A Tool Box Half Full: How Social Science can Help Solve Human–Wildlife Conflict

There is a growing recognition among wildlife managers that focusing management on wildlife often provides a temporary fix to human–wildlife conflicts, whereas changing human behavior can provide long-term solutions. Human dimensions research of wildlife conflicts frequently focuses on stakeholders’ characteristics, problem identification, and acceptability of management, and less frequently on human behavior and evaluation of management actions to change that behavior. Consequently, little information exists to assess overall success of management. We draw on our experience studying human–bear conflicts, and argue for more human dimensions studies that focus on change in human behavior to measure management success. We call for help from social scientists to conduct applied experiments utilizing two methods, direct observation and self-reported data, to measure change in behavior. We are optimistic these approaches will help fill the managers’ tool box and lead to better integration of human dimensions into human–wildlife conflict management.

Optimism of Rural Nebraskans

Results from the 2008 Nebraska Rural Poll showed rural Nebraskans were more optimistic about their lives than they have been in previous years. More Nebraskans believed they were better off than they were five years ago, and more were optimistic about their futures. They had reason to be optimistic last year, the agricultural economy in 2007 was strong, especially for crop producers. The poll was taken between March and May, 2008, before the national economy began to falter in October. Thus the 2009 Nebraska Rural Poll will help clarify how rural Nebraskans are responding to the current economic times.