Abstract
Public wildlife management in the United States is transforming as agencies seek relevancy to broader constituencies. State agencies in the United States, while tasked with conserving wildlife for all beneficiaries of the wildlife trust, have tended to manage for a limited range of benefits in part due to a narrow funding model heavily dependent on hunting, fishing, and trapping license buyers. To best meet the needs, interests, and concerns of a broader suite of beneficiaries, agencies will need to reconsider how priorities for management are set. This presents an opportunity for conservation program design and evaluation to be elevated in importance. We argue that success in wildlife conservation in the U.S. requires assessment of both decision-making processes and management results in relation to four questions: conservation of what, under what authority, for what purposes, and for whom?
Highlights
Public Wildlife Management in the United States (U.S.) is transforming, illustrated by growing momentum among wildlife agencies to foster conservation relevancy across broader segments of society (Association of Fish Wildlife Agencies The Wildlife Management Institute, 2019; Manfredo et al, 2020; Metcalf et al, 2020, Jacobson et al in review)
Building on the work of Decker et al (2016), in this paper we argue that success in wildlife conservation in the U.S requires trustees, trust managers and citizen beneficiaries to play their roles in decision-making processes that define desired program objectives and acceptable management methods (Figure 1)
Beneficiaries have a significant role in defining the benefits expected and in decision making about program objectives and actions that are designed to yield such benefits (Forstchen and Smith, 2014; Decker et al, 2015)
Summary
Public Wildlife Management in the United States (U.S.) is transforming, illustrated by growing momentum among wildlife agencies to foster conservation relevancy across broader segments of society (Association of Fish Wildlife Agencies The Wildlife Management Institute, 2019; Manfredo et al, 2020; Metcalf et al, 2020, Jacobson et al in review) This presents an opportunity for program evaluation in wildlife conservation to be elevated in importance. The more effectively a program pursues the “wrong” outcomes, the farther the end result will be from success, despite achieving intended objectives. This situation can be avoided if attention to program evaluation starts when conservation goals and objectives are formulated. This raises two fundamental questions: 1. How can managers ensure conservation programs target the right outcomes?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
