Risk perception as a factor in Wildlife Stakeholder Acceptance Capacity for cougars in montana

By S. Riley, D. Decker. 2000

210 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/297beb28659bb612f9f004cb7c657e39ac096afb

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

1. K. Slagle
2. Ajay S. Singh
3. Piran C. L. White
4. A. Renwick
5. D. Fulton
6. Jeremy T. Bruskotter
7. J. Andrew Royle
8. W. J. Sutherland

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Jeremy T. Bruskotter
2. R. Wilson
3. K. Slagle
4. Ajay S. Singh
5. D. Fulton

Citations in the corpus

• REVIEW: Questionnaires in ecology: a review of past use and recommendations for best practice (2005, background): “…et al. 2003), fox Vulpes vulpes L. predation of lambs (Moberly et al. 2003), success (Albert, Bowyer & Miller 2001) or legality (Gray & Kaminski 1994) of hunting, and attitudes towards conservation (Gillingham & Lee 1999; Riley & Decker 2000; Sah & Heinen 2001) and tourism (Walpole & Goodwin 2001).”
• Determining Where the Wild Things will be: Using Psychological Theory to Find Tolerance for Large Carnivores (2014, background): “…concerning the acceptability of management actions (e.g., lethal control) (Bruskotter et al. 2009; Vaske et al. 2013) and carnivore populations (Riley & Decker 2000), as well as intentions to engage in supportive (e.g., sign a ballot measure) or oppositional actions (e.g., shoot/kill the…”
• Attitudes of the Michigan public and wildlife agency personnel toward lethal wildlife management (2004, background): “Managers should continue to study public attitudes in specific management situations, as attitudes may vary by species of concern, area of interest, and severity of issue (Riley and Decker 2000).”
• Assessing Tolerance for Wildlife: Clarifying Relations Between Concepts and Measures (2015, methodology): “…that is acceptable,” WAC was originally proposed by Decker and Purdy (1988) for explaining how low levels of human tolerance could limit the frequency and distribution of species within a given area (Carpenter, Decker, & Lipscomb, 2000; Gigliotti, Decker, & Carpenter, 2000; Riley & Decker, 2000).”
• Modelling potential dispersal corridors for cougars in midwestern North America using least-cost path methods (2008, background): “Finally, conservation agencies could use our work to target areas in which to conduct surveys to better understand human attitudes and perceptions regarding cougars (Riley and Decker, 2000; Casey et al., 2005).”
• Estimating abundance of mountain lions from unstructured spatial sampling (2012, methodology): “Without a methodology for accurately enumerating mountain lion populations across space, perceived densities of mountain lions may influence wildlife stakeholders’ acceptance levels for mountain lions (Riley and Decker 2000).”