Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Social and Behavioral Sciences
A Framework To Evaluate Wildlife Feeding In Research, Wildlife Management, Tourism And Recreation, Sara Dubois, David Fraser
A Framework To Evaluate Wildlife Feeding In Research, Wildlife Management, Tourism And Recreation, Sara Dubois, David Fraser
Wildlife Population Management Collection
Feeding of wildlife occurs in the context of research, wildlife management, tourism and in opportunistic ways. A review of examples shows that although feeding is often motivated by good intentions, it can lead to problems of public safety and conservation and be detrimental to the welfare of the animals. Examples from British Columbia illustrate the problems (nuisance animal activity, public safety risk) and consequences (culling, translocation) that often arise from uncontrolled feeding. Three features of wildlife feeding can be distinguished: the feasibility of control, the effects on conservation and the effects on animal welfare. An evaluative framework incorporating these three …
Rating Harms To Wildlife: A Survey Showing Convergence Between Conservation And Animal Welfare Views, S. Dubois, D. Fraser
Rating Harms To Wildlife: A Survey Showing Convergence Between Conservation And Animal Welfare Views, S. Dubois, D. Fraser
Environment and Nature Conservation Collection
Human activities may cause conservation concerns when animal populations or ecosystems are harmed and animal welfare concerns when individuals are harmed. In general, people are concerned with one or the other, as the concepts may be regarded as separate or even at odds. An online purposive survey of 339 British Columbians explored differences between groups that varied by gender, residency, wildlife engagement level and value orientation (conservation-oriented or animal welfare-oriented), to see how they rated the level of harm to wildlife caused by different human activities. Women, urban residents, those with low wildlife engagement, and welfare-orientated participants generally scored activities …