Risk perception as a factor in wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity for cougars in montana

Human Dimensions of Wildlife

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 50-62

  Riley, Shawn J ^a   Decker, Daniel J ^a  

^a Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics   (United States)

Author keywords

Cougars; Human dimensions; Puma concolor; Risk perception; Wildlife management; Wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity

Indexed keywords

EID: 0003241803     PISSN: 10871209     EISSN: 1533158X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10871200009359187     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Beier, P. (1991). Cougar attacks on humans in the United States and Canada. Wildlife Society Bulletin 19, 403-412.
2. Bernstein, P. L. (1996). Against the Gods: The remarkable story of risk. New York: Wiley.
3. Brown, T. L., Decker, D. J. & Connelly, N. A. (1989). Response to mail surveys on resource-based recreation topics: A behavioral model and an empirical analysis. Leisure Science, 11. 99-110.
4. Carpenter, L. H., Decker, D. J., & Lipscomb, J. F. (2000). Stakeholder acceptance capacity in wildlife management. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 5, 5-19.
5. Clarke, L. (1989). Acceptable risk: Making choices in a toxic environment. Berkeley: University of California Press.
6. Dillman, D.A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: Wiley.
7. Dolsen, D. E., McCullough, S. A., Dusek, G. L., & Weigand, J. P. (1996). Beliefs about wildlife-related recreation in Montana. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 1, 83-84.
8. Fischoff, B. (1995). Risk perception and communication unplugged: Twenty years of process. Risk Analysis, 15, 137-145.
9. Kasperson, R. E. (1992). Social amplification of risk: Progress in developing an integrative framework. In S. Krimsksy & D. Golding. Social theories of risk (pp. 153-178). Westport, CT: Praeger.
10. Keeney, R. L. (1995). Understanding life-threatening risks. Risk Analysis, 15, 627-637.
11. Kellert, S. R. (1985). Public perception of predators, particularly the wolf and coyote. Biological Conservation, 31, 167-189.
12. Knuth, B. A., Stout, R. J., Siemer, W. F., Decker, D. J. & Stedman, R. C. (1992). Risk management concepts for improving wildlife population decisions and public communication strategies. Transactions North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 57, 63-74.
13. Lauber, T. B., & Knuth, B. K. (1997). Fairness in moose management decisionmaking: The citizen’s perspective. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 25, 776-787.
14. Lohr, C., Ballard, W. B., & Bath, A. (1996). Attitudes toward gray wolf réintroduction to New Brunswick. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 24, 414-420.
15. Manfredo, M. J., Zinn, H. C., Sikorowski, L., & Jones, J. (1998). Public acceptance of cougar management: A case study of Denver, Colorado, and nearby foothills areas. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 26, 964-970.
16. Montana Fish, Wildlife, & Parks. (1998). Wildlife program-Programmatic environmental impact statement. Federal Aid Project W-IOO-R and W-lOl-R, Helena, Montana.
17. Moore, C. M. (1987). Group techniques for idea building. Applied Social Research Methods, Series No. 9. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
18. National Safety Council. (1995). Accident facts, 1995 edition. Itasca, IL: National Safety Council.
19. Renn, O. (1992). Concepts of risk: A classification. In S. Krimsksy & D. Golding (Eds.), Social theories of risk (pp. 53-82). Westport, CT: Praeger.
20. Riley, S. J. (1998). Integration of environmental, biological, and human dimensions for management of cougars (Puma concolor) in Montana. Dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
21. Riley, S. J., & Decker, D. J. (2000). Wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity for cougars in Montana. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 28, 931-939.
22. Saberwal, V. K., Gibbs, J. P., Chellam, R., & Johsingh, A. J. T. (1994). Lion-human conflict in the Gir Forest, India. Conservation Biology, 8, 501-507.
23. Schusler, T. M., Chase, L. C, & Decker, D. J. (2000). Community based co-management: Sharing responsibility when tolerance for wildlife is exceeded. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 5, 34-49.
24. Siemer, W. F., Knuth, B. A., Decker, D. J., & Alden, V. L. (1992). Human perceptions and behaviors associated with Lyme Disease: Implications for land and wildlife management. Human Dimensions Research Unit Series 92-8, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
25. Sjoberg, L. (1998). Worry and risk perception. Risk Analysis, 18, 85-93.
26. Sjoberg, L., & Drottz-Sjoberg, B. M. (1991). Knowledge and perception of risk among nuclear power plant employees. Risk Analysis, 11, 607-618.
27. Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236, 280-285.
28. Slovic, P. (1993). Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 13, 675-682.
29. Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., & Fischoff, B. (1984). Modeling the societal impacts of fatal accidents. Management Science, 30, 464-474.
30. Stout, R. J., Stedman, R. C., Decker, D. J., & Knuth, B. A. (1993). Perceptions of risk from deer-related vehicle accidents: Implications for public preferences for deer herd size. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 21, 237-249.
31. Torres, S. G., Mansfield, T. M., Foley, J.E., Lupo, T., & Brinkhaus, A. (1996). Mountain lion and human activity in California: testing speculations. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 24, 451-460.
32. von Winterfeldt, D., John, R. J., & Borcherding, K. (1981). Cognitive components of risk ratings. Risk Analysis, 1, 277-287.
33. Zar, J. H. (1984). Biostatistical analysis, 2nd edition. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.