Improving the use of science in conservation: Lessons from the Florida panther

Journal of Wildlife Management

Volumn 70, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 1-7

  Conroy, Michael J ^a   Beier, Paul ^b   Quigley, Howard ^c,e   Vaughan, Michael R ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY   (United States)

^d VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^e NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Endangered species; Florida panther; Multiple working hypotheses; Peer review; Puma concolor; Recovery plans

Indexed keywords

MAMMAL; MONITORING; NATURE CONSERVATION; RESEARCH WORK; RESOURCE MANAGEMENT;

FLORIDA [UNITED STATES]; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

PUMA CONCOLOR; PUMA CONCOLOR CORYI; STRIGIFORMES; STRIX OCCIDENTALIS; STRIX OCCIDENTALIS CAURINA;

EID: 33645822179     PISSN: 0022541X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2193/0022-541X(2006)70[1:ITUOSI]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. Anderson, D. R., K. P. Burnham, A. B. Franklin, R. J. Gutierrez, E. D. Forsman, R. G. Anthony, G. C. White, and T. M. Shenk. 1999. A protocol for conflict resolution in analyzing empirical data related to natural resources controversies. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27:1050-1058.
2. Armstrong, J. S. 1997. Peer review for journals: evidence on quality control, fairness, and innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics 3:63-84.
3. Bauer, H. H. 1994. Scientific literacy and the myth of the scientific method. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, USA.
4. Beier, P., M. R. Vaughan, M. J. Conroy, and H. Quigley. Comments and communications received by the Scientific Review Team during its review of literature related to the Florida panther. Final Report. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
5. Belden, R. C., W. B. Frankenberger, R. T. McBride, and S. T. Schwikert. 1988. Panther habitat use in southern Florida. Journal of Wildlife Management 52: 660-663.
6. Boyce, M. S., L. L. Irwin, and R. Barker. 2005. Demographic meta-analysis: synthesizing vital rates for spotted owls. Journal of Applied Ecology 42:38-49.
7. Burnham, K. P., and D. R. Anderson. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference. Springer, New York, New York, USA.
8. Burnham, K. P., D. R. Anderson, and G. C. White. 1996. Meta-analysis of vital rates of the northern spotted owl. Pages 92-101 in E. D. Forsman, S. DeStefano, M. G. Raphael, and R. J. Gutiérrez, editors. Demography of the northern spotted owl. Studies in avian biology 17. Cooper Ornithological Society, Camarillo, California, USA.
9. Chamberlin, T. C. 1890. The method of multiple working hypotheses. Science (old series) 15:92ff.
10. Reprinted in Science (1965) 148:754-759.
11. Clark, T. W., R. P. Reading, and A. L. Clarke. 1994. Endangered species recovery: finding the lessons, improving the process. Island, Covelo, California, USA.
12. Collins, A. G. 1998. Evaluating multiple alternative hypotheses for the origin of Bilateria: an analysis of 18s rRNA molecular evidence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 95:15458-15463.
13. Day, R. A. 1998. How to write and publish and scientific paper. Oryx Press, Phoenix, Arizona, USA.
14. Godlee, F. 2002. Making reviewers visible. Journal of the American Medical Association 287:2762-2765.
15. Guthery, F. S., J. J. Lusk, and M. J. Peterson. 2001. The fall of the null hypothesis: liabilities and opportunities. Journal of Wildlife Management 65: 379-384.
16. Gutiérrez, R. J. 1996. Biology and distribution of the northern spotted owl. Pages 2-5 in E. D. Forsman, S. DeStefano, M. G. Raphael, and R. J. Gutiérrez, editors. Demography of the northern spotted owl. Studies in avian biology 17. Cooper Ornithological Society, Camarillo, California, USA.
17. Hilborn, R., and M. Mangel. 1997. The ecological detective: confronting models with data. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
18. Kerkhoff, A. B., B. T. Milne, and D. S. Maehr. 2000. Toward a panther-centered view of the forests of south Florida. Ecology and Society 4:1. 〈http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol4/iss1/art1/〉. Accessed 2005 Aug 14.
19. Maehr, D. S. 1997. The Florida panther: life and death of a vanishing carnivore. Island, Covelo, California, USA.
20. Maehr, D. S., and G. B. Caddick. 1995. Demographics and genetic introgression in the Florida panther. Conservation Biology 9:1295-1298.
21. Maehr, D. S., and J. A. Cox. 1995. Landscape features and panthers in Florida. Conservation Biology 9:1008-1019.
22. Maehr, D. S., and J. P. Deason. 2002. Wide ranging carnivores and development permits: constructing a multi-scale model to evaluate impacts on the Florida panther. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy 3:398-406.
23. Maehr, D. S., T. S. Hoctor, and L. D. Harris. 2001. The Florida panther: a flagship for regional restoration. Pages 293-312 in D. S. Maehr, R. F. Noss, and J. L. Larkin, editors. Large mammal restoration. Island, Covelo, California, USA.
24. Maehr, D. S., R. C. Lacy, E. D. Land, O. L. Bass, Jr., and T. S. Hoctor. 2002. Evolution of population viability assessments for the Florida panther: a multiperspective approach. Pages 284-311 in S. R. Beissinger, and D. R. McCullough, editors. Population viability analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
25. Maehr, D. S., E. D. Land, and J. C. Roof. 1991. Social ecology of Florida panthers. National Geographic Research and Exploration 7:414-431.
26. Marcot, B. G., and J. W. Thomas. 1997. Of spotted owls, old growth, and new policies: a history since the interagency scientific committee report. General Technical Report. PNW-GTR-408. U.S. Department of Agricultural, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Station, Portland, Oregon, USA.
27. Marmorek, D., and C. Peters. 2001. Finding a PATH toward scientific collaboration: insights from the Columbia River Basin. Ecology and society 5(2):8. 〈http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol5/iss2/art8/〉. Accessed 2005 Aug 14.
28. Meegan, R. P., and D. S. Maehr. 2002 Landscape conservation and regional planning for the Florida panther. Southeastern Naturalist 1:217-232.
29. Michener, W. K. 1997. Quantitatively evaluating restoration experiments: research design, statistical analysis, and data management considerations. Restoration Ecology 5:324-337.
30. Miron, G., B. Boudreau, and E. Bourget. 1999. Intertidal barnacle distribution: a case study using multiple working hypotheses. Marine Ecology Progress Series 189:205-219.
31. Murphy, D. D., and B. R. Noon. 1991. Coping with uncertainty in wildlife biology. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:773-782.
32. Nichols, J. D. 1991. Science, population ecology, and the management of the American black duck. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:790-799.
33. Nudds, T. D., and M. L. Morrison. 1991. Ten years after "Reliable Knowledge": are we gaining? Journal of Wildlife Management 55:757-760.
34. O'Brien, S. J., M. E. Roelke, N. Yuhki, K. W. Richards, W. E. Johnson, W. L. Franklin, A. E. Anderson, Jr., O. L. Bass, R. C. Belden, and J. S. Martenson. 1990. Genetic introgression within the Florida panther Felis concolor coryi. National Geographic Research 6:485-494.
35. Pfeifer, M. P., and G. L. Snodgrass. 1990. The continued use of retracted, invalid scientific literature. Journal of the American Medical Association 263: 1420-1423.
36. Platt, J. R. 1964. Strong inference. Science 146:347-353.
37. Roelke, M. E. 1990. Florida panther biomedical investigation. Final Performance Report. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Tallahassee, Florida, USA.
38. Romesburg, H. C. 1981. Wildlife science: gaining reliable knowledge. Journal of Wildlife Management 45:293-313.
39. Romesburg, H. C. 1991. On improving the natural resources and environmental sciences. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:744-756.
40. Sinclair, A. R. E. 1991. Science and the practice of wildlife management. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:767-773.
41. Sinclair, A. R. E., C. J. Krebs, J. M. Fryxell, R. Turkington, S. Boutin, R. Boonstra, P. Seccombe-Hett, P. Lundberg, and L. Oksanen. 2000. Testing hypotheses of trophic level interactions: a boreal forest ecosystem. Oikos 89: 313-328.
42. Smallwood, K. S., J. Beyea, and M. L. Morrison. 1999. Using the best scientific data for endangered species conservation. Environmental Management 24: 421-435.
43. Snyder, N. F. R., and H. Snyder. 2000. The California condor. Academic, San Diego, California, USA.
44. Turner, R. E. 1997. Wetland loss in the northern Gulf of Mexico: multiple working hypotheses. Estuaries 20:1-13.
45. Walters, C. J. 1986. Adaptive management of renewable resources. Macmillan, New York, New York, USA.
46. Weiner, J. 1995. On the practice of ecology. Journal of Ecology 83:153-158.
47. Williams, B. K., J. D. Nichols, and M. J. Conroy. 2002. Analysis and management of animal populations. Academic, San Diego, California, USA.