Management Planning for Nature Conservation

Alexander, Mike

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5116-3

Cited by 19 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Creating good management objectives can be challenging, but SMART management objectives help to communicate management issues more clearly, express what is desired by the agency and the public more explicitly, and enable a quantitative evaluation of progress towards achieving management objectives (Alexander, 2008). Providing definitions for the SMART criteria is a great step forward from just listing the criteria (Alexander, 2008), but we go even further to provide managers with a template to help streamline the process for writing SMART management objectives. Perhaps, as a higher frequency of SMART management objectives are stated in management plans, they will serve as a means in helping close the research–implementation gap (Knight et al., 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Developing objectives for management plans is an essential but challenging step in the planning process (Doran, 1981; Gregory et al., 2012). If management objectives are incomplete, wrong, or simply not stated, effort and other finite resources may be misdirected to the wrong problem, and new problems or conflicts can arise (Alexander, 2008; Bond et al., 2008; Gregory et al., 2012; Meadows, 2008; Montibeller & von Winterfeldt, 2015). This is a legitimate hurdle and concern for many natural resource and environmental managers, in part, because management and decision sciences tend to go underemphasized during university coursework and early career development, despite being able to provide conceptual and analytical tools to formally analyse decisions and cope with biases (Barber & Taylor, 1990; Colvin & Peterson, 2016; Johnson et al., 2015; Kahneman, 2011; Kelso & Murphy, 1988; Montibeller & von Winterfeldt, 2015; Nielsen, 1984; Powell et al., 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Writing SMART objectives for natural resource and environmental management

Aldridge,

Colvin

2024

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In natural resource and environmental management, well‐written objectives are critical for effective decision‐making and the achievement of desired outcomes. This article aims to improve practitioners' ability to identify and write SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time‐bound) objectives for natural resource and environmental management. We differentiate between research and management objectives, define each SMART criterion, and introduce a template to help write management objectives. We demonstrate the use of the SMART management objectives template with a hypothetical example and two recent applications. The template simplifies the process of writing SMART management objectives. It is applicable to popular management frameworks like management by objectives and structured decision making. The implementation of SMART criteria and the provided template can lead to better outcomes in natural resource and environmental management, benefiting current and future generations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Writing SMART objectives for natural resource and environmental management

Aldridge,

Colvin

2024

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Municipalities across North America have responded to the increased prevalence of urban coyotes and associated conflicts with management plans that address human–coyote coexistence (Appendix S1: Table S1). Typical goals of these plans are to increase communication among stakeholders and wildlife professionals (Alexander, 2013; Marchini et al, 2019), identify the types of actions that should be used to address human–coyote conflicts, and provide direction for implementing those actions (Schwartz et al, 2018). Many of the plans are based on a template provided by The Humane Society of the United States (2019), which recommends targeted lethal management of animals that bite people, opposes the use of translocations, and encourages the use of low‐intensity hazing (Lesmerises et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proactive use of intensive aversive conditioning increases probability of retreat by coyotes

Lajeunesse,

Smith,

Harshaw

et al. 2023

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coyotes (Canis latrans) are showing increasingly bold behaviors toward people and their pets throughout North America. Bold behavior by wildlife might be reduced by hazing and aversive conditioning, which is recommended in many management plans for coyotes, but with little information about how it is to be conducted, and few studies have tested this approach. We conducted an online search for coyote management plans across North America to review techniques and recommendations related to the implementation of hazing or aversive conditioning and reported on the implementation of a high‐intensity aversive conditioning program in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Almost all the management plans recommended hazing coyotes, most often by using a combination of noises, lights, and movements, but only 20% of 71 plans recommended high‐intensity techniques like those used by the contractors in Calgary. Contractors there searched for coyotes in 72 public park areas where members of the public had submitted reports to a civic call center for bold coyotes, attended sites on 1917 occasions, observed coyotes on 765 occasions, and reported coyote treatments and responses on 734 occasions. The probability of coyote retreats increased by 29%–37% with each additional previous aversive conditioning event at the site and doubled with the presence of dogs and with the application of projected chalk balls prior to the event being investigated, suggesting coyotes learned to avoid contractors. During engagements with contractors, coyote retreat probability declined by 21%–25% with each additional day since the last aversive conditioning engagement, and by 97.2%–97.6% with the presence of dogs and when shots were fired from a paintball gun, presumably because these tools were used only on the boldest coyotes. We found no effect of the presence or past number of aversive conditioning events on the number of coyote reports per week by the public. Although such high‐intensity aversive conditioning is rarely recommended in management plans, our results suggest that its repeated application can reduce coyote boldness over time, but coyotes may not generalize this response to other people owing to visual cues (e.g., high‐visibility vests, consistent vehicles) associated with contractors.

show abstract

“…Attributes are selected because they provide the evidence that is needed to assess the condition of the feature. Examples of attributes for a habitat are (Alexander 2013):…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The key factors are identified, and the limits within which they are considered acceptable are defined. The factors can then be monitored to provide the evidence that they fall within the specified limits, in other words to demonstrate that they are under control or otherwise (Alexander 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%