Wildlife management in Australasia: perceptions of objectives and priorities

2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly K. Miller ◽  
Darryl N. Jones
Keyword(s):  
Wildlife Management ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Timber Harvesting ◽  
Annual Conference ◽  
Strong Belief ◽  
Management Objectives ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Pain And Suffering ◽  
Policies And Programs

The aim of this study was to examine the values and attitudes held by Australasian wildlife managers as they relate to wildlife management issues, and to gain some insight into possible future directions and priorities for Australasian wildlife management. During December 2002 – February 2003, 138 questionnaires were completed by members of the Australasian Wildlife Management Society (AWMS) and registrants of the 2002 AWMS annual conference. Threatened species management, threatened communities/habitats, and management of introduced species were the issues rated as needing the highest priority for the Australasian Wildlife Management Society. Issues such as animal rights, genetically modified organisms and timber harvesting on public lands were the lowest-rating issues. Respondents expressed a strong belief in managing and controlling wildlife to achieve wildlife management objectives, a strong belief that wildlife should be protected and that wildlife managers should minimise the pain and suffering of individual animals, and a belief that resources should be directed towards conserving wildlife populations rather than protecting individual animals from non-threatened populations. While respondents held a strong belief that it is important to consult the community when developing wildlife management policies and programs, there was little support for a comanagerial approach where the community has a significant role to play in decision-making processes.

Gender differences in the perceptions of wildlife management objectives and priorities in Australasia

2006 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly K. Miller ◽  
Darryl N. Jones
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Wildlife Management ◽  
Annual Conference ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Consumptive Use ◽  
Management Objectives ◽  
The Future ◽  
Age Category

It is now well established that men and women often differ significantly in their attitudes and responses to workplace situations, challenges and policies. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of gender on perceptions and priorities held by Australasian wildlife managers. Data were collected via a questionnaire distributed during December 2002 – February 2003 to members of the Australasian Wildlife Management Society (AWMS) and registrants of the 2002 AWMS annual conference. The results show that there are now significantly more female AWMS members than there were in the early 1990s, a possible indication of a change in the wider wildlife management profession in Australasia. Consistent with previous research, male respondents held different views from female respondents about wildlife and wildlife management. In particular, male respondents were significantly more likely to express the ‘management/consumptive use of wildlife’ perspective than female respondents. Interestingly, this gap was observed only in the 18–30-year age category. The paper examines what these differences might mean for the future of wildlife management in Australasia.

Animal rights – Jewish perspectives

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronen Pinkas
Keyword(s):  
Moral Responsibility ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Golden Rule ◽  
The Other ◽  
Jewish Tradition ◽  
Strict Adherence ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Face ◽  
Pain And Suffering ◽  
Paradigmatic Change

This article raises the question why is it that, despite Jewish tradition devoting much thought to the status and treatment of animals and showing strict adherence to the notion of preventing their pain and suffering, ethical attitudes to animals are not dealt with systematically in the writings of Jewish philosophers and have not received sufficient attention in the context of moral monotheism. What has prevented the expansion of the golden rule: »Love your fellow as yourself: I am the LORD« (Lev 19,18) and »That which is hateful to you do not do to another« (BT Shabbat 31a:6; JT Nedarim 30b:1) to animals? Why is it that the moral responsibility for the fellow-man, the neighbor, or the other, has been understood as referring only to a human companion? Does the demand for absolute moral responsibility spoken from the face of the other, which Emmanuel Levinas emphasized in his ethics, not radiate from the face of the non-human other as well? Levinas’s ethics explicitly negates the principle of reciprocity and moral symmetry: The ›I‹ is committed to the other, regardless of the other’s attitude towards him. Does the affinity to the eternal Thou which Martin Buber also discovers in plants and animals not require a paradigmatic change in the attitude towards animals?

Us and Them : Scientists' and Animal Rights Campaigners' Views of the Animal Experimentation Debate

1995 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth S. Paul
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Animal Experiments ◽  
Animal Experimentation ◽  
The Other ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Opposing Group ◽  
Relative Capacity ◽  
Extreme View

AbstractAnimal rights campaigners and scientists working with animals completed anonymous questionnaires in which they were asked to report, not only on their own beliefs and ideas about the animal experimentation debate, but also on those they perceived the opposing group to hold. Both groups of participants tended to have a negative and somewhat extreme view of the other. But they did have an accurate grasp of the arguments and defenses commonly offered on both sides of the debate, and showed some agreement concerning the relative capacity of different animals to suffer. Differences appeared in the level of the phylogenetic hierarchy at which participants thought animals might be capable of suffering, and in their decision-making processes regarding the admissibility of animal experiments.

scholarly journals Factors Influencing the Seedling Establishment of Engelmann Spruce and Subalpine Fir

1981 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 28-33
Author(s):  
A. Knapp ◽  
W. Smith
Keyword(s):  
National Parks ◽  
Wildlife Management ◽  
National Park ◽  
Prescribed Burning ◽  
Fire Suppression ◽  
Community Diversity ◽  
Subalpine Fir ◽  
Engelmann Spruce ◽  
Natural Fires ◽  
Management Objectives

Prescribed burning in U.S. National Parks has been employed as a substitute for natural fires to achieve vegetation and/or wildlife management objectives (Habeck 1970). One specific management objective in Glacier National Park (GNP) is the restoration of plant community diversity to pre-fire-suppression levels.

scholarly journals State forest administration performance in the Czech Republic: A case study of forestry legislation implementation in the South Bohemian Region

2021 ◽  
Vol 67 (4) ◽  
pp. 248-257
Author(s):  
Michal Hrib ◽  
Marcel Riedl ◽  
Petra Hýsková ◽  
Jaroslav Maršík ◽  
Martina Jarkovská
Keyword(s):  
Czech Republic ◽  
Timber Harvesting ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
State Administration ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Forest Act ◽  
Administrative Proceedings ◽  
And Control ◽  
Hunting And Fishing

Abstract In the Czech Republic, the present state forest administration is incorporated into general state administration. Municipalities with extended competence (MECs) as first-instance forest administration bodies thus perform the so-called “mixed” administration. Besides forestry, MECs cumulatively perform hunting and fishing administration, observing several different laws. On an example of three MECs in South Bohemia (České Budějovice, Týn nad Vltavou and Písek), the paper analyses the decision-making processes and control activities concerning the implementation of administrative activity, particularly the Forest Act. The findings show that during the observed period 2011–2015, the most frequently conducted administrative proceedings under the Forest Act involved binding opinions regarding permission for buildings at a distance of fewer than 50 m from the forest and decisions on timber harvesting. Other frequently performed acts somewhat surprisingly concerned issuing licenses for professional forest managers and decisions whether or not the land fulfils forest functions. Based on the findings, the paper also suggests stimuli and suggestions (de lege ferenda) for changes in the Forest Act and other regulations relating to this issue.

scholarly journals Successful Wildlife Conservation Requires Good Governance

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily F. Pomeranz ◽  
Darragh Hare ◽  
Daniel J. Decker ◽  
Ann B. Forstchen ◽  
Cynthia A. Jacobson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Wildlife Management ◽  
Wildlife Conservation ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
The United States ◽  
Limited Range ◽  
State Agencies ◽  
Funding Model ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
The U.S

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?

Public and stakeholder values of wildlife in Victoria, Australia

2003 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly K. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Wildlife Management ◽  
Natural Environment ◽  
Emotional Attachment ◽  
Education Programs ◽  
Management Implications ◽  
Stakeholder Values ◽  
Stakeholder Groups ◽  
Management Objectives ◽  
Consumption Values ◽  
Humanistic Orientation

This paper explores the management implications of a recent study that was designed to explore public and stakeholder values of wildlife in Victoria, Australia. Questionnaires (n = 1431) were used to examine values and knowledge of wildlife held by residents from seven Victorian municipalities and members of six wildlife management stakeholder groups. The results suggest that most Victorians have a relatively strong emotional attachment to individual animals (the humanistic value) and are interested in learning about wildlife and the natural environment (the curiosity/learning/interacting value). In comparison, the negativistic, aesthetic, utilitarian-habitat and dominionistic/wildlife-consumption values were not expressed as strongly. These findings suggest that wildlife managers should expect support for wildlife management objectives that reflect the relatively strong humanistic orientation of Victorians and tailor management and education programs to appeal to this value and Victorians' interest in learning about wildlife.

scholarly journals Book Review: Animal Rights and Welfare: A Documentary and Reference Guide

2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 175
Author(s):  
Michael L. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Animal Rights ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Animal Liberation ◽  
Reference Guide ◽  
Pain And Suffering ◽  
American Society ◽  
Cruelty To Animals

Animal Rights and Welfare: A Documentary and Reference Guide is a collection of fifty-one primary source documents relating to the topics of animal rights and animal welfare. The preface states that these are separate and distinct philosophies: animal rights advocates such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Animal Liberation Front hold that humans and animals have the same rights (thereby precluding their use even as pets or assistive animals), whereas animal welfare adherents like the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the American Humane Society endorse the use of animals for agriculture, work, biomedical research, etc., but in a manner that minimizes pain and suffering.

THE USE OF LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT TO ACHIEVE SUSTAINABLE CONSTRUCTION

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ifije Ohiomah ◽  
Clinton Aigbavboa ◽  
Thulisile Zwane ◽  
Douglas Aghimen
Keyword(s):  
Life Cycle Assessment ◽  
Life Cycle ◽  
Construction Industry ◽  
South African ◽  
Sustainable Construction ◽  
Primary Data ◽  
Life Cycle Thinking ◽  
The South ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Policies And Programs

This study assesses the benefit of sustainable construction and the use of life cycle assessment (LCA) in the South African construction industry to achieve sustainable construction. The data used in this was derived from both primary and secondary resources. The primary data was collected through a questionnaire approach. The study revealed that LCA could be used for product comparison, product development, formulating of product eco-labels, evaluating construction processes and decision-making processes in the construction industry concerning materials. Furthermore, the study revealed that LCA has various strengths, challenges and weakness, this is due to the fact that there is a requirement of the high quality of knowledge and data when conducting a detailed LCA study. However, this study revealed that life cycle thinking is a cornerstone for developing policies and programs, which meet sustainability criteria and there is a great room for the development and use of LCA in the South African construction industry. Therefore, it is recommended that the South African Construction industry invest more in environmental tools such as LCA.

Customary use of fire by indigenous peoples in northern Australia: its contemporary role in savanna management

2003 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter J. Whitehead ◽  
D. M. J. S. Bowman ◽  
Noel Preece ◽  
Fiona Fraser ◽  
Peter Cooke
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Wildlife Management ◽  
Fire Management ◽  
Aboriginal People ◽  
Aboriginal Peoples ◽  
Effective Implementation ◽  
Contentious Issue ◽  
Management Objectives ◽  
Tropical Landscapes ◽  
Indigenous Land

The extent to which use of fire by Aboriginal peoples shaped the landscapes and biota of Australia is a contentious issue. Equally contentious is the proposition that attempts should be made to support and re-establish customary practice. Some dismiss Aboriginal practice as little more than culturally endorsed pyromania, and consequences for land, vegetation and wildlife management as incidental and unintended outcomes. We argue that this view of Aboriginal practice is at odds with available evidence regarding motivations for use of fire, and detailed and sophisticated descriptions of the consequences of poor fire management for the maintenance of important resources. We suggest that misunderstanding arises, at least in part, from the contrasting views that (i) objectives of Aboriginal land managers and the values they seek to extract and maintain in savanna landscapes are or should be similar to those of non-Indigenous land managers; or (ii) the notion that their goals are inherently and entirely incompatible with those of non-indigenous interests. We illustrate our argument with examples that include assessments of ecological consequences of 'prescribed' Aboriginal practice, statements from Aboriginal people regarding their objectives in applying those prescriptions, and the level of active organisation required for their effective implementation. Finally, we propose mechanisms for wider application of Aboriginal prescriptions in tropical landscapes to meet a range of land management objectives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document