Wildlife management in Australasia : perceptions of objectives and priorities

Miller, Kelly and Jones, Darryl N. 2005, Wildlife management in Australasia : perceptions of objectives and priorities, Wildlife research, vol. 32, pp. 265-272, doi: 10.1071/WR04042.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Wildlife management in Australasia : perceptions of objectives and priorities
Author(s) Miller, KellyORCID iD for Miller, Kelly orcid.org/0000-0003-4360-6232
Jones, Darryl N.
Journal name Wildlife research
Volume number 32
Start page 265
End page 272
Publisher CSIRO Publishing
Place of publication Collingwood, Vic.
Publication date 2005-07-05
ISSN 1035-3712
Keyword(s) wildlife management issues
Summary The aim of this study was to examine the values and attitudes held by Australasian wildlife managers as they relate to wildlife management issues, and to gain some insight into possible future directions and priorities for Australasian wildlife management. During December 2002 – February 2003, 138 questionnaires were completed by members of the Australasian Wildlife Management Society (AWMS) and registrants of the 2002 AWMS annual conference. Threatened species management, threatened communities/habitats, and management of introduced species were the issues rated as needing the highest priority for the Australasian Wildlife Management Society. Issues such as animal rights, genetically modified organisms and timber harvesting on public lands were the lowest-rating issues. Respondents expressed a strong belief in managing and controlling wildlife to achieve wildlife management objectives, a strong belief that wildlife should be protected and that wildlife managers should minimise the pain and suffering of individual animals, and a belief that resources should be directed towards conserving wildlife populations rather than protecting individual animals from non-threatened populations. While respondents held a strong belief that it is important to consult the community when developing wildlife management policies and programs, there was little support for a comanagerial approach where the community has a significant role to play in decision-making processes.
Language eng
DOI 10.1071/WR04042
Field of Research 050211 Wildlife and Habitat Management
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Copyright notice ©2005, CSIRO
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30003017

Connect to link resolver
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 11 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 11 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 857 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Mon, 07 Jul 2008, 08:40:58 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.