Book contents
- Human–Wildlife Interactions
- Conservation Biology
- Human–Wildlife Interactions
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Map
- 1 Human–Wildlife Conflicts and the Need to Include Coexistence
- 2 A Multilevel, Systems View of Values Can Inform a Move towards Human–Wildlife Coexistence
- 3 Broadening the Aperture on Coexistence with Wildlife through the Lenses of Identity, Risk and Morals
- 4 Understanding Emotions As Opportunities for and Barriers to Coexistence with Wildlife
- 5 Tolerance for Wildlife
- 6 A Framework for Assessing and Quantifying Human–Wildlife Interactions in Urban Areas
- 7 Predators in Human Landscapes
- 8 Corridor of Conflict
- 9 A Collaborative Approach for Coexistence with Wildlife in Rural Regions of Japan
- 10 Towards Tolerance and Coexistence
- 11 Elephants and Bees
- 12 The Twin Challenges of Preventing Real and Perceived Threats to Human Interests
- 13 Conflict and Coexistence with Invasive Wildlife
- 14 Institutions for Achieving Human–Wildlife Coexistence
- 15 Worldviews and Coexistence with Coyotes
- 16 Conservation Marketing As a Tool to Promote Human–Wildlife Coexistence
- 17 Leaping Forward
- 18 Towards Human–Wildlife Coexistence through the Integration of Human and Natural Systems
- 19 Planning for Coexistence in a Complex Human-Dominated World
- 20 Human–Wildlife Interactions
- Index
- Plate Section (PDF Only)
- References
13 - Conflict and Coexistence with Invasive Wildlife
Examining Attitudes and Behaviours towards Burmese Pythons in Florida
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 April 2019
Book contents
- Human–Wildlife Interactions
- Conservation Biology
- Human–Wildlife Interactions
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Map
- 1 Human–Wildlife Conflicts and the Need to Include Coexistence
- 2 A Multilevel, Systems View of Values Can Inform a Move towards Human–Wildlife Coexistence
- 3 Broadening the Aperture on Coexistence with Wildlife through the Lenses of Identity, Risk and Morals
- 4 Understanding Emotions As Opportunities for and Barriers to Coexistence with Wildlife
- 5 Tolerance for Wildlife
- 6 A Framework for Assessing and Quantifying Human–Wildlife Interactions in Urban Areas
- 7 Predators in Human Landscapes
- 8 Corridor of Conflict
- 9 A Collaborative Approach for Coexistence with Wildlife in Rural Regions of Japan
- 10 Towards Tolerance and Coexistence
- 11 Elephants and Bees
- 12 The Twin Challenges of Preventing Real and Perceived Threats to Human Interests
- 13 Conflict and Coexistence with Invasive Wildlife
- 14 Institutions for Achieving Human–Wildlife Coexistence
- 15 Worldviews and Coexistence with Coyotes
- 16 Conservation Marketing As a Tool to Promote Human–Wildlife Coexistence
- 17 Leaping Forward
- 18 Towards Human–Wildlife Coexistence through the Integration of Human and Natural Systems
- 19 Planning for Coexistence in a Complex Human-Dominated World
- 20 Human–Wildlife Interactions
- Index
- Plate Section (PDF Only)
- References
Summary
Invasive alien species are an emerging arena of human–wildlife conflict, but contra other human–wildlife interactions, 'conflict' with invasive wildlife suggests a positive outcome for biodiversity. Understanding stakeholder attitudes towards invasive animals can be critical for decision-making. We surveyed samples of the Florida general public (N = 505) and participants in the 2016 Python ChallengeTM (N = 287) to examine how attitudes toward invasive Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) relate to the behaviour of hunting pythons. Many Python ChallengeTM participants held contradictory attitudes of appreciating the species but strongly disliking its presence in the environment, whereas the general public was largely neutral-to-negative on both attitudes. Results highlight the multidimensionality of attitudes toward wildlife and suggest that attitudes and behaviours exist on separate continua rather than a single 'conflict-to-coexistence continuum'. Much of the general public currently 'tolerates' the presence of invasive pythons, suggesting limited potential support for control efforts.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Human–Wildlife InteractionsTurning Conflict into Coexistence, pp. 265 - 287Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
13.5 References
Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude–behaviour relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918.Google Scholar
Baker, R., Brick, J. M., Bates, N. A., Battaglia, M., Couper, M. P., Dever, J. A., Gile, K. J. & Tourangeau, R. (2013). Report of the AAPOR Task Force on Non-Probability Sampling. American Association for Public Opinion Research.Google Scholar
Bremner, A. & Park, K. (2007). Public attitudes to the management of invasive non-native species in Scotland. Biological Conservation, 139, 306–14.Google Scholar
Bruskotter, J. T. & Fulton, D. C. (2012). Will hunters steward wolves? A comment on Treves and Martin. Society & Natural Resources, 25, 97–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruskotter, J. T., Singh, A., Fulton, D. C. & Slagle, K. (2015). Assessing tolerance for wildlife: Clarifying relations between concepts and measures. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 20, 255–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Secretariat. (2002). Decision VI/23: Alien species that threaten ecosystems, habitats and species. Document UNEP/CBD/COP/6/23. CBD Secretariat, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
Davis, M.A., Chew, M. K., Hobbs, R. J., Lugo, A. E., Ewel, J. J., Vermeij, G. J., Brown, J. H., Rosenzweig, M. L., Gardener, M. R., Carroll, S. P., Thompson, K., Pickett, S. T. A., Stromberg, J. C., Del Tredici, P., Suding, K. N., Ehrenfeld, J. G., Grime, J. P., Mascaro, J. & Briggs, J. C. (2011). Don’t judge species on their origins. Nature, 474, 153–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickman, A. J. (2010). Complexities of conflict: The importance of considering social factors for effectively resolving human–wildlife conflict. Animal Conservation, 13, 458–66.Google Scholar
Eagly, A. H. & Chaiken, S. (1993). The Psychology of Attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
Ericsson, G. & Heberlein, T. A. (2003). Attitudes of hunters, locals, and the general public in Sweden now that the wolves are back. Biological Conservation, 111 (2), 149–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estévez, R. A., Anderson, C. B., Pizarro, J. C. & Burgman, M. A. (2014). Clarifying values, risk perceptions, and attitudes to resolve or avoid social conflicts in invasive species management. Conservation Biology, 29, 19–30.Google Scholar
Fischer, A., Selge, S., van der Wal, R. & Larson, B. M. H. (2014). The public and professionals reason similarly about the management of non-native invasive species: A quantitative investigation of the relationship between beliefs and attitudes. PLoS ONE, 9(8), e105495.Google Scholar
Fischer, A. & van der Wal, R. (2007). Invasive plant suppresses charismatic seabird: The construction of attitudes towards biodiversity management options. Biological Conservation, 135, 256–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, M. (2016). Whose conflict is it anyway? Mobilizing research to save lives. Oryx, 50(3), 377–8.Google Scholar
Frank, B. (2016). Human–wildlife conflicts, the need to include tolerance and coexistence: An introductory comment. Society & Natural Resources, 29(6), 738–43.Google Scholar
García-Llorente, M., Martín-López, B., González, J. A., Alcorlo, P. & Montes, C. (2008). Social perceptions of the impacts and benefits of invasive alien species: Implications for management. Biological Conservation, 141, 2969–83.Google Scholar
Hart, K. M., Schofield, P. J. & Gregoire, D. R. (2012). Experimentally derived salinity tolerance of hatchling Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) from the Everglades, Florida (USA). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 413, 56–9.Google Scholar
Harvey, R. G., Briggs-Gonzalez, V. S. & Mazzotti, F. J. (2017). Conservation payments in a social context: Determinants of tolerance and behavioural intentions towards wild cats in northern Belize. Oryx, 51(4), 730–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, R. G. & Mazzotti, F. J. (2016). Public Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviours toward Invasive Lionfish: Pre- and Post-Campaign Surveys. Final report to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. 42 pp.Google Scholar
Harvey, R. G., Perez, L. & Mazzotti, F. J. (2015). Not seeing is not believing: Volunteer beliefs about Burmese pythons in Florida and implications for public participation in invasive species removal. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 59, 789–807.Google Scholar
Hayman, R. B., Harvey, R. G., Mazzotti, F. J., Israel, G. D. & Woodward, A. R. (2014). Who complains about alligators? Cognitive and situational factors influence behaviour toward wildlife. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 19, 481–97.Google Scholar
Heberlein, T. A. (2012). Navigating Environmental Attitudes. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Huang, P. & Lamm, A. J. (2016). Identifying invasive species educational needs in Florida: Opportunities for extension. Journal of Extension, 54(5), 5RIB7.Google Scholar
Hunter, M. E., Oyler-McCance, S. J., Dorazio, R. M., Fike, J. A., Smith, B. J., Hunter, C. T., Reed, R. N. & Hart, K. M. (2015). Environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling improves occurrence and detection estimates of invasive Burmese pythons. PLoS ONE, 10(4), e0121655.Google Scholar
Kaltenborn, B. P., Bjerke, T., Nyahongo, J. W. & Williams, D. R. (2006). Animal preferences and acceptability of wildlife management actions around Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. Biodiversity and Conservation, 15(14), 4633–49.Google Scholar
Kellert, S. R. (1984). American attitudes toward and knowledge of animals: An update. In Fox, M. W. & Mickley, L. D., eds., Advances in Animal Welfare Science 1984/85. Washington, DC: The Humane Society of the United States, pp. 177–213.Google Scholar
Kellert, S. R. (1996). The Value of Life: Biological Diversity and Human Society. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Kellert, S. R. & Berry, J. (1981). Knowledge, Affection, and Basic Attitudes toward Animals in American Society. Report no. 024–010- 00–625-1. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Knight, A. J. (2008). Bats, snakes and spiders, oh my! How aesthetic and negativistic attitudes, and other concepts predict support for species protection. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 94–103.Google Scholar
Mazzotti, F. J., Rochford, M. R., Vinci, J. J., Jeffery, B. M., Ketterlin Eckles, J., Dove, C. & Sommers, K. P. (2016). Implications of the 2013 Python Challenge(TM) for ecology and management of the Burmese Python (Python molurus bivittatus) in Florida. Southeastern Naturalist, 15(sp8), 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCleery, R. A, Sovie, A., Reed, R. N., Cunningham, M. W., Hunter, M. E., Hart, K. M. (2015). Marsh rabbit mortalities tie pythons to the precipitous decline of mammals in the Everglades. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 282, 20150120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, J. M. & Gramann, J. H. (1989). Predicting effectiveness of wildlife education programs: A study of students’ attitudes and knowledge toward snakes. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 17(4), 501–9.Google Scholar
Naughton-Treves, L., Grossberg, R. & Treves, A. (2003). Paying for tolerance: Rural citizens’ attitudes toward wolf depredation and compensation. Conservation Biology, 17, 1500–11.Google Scholar
Öhman, A. (2009). Of snakes and faces: An evolutionary perspective on the psychology of fear. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 50(6), 543–52.Google Scholar
Pagani, C., Robustelli, F. & Ascione, F. R. (2007). Italian youths’ attitudes toward, and concern for, animals. Anthrozoös, 20(3), 275–93.Google Scholar
Peterson, M. N., Birckhead, J. L., Leong, K., Peterson, M. L. & Peterson, T. R. (2010). Rearticulating the myth of human–wildlife conflict. Conservation Letters, 3, 74–82.Google Scholar
Pittman, S. E., Hart, K. M., Cherkiss, M. S., Snow, R. W., Fujisaki, I., Smith, B. J., Mazzotti, F. J. & Dorcas, M. E. (2014). Homing of invasive Burmese pythons in south Florida: Evidence for map and compass senses in snakes. Biology Letters, 10, 20140040.Google Scholar
Prokop, P., Ozel, M. & Usak, M. (2009). Cross-cultural comparison of student attitudes toward snakes. Society and Animals, 17, 224–40.Google Scholar
Redpath, S. M., Bhatia, S. & Young, J. (2015). Tilting at wildlife: Reconsidering human–wildlife conflict. Oryx, 49, 222–5.Google Scholar
Reed, R. N. & Rodda, G. H. (2011). Burmese python and other giant constrictors. In Simberloff, D. S. & Rejmánek, M., eds., Encyclopedia of Biological Invasions. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 85–91.Google Scholar
Russell, J. C. & Blackburn, T. M. (2017). The rise of invasive species denialism. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 32(1), 3–6.Google Scholar
Schüttler, E., Rozzi, R. & Jax, K. (2011). Towards a societal discourse on invasive species management: A case study of public perceptions of mink and beavers in Cape Horn. Journal for Nature Conservation, 19, 175–84.Google Scholar
Sharp, R. L., Larson, L. R. & Green, G. T. (2011). Factors influencing public preferences for invasive alien species management. Biological Conservation, 144, 2097–2104.Google Scholar
Sharp, R. L., Larson, L. R., Green, G. T. & Tomek, S. (2013). Comparing interpretive methods targeting invasive species management at Cumberland Island National Seashore. Journal of Interpretation Research, 17(2), 23–43.Google Scholar
Shine, R. & Doody, S. (2011). Invasive species control: Understanding conflicts between researchers and the general community. Frontiers in Ecology & the Environment, 9, 400–6.Google Scholar
Simberloff, D., Alexander, J., Allendorf, F. et al. (2011). Non-natives: 141 scientists object. Nature, 475, 36.Google Scholar
Simberloff, D., Martin, J.-L., Genovesi, P., Maris, V., Wardle, D. A., Aronson, J., Courchamp, F., Galil, B., García-Berthou, E., Pascal, M., Pyšek, P. Sousa, R., Tabacchi, E. & Vilà, M. (2012). Impacts of biological invasions: What’s what and the way forward. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 28(1), 58–66.Google Scholar
Snow, R. W., Johnson, V. M., Brien, M. L., Cherkiss, M. S. & Mazzotti, F. J. (2007). Python molurus bivittatus (Burmese python): Nesting. Herpetological Review, 38, 93.Google Scholar
Thompson, K. (2014). Where Do Camels Belong? The Story and Science of Invasive Species. London: Profile Books.Google Scholar
Thorpe, S. J. & Salkovskis, P. M. (1997). Animal phobias. In Davey, G. C. L., ed., Phobias: A Handbook of Theory, Research and Treatment. Chichester: Wiley, pp. 81–106.Google Scholar
Treves, A. (2012). Tolerant attitudes reflect an intent to steward: A reply to Bruskotter and Fulton. Society & Natural Resources, 25, 103–4.Google Scholar
Vaske, J. J. (2008). Survey Research and Analysis: Applications in Parks, Recreation and Human Dimensions. State College, PA: Venture Publishing, Inc.Google Scholar
Vavreck, L. & Rivers, D. (2008). The 2006 cooperative congressional election study. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 18(4), 355–66.Google Scholar
Wald, D. M., Jacobson, S. K. & Levy, J. K. (2013). Outdoor cats: Identifying differences between stakeholder beliefs, perceived impacts, risk and management. Biological Conservation, 167, 414–24.Google Scholar
Warren, C. R. (2007). Perspectives on the ‘alien’ versus ‘native’ species debate: A critique of concepts, language and practice. Progress in Human Geography, 31(4), 427–46.Google Scholar
White, P. C. L., Ford, A. E. S., Clout, M. N., Engeman, R. M., Roy, S. & Saunders, G. (2008). Alien invasive vertebrates in ecosystems: Pattern, process and the social dimension. Wildlife Research, 35, 171–9.Google Scholar
White, P. C. L. & Ward, A. I. (2010). Interdisciplinary approaches for management of existing and emerging human–wildlife conflicts. Wildlife Research, 37, 623–9.Google Scholar
Wicker, A. W. (1969). Attitudes versus actions: The relationship of verbal and overt behavioural responses to attitude objects. Journal of Social Issues, 4, 41–79.Google Scholar
Young, A. M. & Larson, B. M. H. (2011). Clarifying debates in invasion biology: A survey of invasion biologists. Environmental Research, 111, 893–8.Google Scholar
Young, J. C., Marzano, M., White, R. M., McCracken, D. I., Redpath, S. M., Carss, D. N., Quine, C. P. & Watt, A. D. (2010). The emergence of biodiversity conflicts from biodiversity impacts: Characteristics and management strategies. Biodiversity and Conservation, 19, 3973–90.Google Scholar