Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

dc.contributor.authorCusack, Jeremy
dc.contributor.authorDuthie, Brad
dc.contributor.authorPozo, Rocio
dc.contributor.authorBunnefeld, Nils
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-09T21:30:45Z
dc.date.available2019-01-09T21:30:45Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.citationCusack, J., Duthie, B., Pozo, R. and Bunnefeld, N. (2018). Management and harvesting constraints influence the attainment of wildlife population targets. 5th European Congress of Conservation Biology. doi: 10.17011/conference/eccb2018/107337
dc.identifier.urihttps://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/61839
dc.description.abstractAn increasing number of wildlife populations are the target of intensive management schemes aimed at preventing their extinction or over-abundance, both of which are detrimental to human well-being [1]. These schemes typically involve a manager, whose role is to regulate the activity of those having a direct impact on the wildlife population through legal – and sometimes illegal – harvesting activities, i.e. harvesters. Both manager and harvesters face constraints on their ability to regulate and harvest, respectively, yet how these constraints interact to affect management effectiveness is very rarely considered [2]. Using a novel generalised management strategy evaluation framework [3], we explore the manager-user constraint relationship and its impact on management success for a range of simulated and real-world examples. We show that the potential for variation in both the ability of a manager to regulate harvester behaviour and the ability of individual harvesters to affect a wildlife population shapes a landscape of management effectiveness. We further reveal that only a subset of this landscape corresponds to the successful attainment of a given management target, and that its extent may vary depending on the species in question, the stated management target (i.e. population recovery, stabilization or eradication), and the existence of time lags between monitoring and management policy change. Our work highlights the important of accounting for manager and user constraints when setting targets for and implementing wildlife management schemes. [1] Bunnefeld, N. and Keane, A. (2014). Managing wildlife for ecological, socioeconomic, and evolutionary sustainability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 12964-12965 [2] Milner-Gulland, E. J. (2011). Integrating fisheries approaches and household utility models for improved resource management. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 1741-1746. [3] Duthie, A.B. et al. (2017). GMSE: an R package for generalised management strategy evaluation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution (in review). Preprint available on bioRxiv.
dc.format.mimetypetext/html
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherOpen Science Centre, University of Jyväskylä
dc.relation.urihttps://peerageofscience.org/conference/eccb2018/107337/
dc.rightsCC BY 4.0
dc.titleManagement and harvesting constraints influence the attainment of wildlife population targets
dc.typeArticle
dc.type.urihttp://purl.org/eprint/type/ConferenceItem
dc.identifier.doi10.17011/conference/eccb2018/107337
dc.type.coarconference paper not in proceedings
dc.description.reviewstatuspeerReviewed
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dc.rights.copyright© the Authors, 2018
dc.rights.accesslevelopenAccess
dc.type.publicationconferenceObject
dc.relation.conferenceECCB2018: 5th European Congress of Conservation Biology. 12th - 15th of June 2018, Jyväskylä, Finland
dc.format.contentfulltext
dc.rights.urlhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/


Aineistoon kuuluvat tiedostot

Thumbnail

Aineisto kuuluu seuraaviin kokoelmiin

  • ECCB 2018 [712]
    5th European Congress of Conservation Biology. 12th - 15th of June 2018, Jyväskylä, Finland

Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

CC BY 4.0
Ellei muuten mainita, aineiston lisenssi on CC BY 4.0