Perception and trust influence acceptance for black bears more than bear density or conflicts
IntroductionTo sustain black bear (Ursus americanus) populations, wildlife managers should understand the coupled socio-ecological systems that influence acceptance capacity for bears.MethodIn a study area encompassing a portion of New York State, we spatially matched datasets from three sources: hu...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023-02-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Conservation Science |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2023.1041393/full |
| _version_ | 1811168279246405632 |
|---|---|
| author | William F. Siemer T. Bruce Lauber Richard C. Stedman Jeremy E. Hurst Catherine C. Sun Angela K. Fuller Nicholas A. Hollingshead Jerrold L. Belant Kenneth F. Kellner |
| author_facet | William F. Siemer T. Bruce Lauber Richard C. Stedman Jeremy E. Hurst Catherine C. Sun Angela K. Fuller Nicholas A. Hollingshead Jerrold L. Belant Kenneth F. Kellner |
| author_sort | William F. Siemer |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | IntroductionTo sustain black bear (Ursus americanus) populations, wildlife managers should understand the coupled socio-ecological systems that influence acceptance capacity for bears.MethodIn 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. ResultsThe 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. DiscussionFindings 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. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T16:23:28Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-583c796e174f40b19132b718d945dc9e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2673-611X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T16:23:28Z |
| publishDate | 2023-02-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Conservation Science |
| spelling | doaj.art-583c796e174f40b19132b718d945dc9e2023-02-09T09:14:24ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Conservation Science2673-611X2023-02-01410.3389/fcosc.2023.10413931041393Perception and trust influence acceptance for black bears more than bear density or conflictsWilliam F. Siemer0T. Bruce Lauber1Richard C. Stedman2Jeremy E. Hurst3Catherine C. Sun4Angela K. Fuller5Nicholas A. Hollingshead6Jerrold L. Belant7Kenneth F. Kellner8Center for Conservation Social Sciences, Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United StatesCenter for Conservation Social Sciences, Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United StatesCenter for Conservation Social Sciences, Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United StatesDivision of Fish and Wildlife, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Albany, NY, United StatesZambian Carnivore Programme, Greater Kafue Team, Mfuwe, Eastern Province, ZambiaU.S. Geological Survey, New York Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United StatesCornell Wildlife Health Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, United StatesDepartment of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United StatesDepartment of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, United StatesIntroductionTo sustain black bear (Ursus americanus) populations, wildlife managers should understand the coupled socio-ecological systems that influence acceptance capacity for bears.MethodIn 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. ResultsThe 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. DiscussionFindings 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. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2023.1041393/fullacceptancebearconflictpopulation densitypsychological modeltrust |
| spellingShingle | William F. Siemer T. Bruce Lauber Richard C. Stedman Jeremy E. Hurst Catherine C. Sun Angela K. Fuller Nicholas A. Hollingshead Jerrold L. Belant Kenneth F. Kellner Perception and trust influence acceptance for black bears more than bear density or conflicts Frontiers in Conservation Science acceptance bear conflict population density psychological model trust |
| title | Perception and trust influence acceptance for black bears more than bear density or conflicts |
| title_full | Perception and trust influence acceptance for black bears more than bear density or conflicts |
| title_fullStr | Perception and trust influence acceptance for black bears more than bear density or conflicts |
| title_full_unstemmed | Perception and trust influence acceptance for black bears more than bear density or conflicts |
| title_short | Perception and trust influence acceptance for black bears more than bear density or conflicts |
| title_sort | perception and trust influence acceptance for black bears more than bear density or conflicts |
| topic | acceptance bear conflict population density psychological model trust |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2023.1041393/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT williamfsiemer perceptionandtrustinfluenceacceptanceforblackbearsmorethanbeardensityorconflicts AT tbrucelauber perceptionandtrustinfluenceacceptanceforblackbearsmorethanbeardensityorconflicts AT richardcstedman perceptionandtrustinfluenceacceptanceforblackbearsmorethanbeardensityorconflicts AT jeremyehurst perceptionandtrustinfluenceacceptanceforblackbearsmorethanbeardensityorconflicts AT catherinecsun perceptionandtrustinfluenceacceptanceforblackbearsmorethanbeardensityorconflicts AT angelakfuller perceptionandtrustinfluenceacceptanceforblackbearsmorethanbeardensityorconflicts AT nicholasahollingshead perceptionandtrustinfluenceacceptanceforblackbearsmorethanbeardensityorconflicts AT jerroldlbelant perceptionandtrustinfluenceacceptanceforblackbearsmorethanbeardensityorconflicts AT kennethfkellner perceptionandtrustinfluenceacceptanceforblackbearsmorethanbeardensityorconflicts |