Beliefs, perceived risks and acceptability of lethal management of wild pigs
Jerry J. Vaske
A C , Craig A. Miller B , Hailey E. McLean A and Lauren M. Jaebker A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Colorado State University, Human Dimensions of Natural Resources, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA.
B University of Illinois, Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, IL 61820, USA.
C Corresponding author. Email: jerryv@colostate.edu
Wildlife Research 48(3) 202-208 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR19207
Submitted: 24 October 2019 Accepted: 25 July 2020 Published: 25 September 2020
Abstract
Context: Wild pigs (Sus scrofa) are a non-native, invasive species that can cause significant damage to agricultural crops, and native flora and fauna. In the United States, damage and control costs have been estimated at 1.5 billion USD. A combination of early sexual maturity, high fecundity, opportunistic eating and well established populations forces managers to control wild pig densities and resulting damages.
Aims: The present study aimed to examine the relationships among farmers’ positive and negative beliefs about wild pigs, their perceived risks associated with wild pigs and their acceptability of lethal management actions for controlling agricultural damage.
Methods: Data were obtained from a mail survey of Illinois farmers (n = 3035, response rate = 58%). Variables consisted of six belief statements (three negative, e.g. wild pigs are a source of disease, and three positive, e.g. ‘I enjoy seeing wild pigs around my property’), five perceived risk statements (e.g. wild pigs cause property damage) and four statements regarding the acceptability of lethal management actions for controlling the impact of wild pigs (e.g. shooting wild pigs from a helicopter).
Key results: The relationships between the negative and positive beliefs and the acceptability of lethal management were partially mediated by perceptions of risk (Hypothesis 1). Perceived risks associated with wild pigs were related to negative (Hypothesis 2) and positive (Hypothesis 3) beliefs about wild pigs, as well as acceptability of lethal management actions (Hypothesis 4) to control the impact of wild pigs. In addition, negative beliefs (Hypothesis 5) and positive beliefs (Hypothesis 6) were related to support for lethal control.
Conclusions: These relationships occurred despite the relatively low prevalence of wild pigs in Illinois and suggest that lethal actions are acceptable even though perceived risks are low.
Implications: Findings suggested that perceived risks associated with wild pigs were not substantially related to the attributes of the farm (e.g. farm ownership, crops grown, total acres farmed) or demographic characteristics (i.e. sex, age). Managers should focus on influencing the psychological indicators (e.g. negative and positive beliefs, perceived risks) to increase the acceptability of lethal management actions for mitigating the impacts of wild pigs.
Keywords: invasive species, population management, social dimensions.
References
Agee, J. D., and Miller, C. A. (2009). Factors contributing toward acceptance of lethal control of black bears in central Georgia, USA. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 14, 198–205.| Factors contributing toward acceptance of lethal control of black bears in central Georgia, USA.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Babbie, E. R. (2016). ‘The Basics of Social Research.’ 7th edn. (Cengage Learning: Boston, MA, USA.)
Bennett, N. J., Roth, R., Klain, S. C., Chan, K., Christie, P., Clark, D. A., Cullman, G., Curran, D., Durbin, T. J., Epstein, G., and Greenberg, A. (2017). Conservation social science: understanding and integrating human dimensions to improve conservation. Biological Conservation 205, 93–108.
| Conservation social science: understanding and integrating human dimensions to improve conservation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bevins, S. N., Pedersen, K., Lutman, M. W., Gidlewski, T., and Deliberto, T. J. (2014). Consequences associated with the recent range expansion of nonnative feral swine. Bioscience 64, 291–299.
| Consequences associated with the recent range expansion of nonnative feral swine.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Brown, V. R., Marlow, M. C., Maison, R. M., Gidlewski, T., Bowen, R., and Bosco-Lauth, A. (2019). Current status and future recommendations for feral swine disease surveillance in the United States. Journal of Animal Science 97, 2279–2282.
| Current status and future recommendations for feral swine disease surveillance in the United States.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30767011PubMed |
Bruskotter, J. T., Vaske, J. J., and Schmidt, R. H. (2009). Social and cognitive correlates of Utah residents’ acceptance of the lethal control of wolves. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 14, 119–132.
| Social and cognitive correlates of Utah residents’ acceptance of the lethal control of wolves.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Decker, D. J., Jacobson, C. A., and Brown, T. L. (2006). Situation‐specific ‘impact dependency’ as a determinant of management acceptability: insights from wolf and grizzly bear management in Alaska. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34, 426–432.
| Situation‐specific ‘impact dependency’ as a determinant of management acceptability: insights from wolf and grizzly bear management in Alaska.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Doney, E. D., Vaske, J. J., Bath, A. J., Engel, M. T., and Downer, B. (2019). Predicting acceptance of lethal management of wood bison in Alaska, U.S.A. Ambio , .
| Predicting acceptance of lethal management of wood bison in Alaska, U.S.A.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 30905056PubMed |
Fraser, A. (2006). ‘Public Attitudes to Pest Control: A Literature Review.’ (Science & Technology Publishing, Department of Conservation: Wellington. New Zealand.)
Gore, M. L., Wilson, R. S., Siemer, W. F., Wieczorek-Hudenko, H., Clarke, C. E., Hart, P. S., Maguire, L. A., and Muter, B. A. (2009). Application of risk concepts to wildlife management: special issue introduction. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 14, 301–313.
| Application of risk concepts to wildlife management: special issue introduction.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gramza, A., Teel, T., VandeWoude, S., and Crooks, K. (2016). Understanding public perceptions of risk regarding outdoor pet cats to inform conservation action. Conservation Biology 30, 276–286.
| Understanding public perceptions of risk regarding outdoor pet cats to inform conservation action.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26379227PubMed |
Harper, E. E., Miller, C. A., Stephenson, A. L., McCleary, M. E., and Campbell, L. K. (2014). Landowner attitudes and perceived risks toward wild pigs on private lands in Illinois. Human Dimensions Research Program Report HR-14–05. Technical Report 16. Illinois Natural History Survey, Champaign, IL, USA.
Harper, E. E., Miller, C. A., Vaske, J. J., Mengak, M., and Bruno, S. (2016). Stakeholder attitudes and beliefs toward wild pigs in Georgia and Illinois. Wildlife Society Bulletin 40, 269–273.
| Stakeholder attitudes and beliefs toward wild pigs in Georgia and Illinois.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hayduk, L. A. (1987). ‘Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL.’ (The Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA.)
Higginbotham, B. (2013). ‘Wild Pig Damage Abatement Education and Applied Research Activities.’ (Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension: Overton, TX, USA.)
Hu, L. T., and Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In ‘Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications’. (Ed. R. H. Hoyle.) pp. 76–99. ( Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.)
Keiter, D. A., Mayer, J. J., and Beasley, J. C. (2016). What’s in a “common name”? A call for consistent terminology for nonnative Sus scrofa. Wildlife Society Bulletin 40, 384–387.
| What’s in a “common name”? A call for consistent terminology for nonnative Sus scrofa.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kline, R. B. (2015). ‘Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling.’ 5th edn. (Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA.)
Knuth, B. A., Stout, R. J., Siemer, W. F., Decker, D. J., and Stedman, R. C. (1992). Risk management concepts for improving wildlife population decisions and public communication strategies. In ‘Proceedings of the 57th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference’, 27 March – 1 April 1992, Charlotte, NC, USA. pp. 63–74. (Wildlife Management Institute: Washington, DC, USA.)
Koichi, K., Cottrell, A., Sangha, K. K., and Gordon, I. J. (2013). What determines the acceptability of wildlife control methods? A case of feral pig management in the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area, Australia. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 18, 97–108.
| What determines the acceptability of wildlife control methods? A case of feral pig management in the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area, Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Koval, M. H., and Mertig, A. G. (2004). Attitudes of the Michigan public and wildlife agency personnel toward lethal wildlife management. Wildlife Society Bulletin 32, 232–243.
| Attitudes of the Michigan public and wildlife agency personnel toward lethal wildlife management.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Loyd, K. A. T., and Miller, C. A. (2010). Influence of demographics, experience and value orientations on preferences for lethal management of feral cats. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 15, 262–273.
| Influence of demographics, experience and value orientations on preferences for lethal management of feral cats.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Manfredo, M. J. (2008). ‘Who Cares about Wildlife?’ (Springer: New York, NY, USA.)
Marsh, H. W., and Hocevar, D. (1985). Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: first and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups. Psychological Bulletin 97, 562–582.
| Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the study of self-concept: first and higher order factor models and their invariance across groups.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Miller, K. K. (2009). Human dimensions of wildlife population management in Australasia – history, approaches and directions. Wildlife Research 36, 48–56.
| Human dimensions of wildlife population management in Australasia – history, approaches and directions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Miller, C. A., and Shelby, L. B. (2009). Hunters’ general disease risk sensitivity and behaviors associated with chronic wasting disease. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 14, 133–141.
| Hunters’ general disease risk sensitivity and behaviors associated with chronic wasting disease.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Needham, M. D., Vaske, J. J., and Petit, J. D. (2017). Risk sensitivity and hunter perceptions of chronic wasting disease risk and other hunting, wildlife, and health risks. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 22, 197–216.
| Risk sensitivity and hunter perceptions of chronic wasting disease risk and other hunting, wildlife, and health risks.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Nimmo, D. G., Miller, K. K., and Adams, R. (2007). Managing feral horses in Victoria: a study of community attitudes and perceptions. Ecological Management & Restoration 8, 237–241.
| Managing feral horses in Victoria: a study of community attitudes and perceptions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Pimental, D. (2007). Environmental and economic costs of vertebrate species invasions into the United States. Managing Vertebrate Invasive Species 38, 2–8.
Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Lee, J., and Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. The Journal of Applied Psychology 88, 879–903.
| Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 14516251PubMed |
Riley, S. J., and Decker, D. J. (2000). Risk perception as a factor in wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity for cougars in Montana. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 5, 50–62.
| Risk perception as a factor in wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity for cougars in Montana.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Riley, S. J., Decker, D. J., Carpenter, L. H., Organ, J. F., Siemer, W. F., Mattfeld, G. F., and Parsons, G. (2002). The essence of wildlife management. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30, 585–593.
Sanborn, W. A., and Schmidt, R. H. (1995). Gender effects on views of wildlife professionals about wildlife management. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23, 583–587.
Siegrist, M., and Cvetkovich, G. (2000). Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Analysis 20, 713–720.
| Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 11110217PubMed |
Sijtsma, M. T., Vaske, J. J., and Jacobs, M. H. (2012). Acceptability of lethal control of wildlife that damage agriculture in the Netherlands. Society & Natural Resources 25, 1308–1323.
| Acceptability of lethal control of wildlife that damage agriculture in the Netherlands.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sjöberg, L. (2000). Factors in risk perception. Risk Analysis 20, 1–12.
| Factors in risk perception.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 10841699PubMed |
Sponarski, C. C., Vaske, J. J., and Bath, A. J. (2015). Attitudinal differences among residents, park staff, and visitors toward coyotes in Cape Breton Highlands National Park of Canada. Society & Natural Resources 28, 720–732.
| Attitudinal differences among residents, park staff, and visitors toward coyotes in Cape Breton Highlands National Park of Canada.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Stern, M. J., Ardoin, N. M., and Powell, R. B. (2017). Exploring the effectiveness of outreach strategies in conservation projects: the case of the Audubon Toyota TogetherGreen Program. Society & Natural Resources 30, 95–111.
| Exploring the effectiveness of outreach strategies in conservation projects: the case of the Audubon Toyota TogetherGreen Program.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
US Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2019). History of feral swine in the Americas. Available at https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/wildlifedamage/operational-activities/feral-swine/sa-fs-history [verified 1 May 2019].
van Eeden, L. M., Newsome, T. M., Crowther, M. S., Dickman, C. R., and Bruskotter, J. (2019). Social identity shapes support for management of wildlife and pests. Biological Conservation 231, 167–173.
| Social identity shapes support for management of wildlife and pests.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vaske, J. J. (2019). ‘Survey Research and Analysis.’ 2nd edn. (Sagamore–Venture Publishing: Urbana, IL, USA.)
Vaske, J. J., and Donnelly, M. P. (1999). A value–attitude–behavior model predicting wildland preservation voting intentions. Society & Natural Resources 12, 523–537.
| A value–attitude–behavior model predicting wildland preservation voting intentions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vaske, J. J., and Manfredo, M. J. (2012). Social psychological considerations in wildlife management. In ‘Human Dimensions of Wildlife Management’. (Eds D. J. Decker, S. J. Riley and W. F. Siemer.) pp. 43–57. (The Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA.)
Vaske, J. J., Shelby, L. B., and Needham, M. D. (2009). Preparing for the next disease: the human–wildlife connection. In ‘Wildlife and Society: The Science of Human Dimensions’. (Eds M. J. Manfredo, J. J. Vaske, P. J. Brown, D. J. Decker and E. A. Duke.) pp. 244–261. (The Wildlife Society: Bethesda, MD, USA.)
Vaske, J. J., Miller, C. A., Ashbrook, A. L., and Needham, M. D. (2018). Proximity to chronic wasting disease, perceived risk, and social trust in the managing agency. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 23, 115–128.
| Proximity to chronic wasting disease, perceived risk, and social trust in the managing agency.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
VerCauteren, K., Beasley, J., Ditchkoff, S. S., Mayer, J. J., Roloff, G. J., and Strickland, B. K. (Eds.) (2019). ‘Invasive Wild Pigs in North America: Ecology, Impacts, and Management.’ (CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA.)
Whittaker, D., Vaske, J. J., and Manfredo, M. J. (2006). Specificity and the cognitive hierarchy: values orientations and the acceptability of urban wildlife management actions. Society & Natural Resources 19, 515–530.
| Specificity and the cognitive hierarchy: values orientations and the acceptability of urban wildlife management actions.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
