Seeing wildlife in our Nation's parks is often a highlight of many visitors' trips, but close range human - wildlife interactions can have negative consequences for both wildlife and people. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of two interventions (fear and moral appeals) designed to reduce the feeding of deer by visitors in Shenandoah National Park by measuring changes in visitor attitudes and behavior. The study was conducted from July - September 1999 in a campground and picnic area, by placing the interventions (a small sign) on all picnic tables. Visitor attitudes and beliefs about the different components of the fear and moral appeal interventions were assessed by conducting surveys of campers under each experimental condition (control, moral appeal, and fear appeal). The impact of the interventions on behavior was tested in the picnic area by observing the responses of visitors to deer that frequently begged for food. Under current Park intervention conditions, visitors generally believe that feeding deer is not healthy for the deer. They have considerably less knowledge about potential threats to themselves from feeding deer. The fear appeal significantly changed attitudes about the risks to people (ANOVA, p=0.001). Under control conditions the majority (63%) of groups picnicking fed deer. Although the fear appeal produced an attitude change, it did not reduce feeding behavior by visitors (39% fed) as much as the moral appeal did (25% fed). The conflicting results between attitude and behavior change strongly suggest that researchers need to measure behavior and not just attitudes. / Master of Science

The human population is rapidly urbanizing, creating dramatic changes in local land use and land cover, unprecedented species loss, and a society increasingly disconnected from nature. Nature, specifically biodiversity, has been shown to provide benefits and enhance well-being to humans. Living in an environment with reduced opportunity to interact with or experience biodiversity has increasingly been recognized as both a public health and environmental issue, whereby separation from nature can negatively impact human well-being and how humans value nature, diminishing interest in and understanding of nature and its conservation. Because urban living reduces contact with nature, it is imperative to understand how urban residents perceive and benefit from urban nature to better manage urban biodiversity to both support human well-being and conservation efforts. This study examines how urbanites perceive and benefit from two types of urban nature, trees and birds, by combining surveys of local residents with tree and bird data collected in two Midwestern agricultural cities, Cedar Rapids and Iowa City, Iowa from neighborhoods of varying urban intensity. A residential survey was distributed to these neighborhoods during the summer of 2018 to assess resident perceptions of neighborhood biodiversity and its benefits. In general, residents were not able to assess relative levels of biodiversity compared to other neighborhoods, except in the case of high tree species richness. There was a strong relationship between perceived biodiversity and actual biodiversity, as well as reported knowledge of a given taxon, but only residential perceptions of biodiversity, not actual biodiversity, were strongly related to reported benefits. Respondent perceptions of the influence of trees on their well-being exhibited strong relationships with a person’s connection to trees. Reported influence of birds on well-being was strongly related to a person’s connection to trees, connection to birds, and landscaping practices to support wild species in their yards. Actual bird species richness was significantly negatively related to perceived influence of birds on well-being. Perceived nuisances associated with trees were significantly negatively related to perceived tree species richness, while a person’s connection to trees was strongly positively related to tree nuisances. These results indicate that reported perceptions of the benefits from biodiversity are most heavily influenced by resident perceptions of biodiversity itself and orientation toward nature. This finding also implies that residents benefit from the presence of biodiversity, but that perceived benefits are only related to respondent perceptions of biodiversity, not to actual biodiversity. Further research is necessary to understand why and how this paradox occurs, yet this study provides reason to support efforts to increase knowledge of species as well as provide biodiverse environments that create opportunities for interaction with urban nature. Providing both would strengthen urban resident well-being and support biodiversity and conservation initiatives within cities.

Human-wildlife conflicts (HWC) emerge as complex conservation challenges impairing human livelihood and wildlife populations. Research on HWC, however, has traditionally approached these components apart and focused on single/ similar species, hampering a broader understanding of the connections between ecological drivers and human dimensions of conflicts. We here develop and test a model integrating ecological and human components of HWC, focusing on three species - opossum, crab-eating fox and puma. We investigated the pathways through which the ecological context (forest cover) affects experiences with wildlife (contact and damage), and how such experiences influence tolerance via beliefs, emotions and attitude. We interviewed 114 landowners across 13 landscapes varying in forest cover in a region of the Brazilian Atlantic forest and tested our model using Piecewise Structural Equation Modeling. We found that: i. forest cover negatively affected tolerance, but just towards the largest species; ii. relevance and effects of distinct experiences with wildlife on beliefs and emotions varied across species; iii. beliefs and emotions influenced tolerance, but negative emotions were relevant only for the largest species. Conflicts with larger species can then be understood as disservices provided by forests, indicating the relevance of framing HWC within a broader perspective that consider the trade-offs with ecosystems services. For some species, positive experiences with wildlife may counteract the negative effects of damages to livestock in shaping human behavior. Models such as ours - that structure relationships between ecological and human components - can help identifying deeper, more effective leverage points to improve interventions to mitigate HWC / Conflitos entre seres humanos e fauna silvestre emergem como desafios complexos, ameaçando o sustento de populações humanas e a conservação de populações de animais silvestres. Contudo, pesquisas sobre conflitos tradicionalmente abordam esses componentes separadamente e focam em espécies individuais ou similares, dificultando o entendimento mais amplo das conexões entre determinantes ecológicos e dimensões humanas dos conflitos. Neste estudo, desenvolvemos e testamos um modelo conceitual integrando componentes ecológicos e humanos dos conflitos, focando em três espécies - gambá, cachorro-do-mato e onça-parda. Investigamos os caminhos através dos quais o contexto ecológico (cobertura florestal) afeta experiências (contato e dano), e como tais experiências influenciam a tolerância à fauna por meio de crenças, emoções e atitude. Entrevistamos 114 proprietários rurais em 13 paisagens com diferentes proporções de cobertura florestal em uma região da Mata Atlântica e testamos nosso modelo usando equações estruturais do tipo Piecewise. Encontramos que: i. a cobertura florestal afetou negativamente a tolerância, mas apenas para a maior espécie; ii. a importância e os efeitos de diferentes experiências com a fauna sobre crenças e emoções variaram entre as espécies; iii. crenças e emoções influenciaram a tolerância, mas emoções negativas foram relevantes apenas para a maior espécie. Conflitos com espécies maiores podem então ser entendidos como desserviços providos por florestas, indicando a relevância de inserir os conflitos humano-fauna em perspectiva mais ampla, que considere as relações com serviços ecossistêmicos. Para algumas espécies, experiências positivas podem compensar os efeitos negativos dos danos a criações na formação do comportamento humano. Modelos como o nosso - que estruturem as relações entre os componentes ecológicos e humanos - podem ajudar a identificar pontos de alavancagem mais profundos e efetivos para melhorar intervenções visando a mitigação dos conflitos com a fauna

Human-wildlife conflicts (HWC) emerge as complex conservation challenges impairing human livelihood and wildlife populations. Research on HWC, however, has traditionally approached these components apart and focused on single/ similar species, hampering a broader understanding of the connections between ecological drivers and human dimensions of conflicts. We here develop and test a model integrating ecological and human components of HWC, focusing on three species - opossum, crab-eating fox and puma. We investigated the pathways through which the ecological context (forest cover) affects experiences with wildlife (contact and damage), and how such experiences influence tolerance via beliefs, emotions and attitude. We interviewed 114 landowners across 13 landscapes varying in forest cover in a region of the Brazilian Atlantic forest and tested our model using Piecewise Structural Equation Modeling. We found that: i. forest cover negatively affected tolerance, but just towards the largest species; ii. relevance and effects of distinct experiences with wildlife on beliefs and emotions varied across species; iii. beliefs and emotions influenced tolerance, but negative emotions were relevant only for the largest species. Conflicts with larger species can then be understood as disservices provided by forests, indicating the relevance of framing HWC within a broader perspective that consider the trade-offs with ecosystems services. For some species, positive experiences with wildlife may counteract the negative effects of damages to livestock in shaping human behavior. Models such as ours - that structure relationships between ecological and human components - can help identifying deeper, more effective leverage points to improve interventions to mitigate HWC / Conflitos entre seres humanos e fauna silvestre emergem como desafios complexos, ameaçando o sustento de populações humanas e a conservação de populações de animais silvestres. Contudo, pesquisas sobre conflitos tradicionalmente abordam esses componentes separadamente e focam em espécies individuais ou similares, dificultando o entendimento mais amplo das conexões entre determinantes ecológicos e dimensões humanas dos conflitos. Neste estudo, desenvolvemos e testamos um modelo conceitual integrando componentes ecológicos e humanos dos conflitos, focando em três espécies - gambá, cachorro-do-mato e onça-parda. Investigamos os caminhos através dos quais o contexto ecológico (cobertura florestal) afeta experiências (contato e dano), e como tais experiências influenciam a tolerância à fauna por meio de crenças, emoções e atitude. Entrevistamos 114 proprietários rurais em 13 paisagens com diferentes proporções de cobertura florestal em uma região da Mata Atlântica e testamos nosso modelo usando equações estruturais do tipo Piecewise. Encontramos que: i. a cobertura florestal afetou negativamente a tolerância, mas apenas para a maior espécie; ii. a importância e os efeitos de diferentes experiências com a fauna sobre crenças e emoções variaram entre as espécies; iii. crenças e emoções influenciaram a tolerância, mas emoções negativas foram relevantes apenas para a maior espécie. Conflitos com espécies maiores podem então ser entendidos como desserviços providos por florestas, indicando a relevância de inserir os conflitos humano-fauna em perspectiva mais ampla, que considere as relações com serviços ecossistêmicos. Para algumas espécies, experiências positivas podem compensar os efeitos negativos dos danos a criações na formação do comportamento humano. Modelos como o nosso - que estruturem as relações entre os componentes ecológicos e humanos - podem ajudar a identificar pontos de alavancagem mais profundos e efetivos para melhorar intervenções visando a mitigação dos conflitos com a fauna

No description available.