A decision-aid system. for determining and achieving optimal distributions of wildlife law enforcement manpower was developed. Manpower distributions were computed by means of a workload formula for a case study application in the J.E.B. Stuart Enforcement District, Virginia Commission of Game and Inland Fisheries. A linear programming model was used to determine least cost methods of achieving prescribed manpower distributions. Simulations of permanent relocations and hiring of personnel were performed to evaluate the impact of management decisions on costs of achieving prescribed distributions. In the case study, total transfer cost resulting from simulated permanent relocation of personnel was 73% that of the present distribution, total transfer cost of simulated hiring of new personnel was 94% that of the present distribution. A simulation of inappropriate location of new personnel resulted in an increase in total transfer cost of 22% over that of the present distribution. These findings were relevant only to the case study; however, the use of the system as a general purpose simulator was demonstrated. Studies were performed of the relationships of patrol area environmental attributes, agent personal background characteristics, enforcement methods, enforcement effort, and season with enforcement efficiency (quality arrest score per enforcement hour). A wildlife law violation seriousness scale was developed in order to compute the measure of enforcement efficiency. Observations were obtained from Virginia wildlife law enforcement agents during November 1977, February, May, and August 1978. Patrol area intensity of 20 environmental variables, 25 personal background variables, 5 enforcement methods variables, total enforcement hours, and 4 study periods were independent variables. Two and 3-way interactions were detected by automatic interaction detection (AID) among total quality arrest score (QAS) by patrol, total QAS by response to citizen notification, and total enforcement hours. Analysis of covariance by multiple regression procedures indicated that methods of enforcement, effort, and their interactions we.re more closely associated with enforcement efficiency than other major categories of independent variables. Total QAS by patrol, total QAS by investigation, an interaction of total QAS by patrol and total enforcement hours, total QAS by response to citizen notification, total QAS by stakeout, and effort showed the greatest association with the dependent variable. To a lesser degree, agent rank, months of service, and whether the agent had been fired from previous employment were also shown to be associated with enforcement efficiency. Only one environmental attribute, the intensity of water recreation in the patrol area, was associated with enforcement efficiency. These results generally supported assumptions employed in the decision-aid system. / Ph. D.

Agency directors, program administrators and planners as well as U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service regional federal aid supervisors provided input that defined 22 factors considered most important in determining management effectiveness of state fish and wildlife agencies. I grouped the factors into the following six categories: public support and awareness, conflict resolution, politics, planning and funding, agency management and personnel. State agency directors, commissioners and legislators ranked the factors. In cooperation with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Organization of Wildlife Planners, I conducted case studies of nine state fish and wildlife agencies widely recognized by their peers as being particularly effective relative to the identified factors. Questionnaires and interviews with 845 agency members and constituents revealed effective fish and wildlife agencies had much in common with the excellent companies described by Peters and Waterman (1982) in In Search of Excellence. Effective agencies were proactive in dealing with issues and frequently among the nation's leading agencies in dealing with issues of national scope. Effective agencies used a variety of techniques to understand public desires and involve the public in making important decisions. Effective agencies grant their employees much freedom to make decisions and try new ideas without fear of punishment for making mistakes. They are committed to the personal development of employees. Effective agencies are good planners, with well defined missions and goals. Personal missions of employees are highly congruent with agency missions, resulting ina missionary-like zeal for their work. Effective agencies have a strong biological basis for their decisions and maintain credibility by balancing biological factors with public opinion. Effective agencies have stable political environments and experienced, enlightened resource management professionals as their leaders. Leaders emphasize participative decision making and teamwork. Finally, effective agencies have strong public support and are effective in mobilizing that support when important policy decisions are made. Many specific examples that illustrate the characteristics of effective agencies are discussed. / Ph. D.