Dimensions of local public attitudes towards invasive species management in protected areas

Abstract

Context. Invasive species management is often a source of contention; therefore, understanding human dimensions is viewed increasingly as critical for management success.Aims. Using invasive Javan rusa deer (Cervus timorensis) in the Royal National Park (RNP), Sydney, as a case study, we sought to identify key dimensions of local public attitudes towards deer and associated management interventions, to identify the most divisive issues, and to assess the influence of experiences on attitudes.Methods. We used a mixed-methods approach, using a questionnaire targeted at residents closest to the border of the RNP (n = 406, 30% response rate). The potential for conflict index (PCI 2 ) was used to analyse 32 framing statements, generated through in-depth interviews with 18 key stakeholders from a range of stakeholder groups (e.g. conservation, hunting, animal welfare). We also tested for significant differences in attitudes between those who had or had not experienced deer impacts or received information on deer management. We conducted qualitative analysis of open comments to identify emergent themes and develop an attitudes framework.Key results. We identified three overarching dimensions to local attitudes, namely, stakeholder, wildlife and management dimensions, each consisting of key themes and issues, forming the attitudes framework. The most divisive issues based on PCI 2 analysis related to deer remaining in the park (PCI 2 = 0.626), the heritage value of deer (PCI 2 = 0.626), the need to remove deer (PCI 2 = 0.531) and the need to kill non-natives in national parks (PCI 2 = 0.535). Experience of deer-vehicle collisions and property damage were associated with significantly more negative attitudes towards deer and non-native species and more trust in ecological evidence (P < 0.001), whereas positive experience of deer had the opposite effect (P < 0.001). These experiences were also associated with attitudes towards aerial shooting (P < 0.05) but not hunting. Receiving information improved trust in ecological evidence and decreased belief in heritage value of deer (P < 0.05).Conclusions. Attitudes of the local public were varied and complex; however, a mixed-methods bottom-up approach allowed us to identify specific key issues of divisiveness and make management recommendations.Implications. The framework and analysis have the potential to facilitate conflict mitigation and develop invasive species management strategies that are inclusive of the local community.

Public preferences for the management of different invasive alien forest taxa

“…An EWRR relies heavily on people's knowledge about IAS, which, according to several studies (Ansong and Pickering 2015;Carlson and Vondracek 2014;Ford-Thompson et al 2015;Nanayakkara et al 2018;Sharp et al 2011), can affect their capacity to participate in managing IAS and therefore successfully implement the system. In our research, the media obviously plays a key role in informing the public about IAS and, as confirmed by Marzano et al (2015), significantly contributes to the public's understanding of IAS related issues.…”

“…Several studies have been published on the attitudes of the public towards alien species and possible management measures (Ansong and Pickering 2015;Fischer and Charnley 2012;Ford-Thompson et al 2015;Lindemann-Matthies 2016;Nanayakkara et al 2018;Porth et al 2015;Rolfe and Windle 2014;Subroy et al 2018;Verbrugge et al 2013). However, most of these studies focused on only one taxonomic group-similar to the findings of Courchamp et al (2017)-from which the invasive plant species were best studied.…”

Public Opinion Towards Gene Drive as a Pest Control Approach for Biodiversity Conservation and the Association of Underlying Worldviews

“…Participation in these behaviors was collected as sometimes there is a gap between attitude and behavior (Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002) or engagement in the behaviors occurs for other reasons than environmental benefits, known as co-benefits (MacDonald et al, 2019). Furthermore, participation and engagement in pest species issues has been linked to support of management options in some studies (Ford-Thompson, Snell, Saunders, & White, 2015) but not others (Sharp et al, 2011). We assessed behavior as a measure of engagement in conservation issues and its relationship with support for novel pest control methods.…”

Stakeholder discourse and opinion towards a charismatic non‐native lizard species: Potential invasive problem or a welcome addition?

“…With human dimensions being a feature of all aspects of the invasion process (García‐Llorente, Martín‐López, González, Alcorlo, & Montes, ; Tassin & Kull, ), several studies have sought to explore variation and discord amongst stakeholder opinion with regard to INNS to assess implications for support of management practices (Bremner & Park, ; Fischer, Selge, van der Wal, & Larson, ; Gobster, ). Species attributes, level of knowledge, perceptions of threat, attitudes towards intervention and nature values have all been found to be subjective influences on stakeholder opinion (Ford‐Thompson, Snell, Saunders, & White, ; García‐Llorente et al., ; Gozlan, Burnard, Andreou, & Britton, ; Shackleton & Shackleton, ; Verbrugge, Van den Born, & Lenders, ). Indeed, the discourse surrounding issues of INNS appears to be beset not only by the inherent uncertainty that surrounds ecological knowledge of biological invasions, their management and environmental implications (García‐Llorente et al., ), but also by highly varied and subjective comprehension of emotive terms such as ‘non‐native’, ‘alien’, ‘exotic’, ‘pest’, ‘invasive species’, ‘ecological impact’ and the connotations that arise through social representation of these concepts as a whole (DEFRA., ; Essl et al., ; Tassin & Kull, ).…”