What Determines the Acceptability of Wildlife Control Methods?

A Case of Feral Pig Management in theWet Tropics World Heritage Area, Australia

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Understanding public acceptability of wildlife control methods is key to successful wildlife management. The existing literature, however, pays little attention to alien invasive species. We evaluated the acceptability of methods used to control feral pigs (Sus scrofa; trapping, hunting, fencing, and poison baiting) in Australia's Wet Tropics World Heritage Area (WTWHA) across local residents of and tourists to the area, using household surveys and tourist surveys. We predicted that the level of acceptability of a control method would differ across stakeholder groups (i.e., resident, tourist) and methods considered inhumane and/or unsafe would be less supported. Local residents expressed more support for feral pig control than tourists. Both groups identified similar factors, such as humaneness, as being important, but local residents also considered effectiveness and direct social and/or economic benefits from control. We conclude that the types of stakeholder groups determine the acceptability of the methods, but factors considered important in supporting methods can be case-specific.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)97-108
Number of pages11
JournalHuman Dimensions of Wildlife
Volume18
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2013

Fingerprint

pig
stakeholder
wildlife management
household survey
invasive species
hunting
trapping
method
world
wildlife
tropics
economics

Cite this

@article{46a16df801ce4f86a3bf6fc47f5129f9,
title = "What Determines the Acceptability of Wildlife Control Methods?: A Case of Feral Pig Management in theWet Tropics World Heritage Area, Australia",
abstract = "Understanding public acceptability of wildlife control methods is key to successful wildlife management. The existing literature, however, pays little attention to alien invasive species. We evaluated the acceptability of methods used to control feral pigs (Sus scrofa; trapping, hunting, fencing, and poison baiting) in Australia's Wet Tropics World Heritage Area (WTWHA) across local residents of and tourists to the area, using household surveys and tourist surveys. We predicted that the level of acceptability of a control method would differ across stakeholder groups (i.e., resident, tourist) and methods considered inhumane and/or unsafe would be less supported. Local residents expressed more support for feral pig control than tourists. Both groups identified similar factors, such as humaneness, as being important, but local residents also considered effectiveness and direct social and/or economic benefits from control. We conclude that the types of stakeholder groups determine the acceptability of the methods, but factors considered important in supporting methods can be case-specific.",
author = "Kamaljit Sangha",
year = "2013",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1080/10871209.2013.727523",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "97--108",
journal = "Human Dimensions of Wildlife",
issn = "1087-1209",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "2",

}

What Determines the Acceptability of Wildlife Control Methods? A Case of Feral Pig Management in theWet Tropics World Heritage Area, Australia. / Sangha, Kamaljit.

In: Human Dimensions of Wildlife, Vol. 18, No. 2, 03.2013, p. 97-108.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - What Determines the Acceptability of Wildlife Control Methods?

T2 - A Case of Feral Pig Management in theWet Tropics World Heritage Area, Australia

AU - Sangha, Kamaljit

PY - 2013/3

Y1 - 2013/3

N2 - Understanding public acceptability of wildlife control methods is key to successful wildlife management. The existing literature, however, pays little attention to alien invasive species. We evaluated the acceptability of methods used to control feral pigs (Sus scrofa; trapping, hunting, fencing, and poison baiting) in Australia's Wet Tropics World Heritage Area (WTWHA) across local residents of and tourists to the area, using household surveys and tourist surveys. We predicted that the level of acceptability of a control method would differ across stakeholder groups (i.e., resident, tourist) and methods considered inhumane and/or unsafe would be less supported. Local residents expressed more support for feral pig control than tourists. Both groups identified similar factors, such as humaneness, as being important, but local residents also considered effectiveness and direct social and/or economic benefits from control. We conclude that the types of stakeholder groups determine the acceptability of the methods, but factors considered important in supporting methods can be case-specific.

AB - Understanding public acceptability of wildlife control methods is key to successful wildlife management. The existing literature, however, pays little attention to alien invasive species. We evaluated the acceptability of methods used to control feral pigs (Sus scrofa; trapping, hunting, fencing, and poison baiting) in Australia's Wet Tropics World Heritage Area (WTWHA) across local residents of and tourists to the area, using household surveys and tourist surveys. We predicted that the level of acceptability of a control method would differ across stakeholder groups (i.e., resident, tourist) and methods considered inhumane and/or unsafe would be less supported. Local residents expressed more support for feral pig control than tourists. Both groups identified similar factors, such as humaneness, as being important, but local residents also considered effectiveness and direct social and/or economic benefits from control. We conclude that the types of stakeholder groups determine the acceptability of the methods, but factors considered important in supporting methods can be case-specific.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84876066886&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10871209.2013.727523

DO - 10.1080/10871209.2013.727523

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 97

EP - 108

JO - Human Dimensions of Wildlife

JF - Human Dimensions of Wildlife

SN - 1087-1209

IS - 2

ER -