Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1971. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

No description available.

Thesis (M.S.)--Oregon State University, 2007. / Printout. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 62-65). Also available on the World Wide Web.

Thesis (doctoral)--Université de Berne, 1948. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 163-164).

Thesis (doctoral)--Universiẗat Kiel, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 237-250).

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Stevens Point, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 75-79).

This thesis traces the evolution of wildlife manage­ment practices in British Columbia from pre-contact times to 1918. The aboriginal people employed certain measures to restrict the killing of their most valuable species, particularly salmon and beaver. They also practised environmental control to enhance deer and elk habitat. Indians were able to do this with success because most tribes recognized strict territorial rights to fishing and hunting areas by clans or families. Fierce protection of these monopoly rights prevented such practices as poaching, which would have made conservation measures futile. Because these rights were inherited, hunters and fishermen were obliged to preserve species in their care. This system of monopoly control continued after the Hudson's Bay Company acquired exclusive trading rights in the land west of the Rockies. The company recognized Indian territorial rights and used them to continue the sustained-yield harvesting of beaver in New Caledonia, and to promote the recovery of beaver stocks in the Peace River district where beaver had been depleted during the fur trade rivalry. The period of monopoly control came to an end in 1858-59 when the Hudson's Bay Company lost its exclusive trading rights. During the colonial and early provincial period, the responsibility for management controls fell to the public authorities. The initial efforts by government to restrict the hunting and sale of game was generally ineffectual because law enforcement was difficult in the sparsely settled province and because the entrepreneurial climate of the late nineteenth century was conducive to resource exploitation. Although public regulations in the nineteenth century failed to protect adequately popular species of game, sportsmen, who subscribed to the lifestyle of the British landed gentry, began introducing exotic game and private shooting preserves to the province, following the practice in Europe. They also organized game protective associations, which led the public demand for the cessation of market-hunting excesses and the appointment of government game wardens. During his tenure from 1905 to 1918, the first provincial game warden, A. Bryan Williams, made public control of game conservation a reality in much of the province. He built a department of capable deputies whose efforts annually multiplied convictions of game law infractions. At the same time, Williams constantly stressed the economic importance of game and widely advertised the province's sporting attractions. Under his direction, the government established three public game reserves. It also commenced the control of game predators and the patrol of border areas. Most importantly, Williams inaugurated the principle of game users paying for game protection through a system of licenses. By 1918 most of the public recognized govern­mental responsibility for the management of wildlife. This thesis suggests that wildlife received the most consistent and effective management when their habitat and harvest were subject to the monopolistic control of the users. It also reveals that the history of wildlife management in British Columbia did not adhere closely to the universal sequence of measures observed by Aldo Leopold, the recognized founder of the discipline of wildlife management. The paper concludes that a mixture of private and public wildlife management areas may be the most appropriate means of satisfying the various attitudes and interests of British Columbia citizens who are concerned with wildlife. / Graduate

A mail questionnaire was employed to measure the attitudes of Virginia resident hunters toward game laws and regulations, sportsmanship in hunting, game law violations, game law enforcement, and Virginia game wardens; to determine background and hunting-related correlates of attitudes; and, to compare the ability of three social psychological models to predict the attitudes of Virginia hunters toward game laws and regulations. An initial mailing of a 17-page questionnaire and three follow-up reminders yielded a usable return of 1,245 (40.0 percent) questionnaires. A comparison of responses of respondents and telephone-interviewed nonrespondents suggested that nonresponse bias was negligible. Attitudes toward game laws and regulations, sportsmanship in hunting, game law enforcement, and Virginia game wardens were generally favorable. Mean attitude scores were in the upper range of possible mean scores. Attitudes toward game law violations were bimodally distributed. Approximately one-half of the sample was opposed to game laws violations, 11 percent were neutral, and 36.6 percent favored game law violations. Few background and hunting-related variables were associated or correlated with most or all of the five attitudes. Important negative correlates of most or all of the five attitudes were reported irritating 1977-78 warden contacts; reported irritating warden contacts in the past; the number of times a respondent reported having been bothered by a warden contact; receiving a warning or a citation for violation of a game law or regulation during the period 1973-1978; and, the number of warnings and citations received for violation(s) of game laws and regulations from 1973 to 1978. The three social psychological models tested were Fishbein’s beliefs-based model, Rosenberg’s value importance-perceived instrumentality model, and a modification of Fishbein's subjective behavioral norm. Population-modal beliefs were employed in Fishbein's beliefs-based model, Rosenberg's model employed hunting activities, and Fishbein's subjective norm model contained modal referents. Fishbein's beliefs-based model had a correlation of 0.29 with attitudes toward game laws, Rosenberg's model had a correlation of 0.12 with attitudes, and Fishbein’s subjective norm had a correlation of 0.30 with attitudes. The hypothesis that the models were related in an additive manner to attitudes toward game laws was not supported. Rosenberg's model did not achieve significance in a multiple regression model. Fishbein's two models met a retention criterion in the final model but were also interactive as evidenced by the significance of the interaction term. Fishbein’s two models appear to have both additive and multiplicative influences on attitudes toward game laws and regulations. The final model accounted for 16 percent of the variance in attitudes toward game laws and regulations. Fishbein’s beliefs-based model was supported by a superior performance over a model created by investigator-developed beliefs. A modification of Fishbein’s model of a subjective behavioral norm and a measure of a generalized subjective attitude norm each accounted for nine percent of the variance in attitudes toward game laws and regulations. Hunter perceptions of warden contacts as being irritating, the number of perceived irritating contacts with wardens, and receiving a citation for violation of game laws and regulations appear be the only significant hunting-related factors identified in this study related to unfavorable attitudes among hunters towara game laws and regulations. / Ph. D.

D. Tech. Environmental Health, Tshwane University of Technology, 2012. / Implementation of existing meat hygiene legislation can be costly to the game farm owner in terms of slaughter facilities and human resources. This can consequently force farmers and processors to operate outside of the law when delivering game meat to the market. In answer to this a Game Meat Scheme was negotiated between Wildlife Ranching South Africa, represented by the researcher and the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Nevertheless, the Game Meat Scheme only offers a 5 year period of grace for legal compliance for game farmers producing for the local meat market. Concerns of Wildlife Ranching South Africa on the implementation of such and other legal procedures on game farms motivated the comparative research on regulated and non-regulated game carcasses. Dependent and independent variables were researched to compare game carcasses intended for the export market (aspiring to strict requirements), and game carcasses intended for the local market (no control measures). The swabbing sampling technique used by the researcher was verified against the excision method (used by the export market). The results of this study have further led to a proposed innovation in the testing and verification of current legislation culminating in the Game Meat scheme and a new Game Meat Guide that could lead to the development of practical guidelines for the hunting process on the farm.

This thesis explores the material and non-material impacts of private game farming for a group of farm dwellers in KwaZulu-Natal. The thesis is located within the context of an increasing trend whereby farm dwellers are being relocated in order to provide farm owners with the economic opportunity that commercial game farming entails. The thesis emphasises the marginalised position of the farm dwellers and points to the fact that the farm dwellers themselves often have little control and knowledge regarding their legal rights. It further emphasises the lack of protection that this group receives from the authorities. Even though legislation has been implemented to address tenure insecurity, in reality this legislation has made little difference to the lives of farm dwellers. The thesis concludes that as a direct consequence of the relocation the farm dwellers were affected materially, but perhaps more important were their ‘invisible’ non-material losses. Their non-material losses include loss of self-esteem, increased social marginalisation and the cutting of their ties to their ancestral land. / Thesis (M.Sc.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, 2011.