Hallmarks of science missing from North American wildlife management

Artelle, Kyle A.; Reynolds, John D.; Treves, Adrian; Walsh, Jessica C.; Paquet, Paul C.; Darimont, Chris T.

doi:10.1126/sciadv.aao0167

Cited by 104 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Public agencies are under heightened scrutiny to deliver more rigorous assessments of environmental change and the status of natural resources (Reed 2008;Artelle et al 2018). Whether relating to field data collection, the identification of indicator species, or determining the likelihood of project-related impacts, EA must be underpinned by rigorously evaluating, testing, and ultimately drawing conclusions from the best available evidence (Treweek 1996).…”

Section: Component 3-scientific Rigourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-sectoral input for the potential role of science in Canada’s environmental assessment

Jacob

Moore

Fox

et al. 2018

FACETS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since being elected in 2015, Canada's federal Liberal government has taken steps to overhaul major environment-related laws and policies, including federal environmental assessment (EA) and regulatory processes. During 2016-2017, a government-appointed panel toured Canada and received >1000 suggestions from diverse sectors of society regarding EA reform. Yet, different sectors of society may have different views concerning scientific components of EA. We analyzed written submissions during public consultation (categorized into five sectors) regarding five key scientific components of EA: (1) openly sharing information, (2) evaluating cumulative effects, (3) scientific rigour, (4) transparency in decision-making, and (5) independence between regulators and proponents. On the whole, submissions from Indigenous groups, non-governmental organizations, and individuals/academics supported strengthening all five components. In contrast, most contributions from industry/industry associations, and, to a lesser extent, government bodies or agencies, suggested that there was no need for increased scientific rigour or increased independence. These findings indicate that there is cross-sectoral support for strengthening some scientific aspects of EA. However, the degree to which the Government of Canada strengthens the scientific rigour and independence of EA will indicate whether environmental decision-making in Canada is aligned with preferences from industry or the rest of Canada.

show abstract

Section: Component 3-scientific Rigourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-sectoral input for the potential role of science in Canada’s environmental assessment

Jacob

Moore

Fox

et al. 2018

FACETS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, one recent evaluation of hunt management in the United States and Canada found little adherence to science-based approaches [12]. Using the criteria of Artelle et al [12], our assessment of available state management plans for pumas, indicates this to be the case for pumas in most of the western states. Additionally, there have been more recent calls for using science to evaluate the possible politicization of wildlife management decisions [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…The NAM explicitly advocates the use of science and research in setting and justifying wildlife management policy [8,9,10,11]. Nevertheless, one recent evaluation of hunt management in the United States and Canada found little adherence to science-based approaches [12]. Using the criteria of Artelle et al [12], our assessment of available state management plans for pumas, indicates this to be the case for pumas in most of the western states.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Elephant in the room: What can we learn from California regarding the use of sport hunting of pumas (Puma concolor) as a management tool?

Laundré

Papouchis

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pumas (Puma concolor) in 10 western states of the U.S. have been managed through the use of a sport hunt. The rational for this management technique is that puma populations needed to be hunted to reduce threats to human safety, their livestock, and wild ungulate populations. We evaluated these claims with the state of California as a control, which has prohibited sport hunting since 1972. We tested four hypotheses: 1) Sport hunting reduces puma density, 2) Sport hunting reduces problematic puma-human encounters, 3) Sport hunting reduces puma predation on livestock, and 4) Sport hunting reduces the impact of puma predation on wild ungulate numbers. Results indicated: 1) Puma densities did not differ between California and sport hunting states, 2) California was the 3rd lowest in per capita puma-human incidents. 3) The per capita loss of sheep was significantly lower (t = 5.7, P < 0.001) and the per capita loss of cattle in California did not differ significantly, from the other 10 states (P = 0.13). 4). Changes in annual deer populations in California correlated with changes in other states (F = 95.4, P < 0.001, R2 = 0.68) and average deer densities in California did not differ significantly from the other states. We concluded that sport hunting of pumas as a management tool has not produced the outcomes sought by wildlife managers and may even exacerbate conflicts between pumas and humans. It is suggested that state agencies re-assess the use of sport hunting as a management tool for pumas.

show abstract

“…We do not dispute the suitability of the solutions described by these authors, who provided examples of conservation and wildlife management interventions where they have usefully been employed, but we do question the extent of their utility. Artelle et al () found that the hallmarks of quality science were absent from the majority of 667 wildlife management approaches adopted in North America. This is likely to be due to the complexity of biological systems and the way in which scientists describe them, resulting in decision makers avoiding the use of robust scientific approaches for decision‐making (Addison et al , Hammersley ).…”

Section: Uncertainty In Decision‐makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using and communicating uncertainty for the effective control of invasive non‐native species

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estimates of quantities needed to plan invasive species control, such as population size, are always uncertain; this is an issue that can become a problem when mishandled in ecological science and its communication. The complexities of incorporating uncertainty into sophisticated decision‐support tools may be a barrier to their use by decision makers, leading to decisions being made without due regard to uncertainty and risking misplaced certainty of predicted outcomes. We summarise ways in which uncertainty has been incorporated into and used to advise decisions on the management of invasive non‐native species and other problem species, and offer a simple conceptual model for accommodating and using uncertainty at the planning stage. We also demonstrate how frequently uncertainty has been misused and miscommunicated in the wildlife management literature. We contend that uncertainty in estimates of natural quantities must be acknowledged, can inform decisions and can be made to derive decisions, and should not be ignored if invasive species policy is to be delivered effectively. Uncertainty must be communicated thoroughly and correctly by scientists if decision makers are to understand its consequences for planning and resourcing control programmes.

show abstract

Hallmarks of science missing from North American wildlife management

Abstract: Fundamental components of science are often lacking in U.S. state and Canadian provincial hunt management systems.

Cited by 104 publications

References 31 publications

Cross-sectoral input for the potential role of science in Canada’s environmental assessment

Cross-sectoral input for the potential role of science in Canada’s environmental assessment

The Elephant in the room: What can we learn from California regarding the use of sport hunting of pumas (Puma concolor) as a management tool?

Using and communicating uncertainty for the effective control of invasive non‐native species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About