Conservation reliance and its influence on support for carnivore recovery

被引:1
|
作者
Serenari, Christopher [1 ]
机构
[1] Texas State Univ, Dept Biol, San Marcos, TX USA
关键词
carnivore; Conservation reliance; North Carolina; policy tool; private lands; wolf; RED WOLF; WILDLIFE POLICY; REINTRODUCTION; NEED; COEXISTENCE; GOVERNANCE; MANAGEMENT; TOLERANCE; ATTITUDES; CONFLICTS;
D O I
10.1111/csp2.382
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
The number of species reliant on consistent human intervention is rising. These species are labeled conservation-reliant, which affords them unique resources to propagate them. A conservation reliance designation has important implications for recovery of large carnivores, particularly where private lands encompass historical ranges. As a policy tool, a conservation reliance designation may be used in conjunction with other popular instruments such as financial incentives or co-governance to promote coexistence between carnivores and key cohorts such as landowners and hunters, who are often vocal dissidents of carnivore recovery, especially wolf recovery projects. Yet, the nascent literature on conservation reliance has yet to address the influence of conservation reliance on landowner or hunter support for carnivore conservation. This paper fills this gap with an analysis of responses from 639 landowners to explore the influence of a conservation reliance designation on intention to coexist with wild red wolves (Canis rufus) in northeast North Carolina. Findings suggest that respondents living in the red wolf recovery zone generally oppose a conservation reliance designation, a critical means to red wolf recovery. Hence, a conservation reliance designation may actually erode the value of some species they intend to preserve. Disapproval of conservation reliance poses new confronts to restoration politics and its diversity of strands, which must be woven into new ways of thinking about the ethical and political aspects of carnivore policy and management.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Why 'carnivore conservation'?
    Gittleman, JL
    Funk, SM
    MacDonald, DW
    Wayne, RK
    [J]. CARNIVORE CONSERVATION, 2001, 5 : 1 - +
  • [2] Carnivore conservation at the crossroads
    Karanth, K. Ullas
    Chellam, Ravi
    [J]. ORYX, 2009, 43 (01) : 1 - 2
  • [3] Conservation biology and carnivore conservation in the Rocky Mountains
    Noss, RF
    Quigley, HB
    Hornocker, MG
    Merrill, T
    Paquet, PC
    [J]. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 1996, 10 (04) : 949 - 963
  • [4] Hunting for large carnivore conservation
    Treves, Adrian
    [J]. JOURNAL OF APPLIED ECOLOGY, 2009, 46 (06) : 1350 - 1356
  • [5] Conservation performance payments for carnivore conservation in Sweden
    Zabel, Astrid
    Holm-Mueller, Karin
    [J]. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2008, 22 (02) : 247 - 251
  • [6] Wildlife conservation - The carnivore comeback
    Enserink, Martin
    Vogel, Gretchen
    [J]. SCIENCE, 2006, 314 (5800) : 746 - 749
  • [7] A new era for carnivore conservation
    Mech, LD
    [J]. WILDLIFE SOCIETY BULLETIN, 1996, 24 (03) : 397 - 401
  • [8] Trust and Emotions Predict Support for Large Carnivore Recovery in the Absence of Real Threats
    Ghasemi, Benjamin
    Landon, Adam C.
    Miller, Craig A.
    Williams, Brent D.
    [J]. SOCIETY & NATURAL RESOURCES, 2021, 34 (10) : 1318 - 1337
  • [9] Carnivore conservation planning on Borneo: identifying key carnivore landscapes, research priorities and conservation interventions
    Mathai, John
    Duckworth, J. W.
    Meijaard, Erik
    Fredriksson, Gabriella
    Hon, Jason
    Sebastian, Anthony
    Ancrenaz, Marc
    Hearn, Andrew J.
    Ross, Joanna
    Cheyne, Susan
    Wilting, Andreas
    [J]. RAFFLES BULLETIN OF ZOOLOGY, 2016, : 186 - 217
  • [10] Reliance on Facebook for news and its influence on political engagement
    David, Clarissa C.
    San Pascual, Ma. Rosel S.
    Torres, Ma. Eliza S.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (03):