Trade-off between human–wildlife conflict risk and recreation conditions

Abstract

Our study reveals trade-offs associated with human–wildlife conflicts in recreation areas. It is common for recreational users to face risks of wildlife attacks while hiking. Although some studies show that recreational users consider trade-offs between three dimensions of recreational experiences consisting of resource, social and management conditions, there are no studies addressing human–wildlife conflicts from the perspective of the trade-offs for the users. To better understand trade-offs considered by recreational users, we performed a discrete choice experiment. We conducted a questionnaire-based survey among recreational users at the Numameguri hiking trail in Daisetsuzan National Park, Japan, which has a high density of brown bears. Using a series of choice tasks, respondents indicated a preferred trail scenario from a group of alternatives. Scenarios varied in terms of their destinations (resource), crowding (social), management system (management) and bear encounter risk (bear appearances on the trail and bear appearances on mountain slopes seen from the trail). Results show that risk conditions have decisive, negative effects on satisfaction level for those hiking. Specifically, when the risk of encountering brown bears on the trail is high, user satisfaction cannot be increased on the other three dimensions. A consideration of only resource-, social- and management-based indicators is insufficient for understanding recreation experiences in areas with a high risk for human–wildlife conflict. At the recreation areas that are home to large wildlife, a guided tour may leave users more satisfied and safe from wildlife attacks. Understanding trade-offs related to the risk helps tour design and enhances the users’ experience.