Forest stakeholder participation in improving game habitat in swedish forests

Sustainability

Volumn 4, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 1580-1595

  Ezebilo, Eugene E ^a  

^a SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Forest management; Game hunting; Stakeholder participation; Sustainability; Timber production

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864355053     PISSN: 20711050     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/su4071580     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Coté, S.D.; Rooney, T.P.; Tremblay, J.P.; Dussault, C.; Waller, D.M. Ecological impacts of deer overabundance. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2004, 35, 113-147.
2. Rooney, T.P. Deer impacts on forest ecosystems: A North American perspective. Forestry 2001, 74, 201-208.
3. Hornberg, S. The relationship between moose (Alces alces) browsing utilisation and the occurrence of different species in Sweden. For. Ecol. Manag. 2001, 149, 91-102.
4. McLaren, B.E.; Peterson, R.O. Wolves, moose, and tree rings on Isle Royale. Science 1994, 1555-1558.
5. Bergqvist, G.; Bergstrom, R.; Edenius, L. Effects of moose (Alces alces) rebrowsing on damage development in young stands of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris). For. Ecol. Manag. 2003, 176, 397-403.
6. Persson, I.L.; Danell, K.; Bergstrom, R. Different moose densities and accompanied changes in tree morphology and browse production. Ecol. Appl. 2005, 15, 1296-1305.
7. Bergqvist, G.; Bergstrom, R.; Edenius, L. Patterns of stem damage by moose (Alces alces) in young Pinus sylvestris stands in Sweden. Scand. J. For. Res. 2001, 16, 363-370.
8. Kalen, C.; Bergqvist, J. Forage availability for moose of young silver birch and Scots pine. For. Ecol. Manag. 2004, 187, 149-158.
9. Millington, J.D.A.; Walters, M.B.; Matonis, M.S.; Liu, J. Effects of local and regional landscape characteristics on wildlife distribution across managed forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 2010, 1102-1110.
10. Lavsund, S.; Nygren, T.; Solberg, E.J. Status of moose populations and challenges to moose management in Fennoscandia. Alces 2003, 39, 109-130.
11. Putman, R.J.; Staines, B.W. Supplementary winter feeding of wild red deer Cervus elaphus in Europe and North America: Justifications, feeding practice and effectiveness. Mamm. Rev. 2004, 34, 285-306.
12. Smith, B.L. Winter feeding of elk in western North America. J. Wildl. Manag. 2001, 65, 173-190.
13. Van Beest, F.M.; Loe, L.E.; Mysterud, A.; Milner, J.M. Comparative space use and habitat selection of moose around feeding stations. J. Wildl. Manag. 2010, 74, 219-227.
14. Sahlsten, J.; Bunnefeld, N.; Månsson, J.; Ericsson, G.; Bergström, R.; Dettki, H. Can supplementary feeding be used to redistribute moose Alces alces? Wildl. Biol. 2010, 16, 85-92.
15. Kilpatrick, H.J.; Stober, W.A. Effects of temporary bait sites on movements of suburban white-tailed deer. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 2002, 30, 760-766.
16. Andreassen, H.P.; Gundersen, H.; Storaas, T. The effect of scent-marking, forest clearing, and supplementary feeding on moose-train collisions. J. Wildl. Manag. 2005, 69, 1125-1132.
17. SOU. Uthållig Älgförvaltning i Samverkan: Betänkande (Sustainable moose management in collaboration: Report) (in Swedish); Fritzes kundtjänst: Stockholm, Sweden, 2009. Available online: http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/c6/12/84/56/c7f15b49.pdf (accessed on 5 February 2012).
18. Mattsson, L. Hunting in Sweden: Extent, economic values and structural problems. Scand. J. For. Res. 1990, 5, 563-573.
19. Ingemarsson, F.; Claesson, S.; Thuresson, T. Älg- och Rådjursstammarnas Kostnader och Värden (Costs and values of the moose and roe deer populations) (in Swedish); Report No. 3; Skogsstyrelsens förlag: Jönköping, Sweden, 2007.
20. Bergström, R.; Helldin, J.O.; Boman, M.; Mattsson, L.; Karlsson, J.; Ericsson, G.; Hake, M.; Mörner, T.; Persson, I.L.; Risberg, P.; et al. Viltet i Samhället (Game and Society). In Vilt, Människa, Samhälle (Game, People, Society) (in Swedish); Danell, K., Bergström, R., Eds.; Liber: Stockholm, Sweden, 2010; pp. 135-167.
21. Sandström, C.; Lindkvist, A.; Öhman, K.; Nordström, E.-M. Governing competing demands for forest resources in Sweden. Forests 2011, 2, 218-242.
22. Boman, M.; Mattsson, L.; Ericsson, G.; Kriström, B. Moose hunting values in sweden now and two decades ago: The Swedish hunters revisited. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2011, 50, 515-530.
23. Blennow, K.; Sallnäs, O. Risk perception among non-industrial private forest owners. Scand. J. For. Res. 2002, 17, 472-479.
24. Wam, K.H.; Hofstad, O. Taking timber browsing damage into account: A density dependant matrix model for optimal harvest of moose in Scandinavia. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 62, 45-55.
25. Gundersen, H.; Andreassen, H.P.; Storaas, T. Supplemental feeding of migratory moose Alces alces forest damage at two spatial scales. Wildl. Biol. 2004, 10, 213-223.
26. Short, J.J.; Knight, J.E. Fall grazing affects big game forage on rough fescue grasslands. J. Range Manag. 2003, 56, 213-217.
27. Stevens, T.H.; Dennis, D.; Kittredge, D.; Rickenbach, M. Attitudes and prefences toward co-operative agreements for management of private forestlands in the North-eastern United States. J. Environ. Manag. 1999, 55, 81-90.
28. Boman, M.; Mattsson, L. A note on attitudes and knowledge concerning environmental issues in Sweden. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 575-579.
29. Garrod, G.; Willis, K.G. Economic Valuation of the Environment; Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, UK, 1999.
30. Boardman, A.E.; Greenberg, D.H.; Vining, A.R.; Weimer, D.L. Cost-Benefit Analysis, Concepts and Practice; Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2006.
31. National Board of Forestry. Skogsstatistisk Årsbok (Swedish Statistical Yearbook of Forestry); National Board of Forestry: Jönköping, Sweden, 2009.
32. Dillman, D.A. Mail and Internet Surveys; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 2000.
33. Mattsson, L.; Boman, M.; Ericsson, G. Jakten i Sverige-Ekonomiska Värden och Attityder Jaktåret 2005/06 (Hunting in Sweden-Economic Values and Attitudes in the Hunting Year 2005/06) (in Swedish); Report No. 1; Adaptive Management of Fish and Wildlife: Umeå, Sweden, 2008.
34. McElvey, R.; Zavoina, W. A statistical model for the analysis of ordered level dependent variables. J. Math. Sociol. 1975, 4, 103-120.
35. McCullagh, P. Regression models for ordered data. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B (Methodological) 1980, 42, 109-142.
36. Greene, W.H.; Hensher, D.A. Modeling Ordered Choices; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009.
37. Greene, W.H. Econometric Analysis, 5th ed.; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2003.
38. Harrell, F.E., Jr. Regression Modelling Strategies: With Applications to Linear Models, Logistic Regression and Survival Analysis; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2001.
39. Chatterjee, S.; Price, B. Regression Analysis by Example; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1991.
40. Varian, H.R. Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach; W. W. Norton & Company: London, UK, 2010.
41. Bergquist, J.; Kalén, C. Assessing Effects of Wildlife on Forestry. In Developing Principles and Models for Sustainable Forestry in Sweden; Sverdrup, H., Stjnernquist, I., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: London, UK, 2002.
42. Lidestav, G.; Ekström, M. Introducing gender in studies on management behaviour among non- industrial private forest owners. Scand. J. For. Res. 2000, 378-386.
43. Arifin, B.; Swallow, B.M.; Suyanto, S.; Coe, R.D. A conjoint analysis of farmer preferences for community forestry contracts in the Sumber Jaya Watershed, Indonesia. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 2040-2050.
44. Orians, G.H.; Pearson, N.E. On the Theory of Central Place Foraging. In Analysis of Ecological Systems; Horn, D., Ed.; Ohio State University Press: Columbus, OH, USA, 1979.
45. Fishbein, M.; Ajzen, I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behaviour: An Introduction to Theory and Research; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, USA, 1975.
46. Angelstam, P.; Wikberg, P.-E.; Danilov, P.; Faber, W.E.; Nygren, K. Effects of moose density on timber quality and biodiversity in Sweden, Finland and Russian Karelia. ALCES 2000, 36, 133-145.