. 2010. Demographic Profile for Alaska. Department of Labor and Workforce Development: Research and Analysis. http://live.laborstats.alaska.gov/cen/dp.cfm.
  3. Alaska Communications. 2014a. Telephone directory: Anchorage & vicinity. Anchorage: White Pages.Google Scholar
  4. Alaska Communications. 2014b. Telephone directory: Fairbanks & vicinity. Anchorage: White Pages.Google Scholar
  5. Alaska Wood Bison Management Planning Team. 2015. Wood bison management plan for lower Innoko/Yukon River in Westcentral Alaska, 2015–2020. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Wildlife Conservation, Wildlife Management Plan ADF&G/DWC/WMP-2015-1, Fairbanks.Google Scholar
  6. Bath, A.J. 1998. The role of human dimensions of wildlife resource research in wildlife management. Ursus 10: 349–355.Google Scholar
  7. Bath, A.J., and J.W. Enck. 2003. Wildlife–human interactions in national parks in Canada and the USA. National Parks Social Science Research Review 4: 1–32.Google Scholar
  8. Bennett, N.J., R. Roth, S.C. Klain, K. Chan, P. Christie, D.A. Clark, G. Cullman, D. Curran, et al. 2017. Conservation social science: Understanding and integrating human dimensions to improve conservation. Biological Conservation 205: 93–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bland, J.M., and D.G. Altman. 1997. Statistics notes: Cronbach’s alpha. British Medical Journal 314: 572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boholm, A., and R. Löfstedt. 2004. Facility Siting: Risk, power and identity in land use planning. Earthscan, London, UK: Earthscan Risk in Society.Google Scholar
  11. Bright, A.D., and M.J. Manfredo. 1996. A conceptual model of attitudes toward natural resource issues: A case study of wolf reintroduction. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 1: 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bright, A.D., M.J. Manfredo, and D.C. Fulton. 2000. Segmenting the public: An application of value orientations to wildlife planning in Colorado. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28: 218–226.Google Scholar
  13. Bruskotter, J.T., J.J. Vaske, and R.H. Schmidt. 2009. Social and cognitive correlates of Utah residents’ acceptance of the lethal control of wolves. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 14: 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Decker, D.J., and L.C. Chase. 1997. Human dimensions of living with wildlife—A management challenge for the 21st century. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25: 788–795.Google Scholar
  15. Decker, D.J., C.A. Jacobson, and T.L. Brown. 2006. Situation-specific “impact dependency” as a determinant of management acceptability: Insights from wolf and grizzly bear management in Alaska. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34: 426–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Decker, S.E., A.J. Bath, A. Simms, U. Lindner, and E. Reisinger. 2010. The return of the king or bringing snails to the garden? The human dimensions of a proposed restoration of European bison (Bison bonasus) in Germany. Restoration Ecology 18: 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Doney, E.D., A.J. Bath, and J.J. Vaske. 2018. Understanding conflict and consensus regarding wood bison management in Alaska, USA. Wildlife Research 45: 229–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dougherty, E.M., D.C. Fulton, and D.H. Anderson. 2003. The influence of gender on the relationship between wildlife value orientations, beliefs, and the acceptability of lethal deer control in Cuyahoga Valley National Park. Society and Natural Resources 16: 603–623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Enck, J.W., and T.L. Brown. 2002. New Yorkers’ attitudes toward restoring wolves to the Adirondack Park. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30: 16–28.Google Scholar
  20. Engel, M.T., J.J. Vaske, A.J. Bath, and S. Marchini. 2016. Predicting acceptability of jaguars and pumas in the Atlantic Forest, Brazil. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 21: 427–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Espinosa, S., and S.K. Jacobson. 2012. Human-wildlife conflict and environmental education: Evaluating a community program to protect the Andean bear in Ecuador. The Journal of Environmental Education 43: 55–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fazio, R.H., J.M. Chen, E.C. McDonel, and S.J. Sherman. 1982. Attitude accessibility, attitude–behavior consistency, and the strength of the object-evaluation association. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 18: 339–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fulton, D.C., M.J. Manfredo, and J. Lipscomb. 1996. Wildlife value orientations: A conceptual and measurement approach. Human dimensions of wildlife 1: 24–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gamborg, C., and F.S. Jensen. 2016. Wildlife value orientations among hunters, landowners, and the general public: A Danish comparative quantitative study. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 21: 328–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gore, M.L., B.A. Knuth, P.D. Curtis, and J.E. Shanahan. 2006. Stakeholder perceptions of risk associated with human-black bear conflicts in New York’s Adirondack Park Campgrounds: Implications for theory and practice. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34: 36–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hamaker, E.L., J.R. Nesselroade, and P.C. Molenaar. 2007. The integrated trait-state model. Journal of Research in Personality 41: 295–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hartel, C.M., J.S. Carlton, and L.S. Prokopy. 2015. The role of value orientations and experience on attitudes toward a well-liked threatened reptile. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 20: 553–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Heberlein, T.A., and R.C. Stedman. 2009. Socially amplified risk: Attitude and behavior change in response to CWD in Wisconsin deer. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 14: 326–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hermann, N., C. Voß, and S. Menzel. 2012. Wildlife value orientations as predicting factors in support of reintroducing bison and of wolves migrating to Germany. Journal for Nature Conservation 21: 125–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jacobs, M.H., P. Fehres, and M. Campbell. 2012a. Measuring emotions towards wildlife: A review of generic methods and instruments. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 17: 233–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jacobs, M.H., J.J. Vaske, and J.M. Roemer. 2012b. Toward a mental systems approach to human relationships with wildlife: The role of emotional dispositions. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 17: 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jacobs, M.H., J.J. Vaske, S. Dubois, and P. Fehres. 2014a. More than fear: Role of emotions in acceptability of lethal control of wolves. European Journal of Wildlife Research 60: 589–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jacobs, M.H., J.J. Vaske, and M.T. Sijtsma. 2014b. Predictive potential of wildlife value orientations for acceptability of management interventions. Journal for Nature Conservation 22: 377–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Johansson, M., M. Sjöström, J. Karlsson, and R. Brännlund. 2012. Is human fear affecting public willingness to pay for the management and conservation of large carnivores. Society & Natural Resources 25: 610–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jurowski, C., and D. Gursoy. 2004. Distance effects on residents’ attitudes toward tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 31: 296–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Karlsson, J., and M. Sjöström. 2007. Human attitudes towards wolves, a matter of distance. Biological Conservation 137: 610–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Loyd, K.A.T., and C.A. Miller. 2010. Influence of demographics, experience and value orientations on preferences for lethal management of feral cats. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 15: 262–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Manfredo, M.J., T.L. Teel, and A.D. Bright. 2004. Application of the concepts of values and attitudes in human dimensions of natural resources research. In Society and natural resources: A summary of knowledge, pp. 271–282. Jefferson City: Modern Litho.Google Scholar
  39. Manfredo, M.J. 2008. Who cares about wildlife?. Springer, New York: Social Science Concepts for Exploring Human-Wildlife Relationships and Conservation Issues.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Manfredo, M.J., and A.A. Dayer. 2004. Concepts for exploring the social aspects of human–wildlife conflict in a global context. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 9: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Manfredo, M.J., S.M. Yuan, and F.A. McGuire. 1992. The influence of attitude accessibility on attitude–behavior relationships: Implications for recreation research. Journal of Leisure Research 24: 157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Manfredo, M.J., T.L. Teel, and K.L. Henry. 2009. Linking society and environment: A multilevel model of shifting wildlife value orientations in the western united states. Social Science Quarterly 90: 407–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Riley, S.J., D.J. Decker, L.H. Carpenter, J.F. Organ, W.F. Siemer, G.F. Mattfeld, and G. Parsons. 2002. The essence of wildlife management. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30: 585–593.Google Scholar
  44. Rokeach, M. 1973. The Nature of Human Values. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  45. Sanborn, W.A., and R.H. Schmidt. 1995. Gender effects on views of wildlife professionals about wildlife management. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23: 583–587.Google Scholar
  46. Scherer, K.R. 1999. Appraisal Theory. In Handbook of Cognition and Emotion, ed. T. Dalgleish and M. Power, 637–663. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  47. Schwartz, S.H. 2006. A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications. Comparative Sociology 5: 137–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Seaton CT (2016) The Status of Wood Bison and Factors Influencing their populations. Alaska Department of Fish and Game Wildlife Restoration Grant Federal Aid Annual Performance Report 10:1-2.Google Scholar
  49. Sijtsma, M.T., J.J. Vaske, and M.H. Jacobs. 2012. Acceptability of lethal control of wildlife that damage agriculture in the Netherlands. Society and Natural Resources 25: 1308–1323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sjöberg, L. 2000. Factors in Risk Perception. Risk Analysis 4: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Slagle, K.M., J.T. Bruskotter, and R.S. Wilson. 2012. The role of affect in public support and opposition to wolf management. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 17: 44–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sponarski, C.C., J.J. Vaske, and A.J. Bath. 2015. Differences in Management Action Acceptability for Coyotes in a National Park. Wildlife Society Bulletin 39: 239–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Statewide Licensing Database. 2015. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Administrative Services, Juneau. Accessed 21 Nov 2016.Google Scholar
  54. Stephenson RO, Gerlach SC (2001) People and Wildlife in Northern North America: Essays in Honor of R. Dale Guthrie.Google Scholar
  55. Stern, M.J., N.M. Ardoin, and R.B. Powell. 2017. Exploring the Effectiveness of Outreach Strategies in Conservation Projects: The Case of the Audubon Toyota Together Green Program. Society & Natural Resources 30: 95–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sudharsan, K., S.J. Riley, and H. Campa III. 2009. Relative Risks of Deer-Vehicle Collisions Along Road Types in Southeast Michigan. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 14: 341–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Teel, T.L., and M.J. Manfredo. 2010. Understanding the diversity of public interests in wildlife conservation. Conservation Biology 24: 128–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Teel, T.L., M.J. Manfredo, and H.M. Stinchfield. 2007. The need and theoretical basis for exploring wildlife value orientations cross-culturally. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 12: 297–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. U.S Fish and Wildife Service (2013). Threatened and Endangered Species: Wood Bison (Bison bison athabascae). Department of the Interior.Google Scholar
  60. Vaske, J.J., and M.P. Donnelly. 2007. Public knowledge and perceptions of the desert tortoise. HDNRU Report No. 81. Report for the National Park Service. Human Dimensions in Natural Resources Unit, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.Google Scholar
  61. Vaske, J.J. 2008. Survey research and analysis: Applications in parks, recreation and human dimensions. State College: Venture Publishing.Google Scholar
  62. Vaske, J.J., and M.P. Donnelly. 1999. A value-attitude–behavior model predicting wildland preservation voting intentions. Society and Natural Resources 12: 523–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vaske, J.J., and K.M. Lyon. 2011. CWD prevalence, perceived human heath risks and state influences on deer hunting participation. Risk Analysis 41: 488–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Vaske, J.J., and M.J. Manfredo. 2012. Social psychological considerations in wildlife management. In Human dimensions of wildlife management, ed. D.J. Decker, S. Riley, and W.F. Siemer, 43–57. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Vaske, J.J., J.M. Roemer, and J.G. Taylor. 2013. Situational and emotional influences on the acceptability of wolf management actions in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Wildlife Society Bulletin 37: 122–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Whittaker, D., J.J. Vaske, and M.J. Manfredo. 2006. Specificity and the cognitive hierarchy: Value orientations and the acceptability of urban wildlife management actions. Society and Natural Resources 19: 515–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wildavsky, A.B. 1991. The rise of radical egalitarianism. Washington, D.C.: The American University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ethan D. Doney
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jerry J. Vaske
    • 2
  • Alistair J. Bath
    • 1
  • Monica T. Engel
    • 1
  • Bethany Downer
    • 1
  1. 1.Geography DepartmentMemorial University of NewfoundlandSt. John’sCanada
  2. 2.Human Dimensions of Natural ResourcesColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA

Personalised recommendations