OPINIONS ON WILDLIFE: RESPONSES OF RESOURCE MANAGERS AND WILDLIFE USERS IN THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES

Abstract

Wildlife is one of the uses included in multiple-use management and planning that have been implemented on National Forests and many state forests. Increasingly sophisticated planning techniques are being used that often include wildlife variables. For example, FORPLAN, which is used by the U.S. Forest Service for National Forest planning, contains several wildlife decision variables including habitat improvement, land acquisition, and coordination with other activities (Johnson et al. 1986). Even the most sophisticated planning techniques require decisions based on judgement. Studies and guidelines are not available for all cases; ultimately, the analyst must rely on professional experience and expertise. This can be particularly difficult for public forest managers because they serve many clientele groups that have diverse desires concerning resource management. The managers' experience and expertise may not include all clientele or all situations and thus can cause incorrect judgements. Further, there may be inherent biases which also lead managers to incorrect judgements. Differences between resource managers' and visitors' preferences, attitudes, motivations, and perceptions have been studied for years (e.g., Hendee and Harris 1970, Peterson 1974). These studies often found that views of managers were not the same as those of their clientele. Wellman et al. (1982) asked National Park managers to predict views of their clientele. They found managers at 1 park to be frequently in error, while those at another park were correct about two-thirds of the time. These results indicated that professional wildlife and forest managers may benefit by having information about their own views and those of their clientele. Managers can correct unintentional biases and erroneous judgements, and assess impacts of adverse decisions if they know the differences between their preferences, attitudes, and perceptions and those of their clients. Our study was designed to provide this kind of information for wildlife and forest managers. We compared views of managers and users on several management areas to provide managers a better understanding of the desires of their clientele. We first examined the question of why users consider wildlife important. Second, we identified which experiences make consumptive or nonconsumptive activities more enjoyable. Finally, we analyzed opinions about general wildlife management questions to aid policy decisions.