Wildlife management in Australasia : perceptions of objectives and priorities

The aim of this study was to examine the values and attitudes held by Australasian wildlife managers as they relate to wildlife management issues, and to gain some insight into possible future directions and priorities for Australasian wildlife management. During December 2002 – February 2003, 138 questionnaires were completed by members of the Australasian Wildlife Management Society (AWMS) and registrants of the 2002 AWMS annual conference. Threatened species management, threatened communities/habitats, and management of introduced species were the issues rated as needing the highest priority for the Australasian Wildlife Management Society. Issues such as animal rights, genetically modified organisms and timber harvesting on public lands were the lowest-rating issues. Respondents expressed a strong belief in managing and controlling wildlife to achieve wildlife management objectives, a strong belief that wildlife should be protected and that wildlife managers should minimise the pain and suffering of individual animals, and a belief that resources should be directed towards conserving wildlife populations rather than protecting individual animals from non-threatened populations. While respondents held a strong belief that it is important to consult the community when developing wildlife management policies and programs, there was little support for a comanagerial approach where the community has a significant role to play in decision-making processes.

Gender differences in the perceptions of wildlife management objectives and priorities in Australasia

It is now well established that men and women often differ significantly in their attitudes and responses to workplace situations, challenges and policies. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of gender on perceptions and priorities held by Australasian wildlife managers. Data were collected via a questionnaire distributed during December 2002 – February 2003 to members of the Australasian Wildlife Management Society (AWMS) and registrants of the 2002 AWMS annual conference. The results show that there are now significantly more female AWMS members than there were in the early 1990s, a possible indication of a change in the wider wildlife management profession in Australasia. Consistent with previous research, male respondents held different views from female respondents about wildlife and wildlife management. In particular, male respondents were significantly more likely to express the ‘management/consumptive use of wildlife’ perspective than female respondents. Interestingly, this gap was observed only in the 18–30-year age category. The paper examines what these differences might mean for the future of wildlife management in Australasia.

Toward incorporating human dimensions information into wildlife management decision-making

This paper presents a comparison of values of wildlife held by stakeholder groups and public samples in Victoria, Australia, with a sample of wildlife managers' beliefs about these groups. It also examines the managers' views of the importance of utilizing human dimensions information in their decision-making. In-depth interviews were conducted with wildlife/environmental managers in a sample of state and local government agencies and members of wildlife management stakeholder groups. Questionnaires were used to explore values of wildlife held by stakeholder group members and the Victorian public. There are several instances of interviewed managers misunderstanding the values held by stakeholder groups and subsets of the Victorian public. Such discrepancies can be reduced by incorporating systematically obtained human dimensions information into management decisions. Interviewed wildlife managers appear to appreciate the importance of human dimensions information; however, there was some uncertainty about how it could be applied.

Wildlife management in Australasia : perceptions of objectives and priorities

The aim of this study was to examine the values and attitudes held by Australasian wildlife managers as they relate to wildlife management issues, and to gain some insight into possible future directions and priorities for Australasian wildlife management. During December 2002 – February 2003, 138 questionnaires were completed by members of the Australasian Wildlife Management Society (AWMS) and registrants of the 2002 AWMS annual conference. Threatened species management, threatened communities/habitats, and management of introduced species were the issues rated as needing the highest priority for the Australasian Wildlife Management Society. Issues such as animal rights, genetically modified organisms and timber harvesting on public lands were the lowest-rating issues. Respondents expressed a strong belief in managing and controlling wildlife to achieve wildlife management objectives, a strong belief that wildlife should be protected and that wildlife managers should minimise the pain and suffering of individual animals, and a belief that resources should be directed towards conserving wildlife populations rather than protecting individual animals from non-threatened populations. While respondents held a strong belief that it is important to consult the community when developing wildlife management policies and programs, there was little support for a comanagerial approach where the community has a significant role to play in decision-making processes.

Human dimensions of wildlife population management in Australasia – history, approaches and directions

It is now widely accepted that it is important to understand the ‘human dimensions’ of wildlife management issues in order to achieve management goals. This growing field of study was born in the 1960s and involves an examination of societal values, knowledge and behaviours associated with wildlife and wildlife management issues. This paper provides an overview of the history and directions in human dimensions research, focusing specifically on its application for wildlife population management in Australasia (in particular, Australia and New Zealand). It also provides a ‘toolkit’ of methods and approaches for those wishing to undertake, interpret or utilise human dimensions enquiries.

Public and stakeholder values of wildlife in Victoria, Australia

This paper explores the management implications of a recent study that was designed to explore public and stakeholder values of wildlife in Victoria, Australia. Questionnaires (n = 1431) were used to examine values and knowledge of wildlife held by residents from seven Victorian municipalities and members of six wildlife management stakeholder groups. The results suggest that most Victorians have a relatively strong emotional attachment to individual animals (the humanistic value) and are interested in learning about wildlife and the natural environment (the curiosity/learning/interacting value). In comparison, the negativistic, aesthetic, utilitarian-habitat and dominionistic/wildlife-consumption values were not expressed as strongly. These findings suggest that wildlife managers should expect support for wildlife management objectives that reflect the relatively strong humanistic orientation of Victorians and tailor management and education programs to appeal to this value and Victorians' interest in learning about wildlife.

Anything new under the sun? Lessons learned from community based natural resource management

Involving community in natural resource management has occurred under a wide variety of approaches, ideologies and titles over the last 30 odd years, with equally wide variety of outcomes for both the community and natural resource management!. Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) is now a commonly used and promoted, if not always well defined, approach. Claims about the benefits of CBNRM cover wildlife management and biodiversity, sustainable utilisation and management of natural resources, poverty reduction, increased livelihoods outcomes, improved food security, as well as less material benefits of livelihood diversification, empowerment, increased gender equality, and better institutional relations. There are also some fairly convincing criticisms of CBNRM reflecting on assumptions of the nature of communities, institutional arrangements and both institutional and community expectations. This paper reflects on the changing nature of community engagement in natural resource management, the emergence of CBNRM as an approach and the lessons learned from promoting CBNRM across case studies in the developing world.

Public and stakeholder values and knowledge of wildlife in Victoria, Australia

Prompted by a lack of human dimensions research in Australia, this study investigated the values and knowledge relating to wildlife held by members of the public within distinct demographic subsets of the Victorian population and members of wildlife management stakeholder groups; and compared these characteristics with how Victorian wildlife managers perceive these groups. A combination of semi-structured interviews and postal questionnaires were used. Fifteen in-depth interviews were conducted to explore how wildlife managers perceive the values and knowledge of wildlife held by members of various subsets of the Victorian population. A total of 1,431 questionnaires were completed by members of 13 public and stakeholder groups throughout Victoria, and these were analysed to explore values and knowledge relating to wildlife in Victoria. The findings of this study suggest that Victorian people have a strong emotional attachment to individual animals (the humanistic value), and an interest in learning about wildlife (the curiosity/learning/interacting value). The dominionistic/wildlife-consumption, utilitarian-habitat, aesthetic and negativistic values were not expressed by the majority of respondents from the public samples. The data also suggest that Victorian people have relatively low levels of factual knowledge about Australian wildlife. Thus, wildlife managers should expect support for wildlife management objectives that reflect the strong humanistic orientation of Victorians and tailor management and education programs to appeal to this value and Victorians' interest in learning about wildlife. Members of the Field Naturalists Club of Victoria (FNCV), Bird Observers Club of Australia (BOCA), Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) stakeholder groups and management agency Parks Victoria expressed a strong interest in learning about wildlife. Members of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) obtained high humanistic value scores; and members of the Victorian Field and Game Association (VFGA) obtained high domimomstic/wildlife-consumption value scores. Importantly, the humanistic and curiosity/learning/interacting values were the most strongly expressed values in all six groups and these values could be the key to more effective communication and collaboration between groups. Relationships between demographic factors, and values and knowledge relating to wildlife were found. For example, rural Victorians held a stronger dominionistic/ wildlife-consumption value than urban Victorians; females held stronger humanistic, curiosity/learning/interacting and negativistic values than males; young Victorians (18-34 years) held a lower curiosity/learning/interacting value and lower factual knowledge of wildlife than older Victorians; and more highly educated Victorians were more knowledgeable about wildlife than people with less formal education. No statistically significant differences were found between the values and knowledge of wildlife held by different income classes. While relationships between demographic factors, and values and knowledge relating to wildlife were found, they were generally much smaller than expected based on wildlife managers' perceptions and previous research. For example, the results suggest that Victorian females have a slightly stronger humanistic value of wildlife than males do. However, the important message emerging from the data is that males and females both express a strong emotional attachment to individual animals. Importantly, the results indicate that the effects of demographic factors on values and knowledge relating to wildlife are not always consistent across different geographic locations and stakeholder groups. For example, the slightly stronger interest in learning about wildlife among females when compared with males was observed in the rural and urban-fringe samples but not in the urban samples. This suggests that caution must be used when generalising the findings from human dimensions studies from one type of community or stakeholder group to another. Management programs should be tailored to the specific characteristics of the target audience. The findings also indicate that Victorian wildlife managers have diverse perceptions about the values and knowledge of wildlife held by members of different publics and stakeholder groups, and that the perceptions held by wildlife managers are not always consistent with the actual values and knowledge of wildlife held by members of different publics and stakeholders. For example, counter to the perceptions expressed by the interviewed wildlife managers, the interest in and factual knowledge of wildlife held by members of voluntary conservation groups equalled or surpassed that of wildlife managers; young Victorian adults (18-34 years) held a slightly lower curiosity/learning/interacting value and slightly lower level of factual knowledge of wildlife than older Victorians; and rural and urban communities in Victoria held low dominionistic and utilitarian values. Such discrepancies highlight the importance of investigating the actual values and knowledge held by members of such groups, so that appropriate and effective wildlife management programs can be implemented. Inaccurate perceptions and assumptions may contribute to ineffective communication between managers, stakeholders and publics; and adversely effect the success of wildlife management programs.

Dingoes can help conserve wildlife and our methods can tell

Management of apex predators is among the most controversial wildlife management issues globally. In Australia, some ecologists have advocated using the dingo, Canis dingo, as a tool for conservation management, due to evidence that they suppress invasive mesopredators. Hayward & Marlow (Journal of Applied Ecology, 51, 2014 and 835) questioned the capacity of dingoes to provide benefits to native biodiversity due to their inability to eradicate foxes and cats. They also argued that indices of abundance commonly used in studies of mesopredator release by dingoes (namely, track-based indices) invalidate the conclusions of the studies. Hayward & Marlow caution conservation practitioners against incorporating dingoes into conservation programmes. Counter to their claims, we summarise research showing that the suppression of invasive mesopredators (cf. eradication) can enhance populations of native species and is therefore a meaningful conservation objective. We highlight literature supporting the hypothesis that dingoes suppress mesopredator abundance and activity, which in turn benefits native biodiversity. We show that Hayward & Marlow overlook many studies of carnivores that show track indices capture a large amount of the variation in the density of medium- and large-sized carnivores. Synthesis and applications. Practitioners cannot afford to wait to act given the perilous state of Australia's mammal species, and we argue that the evidence is sufficiently strong to justify managing dingoes for biodiversity conservation.

AvianBuffer: an interactive tool for characterising and managing wildlife fear responses

The characterisation and management of deleterious processes affecting wildlife are ideally based on sound scientific information. However, relevant information is often absent, or difficult to access or contextualise for specific management purposes. We describe 'AvianBuffer', an interactive online tool enabling the estimation of distances at which Australian birds respond fearfully to humans. Users can input species assemblages and determine a 'separation distance' above which the assemblage is predicted to not flee humans. They can also nominate the diversity they wish to minimise disturbance to, or a specific separation distance to obtain an estimate of the diversity that will remain undisturbed. The dataset is based upon flight-initiation distances (FIDs) from 251 Australian bird species (n = 9190 FIDs) and a range of human-associated stimuli. The tool will be of interest to a wide audience including conservation managers, pest managers, policy makers, land-use planners, education and public outreach officers, animal welfare proponents and wildlife ecologists. We discuss possible applications of the data, including the construction of buffers, development of codes of conduct, environmental impact assessments and public outreach. This tool will help balance the growing need for biodiversity conservation in areas where humans can experience nature. The online resource will be expanded in future iterations to include an international database of FIDs of both avian and non-avian species.

Stop jumping the gun : a call for evidence-based invasive predator management

Invasive mammalian predators are major drivers of species extinctions globally. To protect native prey, lethal control is often used with the aim of reducing or exterminating invasive predator populations. The efficacy of this practice, however, is often not considered despite multiple practical and ecological factors that can limit success. Here, we summarize contemporary knowledge regarding the use and challenges of both lethal control and alternative approaches for reducing invasive predator impacts. As the prevailing management approach, we outline four key issues that can compromise the effectiveness of lethal control: release of herbivore and mesopredator populations, disruption of predator social systems, compensatory predator immigration, and ethical concerns. We then discuss the relative merits and limitations of four alternative approaches that may enhance conservation practitioner's ability to effectively manage invasive predators: top-predator conservation or reintroduction, maintaining habitat complexity, exclusion fencing, and behavioral and evolutionary ecology. Considerable uncertainty remains regarding the effectiveness of management approaches in different environmental contexts. We propose that the deficiencies and uncertainties outlined here can be addressed through a combination of adaptive management, expert elicitation, and cost-benefit analyses. Improved management of invasive predators requires greater consideration and assessment of the full range of management approaches available.