Source: UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA submitted to
PREDATOR COMPENSATION PROJECT
Sponsoring Institution
Other Cooperating Institutions
Project Status
TERMINATED
Funding Source
STATE
Reporting Frequency
Annual
Accession No.
0183847
Grant No.
(N/A)
Project No.
MONZ-9914
Proposal No.
(N/A)
Multistate No.
(N/A)
Program Code
(N/A)
Project Start Date
Feb 1, 1999
Project End Date
Dec 31, 2004
Grant Year
(N/A)
Project Director
Patterson, M. E.
Recipient Organization
UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA
COLLEGE OF FORESTRY AND CONSERVATION
MISSOULA,MT 59812
Performing Department
COLLEGE OF FORESTRY AND CONSERVATION
Non Technical Summary
Predator conservation and associated conflicts are prevalent social concerns in the United States. Compensation programs for wildlife damage are widespread throughout the United States and Canada and their effectiveness is relatively unknown (Wagner et al, 1997).
Animal Health Component
(N/A)
Research Effort Categories
Basic
(N/A)
Applied
100%
Developmental
(N/A)
Classification

Knowledge Area (KA)Subject of Investigation (SOI)Field of Science (FOS)Percent
12308993060100%
Knowledge Area
123 - Management and Sustainability of Forest Resources;

Subject Of Investigation
0899 - Wildlife and natural fisheries, general/other;

Field Of Science
3060 - Political science;
Goals / Objectives
This research project explores a series of questions related to the perceptions of predator compensation programs from the perspectives of livestock owners and the general public. The first questions how individuals frame the underlying issues and conflicts related to predator compensation. The second, explores how individuals conceive of concepts like equity, fairness, individual versus societal responsibilities. The third looks at the public interest in regard to predator conservation and compensation and public views about compensation program administration and funding.
Project Methods
Three research initiatives were utilized for gathering data. The first approach consisted of in-depth interviews with livestock producers in four communities: Augusta, MT; Salmon, ID; Dubois, WY; and Kaycee, WY. The second approach consisted of mail surveys sent to randomly selected livestock owners in 12 communities in each state. The third approach consisted of a general public mail survey sent to a randomly selected state-wide sample in each of the three states (Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming).

Progress 02/01/99 to 12/31/04

Outputs
The results indicate that predator compensation is widely viewed as desirable (>74%) by both livestock owners and the public in the three states. Those supporting predator compensation programs appear to do so because they believe predator reintroduction efforts and restrictions on livestock owners ability to control problem predators (e.g., ESA restrictions) create a responsibility for society to compensate those whose livelihood has been impacted. Additionally, many see compensation as justifiable due to societal benefits (e.g., wildlife habitat) ranching provides. However, while many livestock owners see compensation as desirable, compensation is not seen as a wholly adequate solution by itself because it does not deal with the "cause of the problem." Livestock owners who found compensation desirable tended to characterize it as a means of making losses (rather than predators themselves) more acceptable. In other words, among these livestock owners, compensation was valued as a means of distributing the costs of predation more fairly rather than as a solution to the problem of predation. Among both livestock owners and general public, giving livestock owners the right to kill predators attacking livestock received even more widespread endorsement than did compensation. While the perception that compensation does not deal with the cause of the problem is one of the major reasons interview respondents characterized compensation as a desirable but not sufficient tool for dealing with predator management, other issues that compensation does not address were a concern for many as well. Further, a subgroup of respondents did not find compensation desirable. Interestingly, many of the same practical and political concerns or "objections" (such as a belief that compensation does not solve the cause of the problem; political concerns over private property rights; and a belief that the broader public, those who value predators, should share responsibility for the costs of predation) were held by both those interviewees who found compensation desirable and those who did not. What appears to be most different is how heavily each group weighs these concerns. For example, some of those finding compensation undesirable expressed the sentiment that they do not raise livestock to feed the predators, but instead "raise cattle to feed people". In other words, for these individuals, the whole concept of compensation was simply too contradictory to the goal of the activity that was to be compensated to be acceptable. Views toward compensation are complex and better understood through reading of the whole final report. However, there is evidence that predator compensation programs may have the potential to serve an important "relationship building" function with respect to dealing with conflict over predator conservation.

Impacts
The results of this study will help wildlife management agencies better understand the role of compensation as a means of addressing social conflict over predator conservation. This increased understanding will in-turn help agencies build stronger relationships with the community that result in more successful, less conflict ridden collaborative decision making, planning, and policies. The PhD student on the project, Jessica Montag, has been invited to present at the Living with Wolves-Conflict Resolution and Management Strategies symposium, March 15-16, 2005, Sheridan, WY and to participate in Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, Wolf Management working groups for compensation program.

Publications

  • Montag, J. 2001. Predator Compensation Programs: An Annotated Bibliography. Project Report Submitted to USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
  • Montag, J. and Patterson, Michael E. 2001. Predator Compensation Programs: A State of Knowledge Report. Project Report Submitted to USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station
  • Montag, J. M. 2004. Lions, Wolves, and Bears, Oh My! Detangling the issues surrounding predator conservation in the West. Fair Chase, Spring 2004.
  • Montag, Jessica M., 2003. Compensation and predator conservation: limitations of compensation. Carnivore Damage Prevention News (6):2-6.
  • Montag, Jessica M. 2004. Mountain Lions, Wolves, and Bears: Detangling the Issues Surrounding Predator Conservation in the West. Unpublished Dissertation, Missoula, Montana, The University of Montana. 257 p.


Progress 01/01/03 to 12/31/03

Outputs
A research project that explored questions related to the perceptions of predator compensation programs from the perspectives of livestock owners and the general public in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming was completed during 2003. The results indicate that predator compensation is widely viewed as desirable (greater than 74 percent) by both livestock owners and the public in the three states. Those supporting predator compensation programs appear to do so because they believe predator reintroduction efforts and restrictions on livestock owners' ability to control problem predators (e.g., ESA restrictions) create a responsibility for society to compensate those whose livelihood has been impacted. Additionally, many see compensation as justifiable due to societal benefits (e.g., wildlife habitat) ranching provides. However, while many livestock owners see compensation as desirable, compensation is not seen as a wholly adequate solution by itself because it does not deal with the cause of the problem. Livestock owners who found compensation desirable tended to characterize it as a means of making losses (rather than predators themselves) more acceptable. In other words, among these livestock owners, compensation was valued as a means of distributing the costs of predation more fairly rather than as a solution to the problem of predation. Between both livestock owners and the general public, giving livestock owners the right to kill predators attacking livestock received even more widespread endorsement than did compensation. While the perception that compensation does not deal with the cause of the problem is one of the major reasons interview respondents characterized compensation as a desirable but not sufficient tool for dealing with predator management, other issues that compensation does not address were a concern for many as well. Further, a subgroup of respondents did not find compensation desirable. Interestingly, many of the same practical and political concerns or objections (such as a belief that compensation does not solve the cause of the problem; political concerns over private property rights; and a belief that the broader public, those who value predators, should share responsibility for the costs of predation) were held by both those interviewees who found compensation desirable and those who did not. What appears to be most different is how heavily each group weighs these concerns. For example, some of those finding compensation undesirable expressed the sentiment that they do not raise livestock to feed the predators, but instead raise cattle to feed people. In other words, for these individuals, the whole concept of compensation was simply too contradictory to the goal of the activity that was to be compensated to be acceptable. Views toward compensation are complex and better understood through reading of the whole final report. However, there is evidence that predator compensation programs may have the potential to serve an important relationship building function with respect to dealing with conflict over predator conservation.

Impacts
The results of this study will help wildlife management agencies better understand the role of compensation as a means of addressing social conflict over predator conservation. This increased understanding will in-turn help agencies build stronger relationships with the community that result in more successful, less conflict ridden collaborative decision making, planning, and policies.

Publications

  • Patterson, M. E., Montag, J. M., and Williams, D. R. 2003. The urbanization of wildlife management: social science, conflict, and decision making. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 1:171-183.
  • Montag, J. M., Patterson, M. E., and Sutton, B. 2003. Political and Social viability of predator compensation programs in the west. Final Project Report. 143 pp.
  • Montag, J. M. and Patterson, M. E. 2003. Public perceptions toward predator compensation programs in the Rocky Mountain West, USA. Paper presented at the Third International Wildlife Management Conference, Dec. 1-5, Christchurch New Zealand.
  • Watson, A. E., Christensen, N., Puttkammer, A., Patterson, M. E., and Meyer, S. 2003 accepted. The role of science in providing a foundation for managing special provisions in wilderness. International Journal of Wilderness


Progress 01/01/02 to 12/31/02

Outputs
Two research projects were conducted during this period. The first study explored how individuals responded to forest landscapes that recently experienced catastrophic events (extensive damage due to storms, fire, etc.). Little research has focused on issues related to how people are impacted by changes in valued places, how people cope with those changes, and how these issues might be related to forest planning. In addition to examining the nature of the response, the study sought to determine if it is possible to develop a standard qualitative research protocol for use by different researchers collaboratively studying this phenomenon in different places or regions. A project report was submitted in August, 2002. A second study was initiated to evaluate existing predator compensation programs in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. The results of this study will provide an empirically based, in-depth understanding of: (1) the constellation of beliefs, values, meanings, and perceived conflicts that characterize stakeholders' perceptions of predator compensation programs; (2) views about the administration and effectiveness of compensation programs; (3) how individuals frame the underlying issues and conflicts related to predator conservation; and (4) how individuals conceive of concepts like equity, fairness, individual versus societal responsibilities, and the public interest in regard to predator conservation. Data were collected through interviews and mail surveys. A presentation of preliminary analyses was presented to sponsors and other stakeholders in December 2002.

Impacts
The results of these studies will help land management agencies better understand the values and emotional bonds community members have for natural resources and related policies. This increased understanding will in-turn help agencies build stronger relationships with the community that result in more successful, less conflict ridden collaborative decision making, planning, and policies.

Publications

  • Patterson, M. E. 2002. Relationship to Place: Coping with Significant Changes in Landscapes Project Report Submitted to USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
  • Montag, J., Patterson, M. E., and Williams, Daniel R. 2002. The urbanization of wildlife management. IUFRO European Regional Conference - Forestry Serving Urbanised Societies. August 27-30, 2002, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  • Birzell, R., Patterson, M. E., and Borrie, W. T. 2002. Recreation Assessment of Multi-Ownership Lands in the Tenderfoot Creek Watershed. Final Project Report. April 2002. 23 pp.
  • Lachapelle, P. R., McCool, S. F., and Patterson, M. E. 2003 (in press). Barriers to effective natural resource planning in a `mess' world. Society and Natural Resources.


Progress 01/01/01 to 12/31/01

Outputs
One study explored community values with respect to the Helena and Flathead National Forests; how those values are expressed through community discourse; social capital and social networks within communities surrounding the forests; and the nature of social assessment in an era of collaborative management is still ongoing. This project was the basis for a student's Ph.D dissertation. The student defended his dissertation in December 2001 and will turn the final draft of the dissertation into the graduate school in January 2002. The student made 3 presentations to project sponsors regarding the findings (one to the Flathead National Forest planners, one to Helena National Forest planners, and one to the office of general counsel for region one of the USDA Forest Service. Another ongoing study is trying to determine if it is possible to develop a standard qualitative research protocol that can be used to provide an understanding of relationship to place in areas where forest landscapes have recently experienced catastrophic events (extensive damage due to storms, fire, etc.) for use by different researchers collaboratively studying this phenomenon in different places or regions. A masters student was recruited to conduct the interviews and an interview guide and sampling plan was developed. While relationship to place has emerged as a prominent construct within human dimensions of natural resource management over the last decade, significant research questions remain. Little research has focused on issues related to how people are impacted by changes in valued places, how people cope with those changes, and how these issues might be related to forest planning. A third study was initiated to evaluate existing predator compensation programs in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming. The results of this study will provide an empirically based, in-depth understanding of: (1) the constellation of beliefs, values, meanings, and perceived conflicts that characterize stakeholders' perceptions of predator compensation programs; (2) views about the administration and effectiveness of compensation programs; (3) how individuals frame the underlying issues and conflicts related to predator conservation; and (4) how individuals conceive of concepts like equity, fairness, individual versus societal responsibilities, and the public interest in regard to predator conservation. This year a literature review and annotated bibliography was produced and a research design was developed and presented to sponsors. Data collection, which involves interviews with ranchers, began in November.

Impacts
The results of these studies will help land management agencies better understand the values and emotional bonds community members have for natural resources and related policies. This increased understanding will in-turn help agencies build stronger relationships with the community that result in more successful, less conflict ridden collaborative decision making, planning, and policies.

Publications

  • Montag, J. 2001. Predator Compensation Programs: An Annotated Bibliography. Project Report Submitted to USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
  • Montag, J. M. and Patterson, M. E. 2001. Predator Compensation Programs: A State of Knowledge Report. Project Report Submitted to USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.
  • Montag, J. M., Patterson, M. E., and McCollum, D. W. 2001. Predator compensation programs: Are they an effective tool at increasing social tolerance and acceptance of predators. Presented at the Human Dimensions of Natural Resources in the Western U.S. A regional conference of Human Dimensions professionals October 18-21, Grand Targhee Resort Alta, WY.


Progress 01/01/00 to 12/31/00

Outputs
The final project report for the study of jet boat users of the Salmon River in the Frank Church River of no Return Wilderness was completed. This study helped provide the Forest Service with 1) a basis for understanding how various management alternatives might impact jet boaters and 2) help facilitating communication between agency planners and jet boat users. The project report explores jet boat users desired experiences, use ethic, access concerns, relationship with the managing agency, etc. Two conference presentations were made based on this project at the Eighth International Symposium on Society and Resource Management in Bellingham, Washington, June, 2000. A second project on wolf watching in Yellowstone National Park served as a Masters Thesis project that was completed in Fall 2000. This thesis sought to understand 1) the nature and dynamics of the wolf watching experience at Yellowstone to better understand issues related to satisfaction and quality of wildlife viewing experiences in wildland settings and 2) the long-term consequences of the experience in shaping people's perceptions about wolves and wildlife restoration. Two conference presentations based on this study were made, one at the Eighth International Symposium on Society and Resource Management in Bellingham, Washington, June, 2000 and the other at the Eleventh International Conference of the Society for Human Ecology in Jackson Hole, WY. A third project exploring community values with respect to the Helena and Flathead National Forests; how those values are expressed through community discourse; social capital and social networks within communities surrounding the forests; and the nature of social assessment in an era of collaborative management is still ongoing. This project is the basis for a student's Ph.D dissertation. He has completed in-depth interviews were with key opinion leaders in communities surrounding these national forests and with agency personnel. Data analysis is completed and the student should defend spring 2001 and produce a final report. One conference presentation was made based on this project at the Eighth International Symposium on Society and Resource Management in Bellingham, Washington, June, 2000. A fourth project exploring recreation activities and relationship to place among recreationists in the Tenderfoot Creek drainage is under way. This research project seeks to provide information that will help public and private landowners (primarily the Bair Ranch Foundation) understand how their land management decisions will impact current recreational users and, more broadly, community relations. Visitor surveys were developed and sent out during the summer and fall. Currently the data is being analyzed. A fifth project underway explores public values, public discourse, and public relations in the context of exotic weed management in two communities (one in Montana, one in Washington). The goal of this project is to generate knowledge about the social dimensions of exotic weed management that will help facilitate cooperative weed management. The data for this study has been collected and is currently being analyzed.

Impacts
These research projects will be useful in helping natural resource agencies understand the impact of recreational experiences on public values and how values are involved in public discourse about resource conflicts. This information will help managers to shift to collaborative management and to better understand communication and collaboration with the public and other stakeholders.

Publications

  • No publications reported this period


Progress 01/01/99 to 12/31/99

Outputs
One study was conducted to gather knowledge about the experiences sought by jet boaters on the Salmon River in the Frank Church River of no Return Wilderness to help the Forest Service prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. This represents one of a series of studies designed to generate knowledge that will be useful in helping the Forest Service assess the impacts of various management decisions on this user group. In the first phase of the study in-depth interviews were conducted with the leadership of the primary jet boat club in the region. In the second phase of the study, in-depth interviews were conducted with 20 jet boaters representing club members, nonmembers, landowners, and passengers. The study results are presented in three project reports. One report contains an across individual analysis. This report explores findings that have relevance for planning decisions involving jet boaters as a group e.g., description of experiences, use ethic, access concerns, relationship with the managing agency, etc. The other two reports are comprised of two sections. The first section includes bio-sketches of interview participants. These bio-sketches represent a brief characterization of specific individuals relationship to place, jet boating experiences, use ethic, and other relevant issues. The second section contains actual interview excerpts that are referred to in the previous section of the report. These excerpts represent the data that provide the justification or basis for the characterizations of jet boaters in the bio-sketches. Just as importantly, these excerpts provide additional depth of insight into the individuals relationship to place, nature of experience, etc. that the brief summaries contained in the bio-sketches do not capture. The goal of these latter two sections is to help promote an understanding of jet boaters as a group of real-life, tangible individuals rather than as a more distant statistical aggregate of characteristics. Another project is exploring community values with respect to the Helena and Flathead National Forests; how those values are expressed through community discourse; social capital and social networks within communities surrounding the forests; and the nature of social assessment in an era of collaborative management. In-depth interviews were with key opinion leaders in communities surrounding these National Forests and with agency personnel were conducted in 1999. These interviews have been tape-recorded and transcribed and are currently being analyzed

Impacts
This project research will be useful in helping the Forest Service assess the impacts of various management decisions on jet boat users. It should also help natural resource planners develop a social assessment process that is consistent with the shift toward collaborative management expressed in the recently proposed Forest Service planning regulations.

Publications

  • No publications reported this period