A Pragmatic Approach to Grizzly Bear Conservation

Progress in grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) conservation in the Rocky Mountains of Canada and the United States is urgently needed. Human-caused mortality is the appropriate focal point for understanding the problem. This issue has a number of dimensions, but the human dimensions are by far the most complex and difficult to analyze. Conducting analyses and implementing conservation plans at the site or local level makes optimal use of humans' limited cognitive capabilities. Neither maintaining the status quo in grizzly bear conservation nor relying solely on major reform is a viable strategy. Instead, concerned people should take a pragmatic approach to developing innovative processes for forming reason-based public opinions that in turn inform effective public policies. There are many benefits to such an approach and, given the lack of viable alternatives, it should be tested with a pilot project by the appropriate people and organizations.     

Spatial Patterns of Breeding Success of Grizzly Bears Derived from Hierarchical Multistate Models

Conservation programs often manage populations indirectly through the landscapes in which they live. Empirically, linking reproductive success with landscape structure and anthropogenic change is a first step in understanding and managing the spatial mechanisms that affect reproduction, but this link is not sufficiently informed by data. Hierarchical multistate occupancy models can forge these links by estimating spatial patterns of reproductive success across landscapes. To illustrate, we surveyed the occurrence of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in the Canadian Rocky Mountains Alberta, Canada. We deployed camera traps for 6 weeks at 54 surveys sites in different types of land cover. We used hierarchical multistate occupancy models to estimate probability of detection, grizzly bear occupancy, and probability of reproductive success at each site. Grizzly bear occupancy varied among cover types and was greater in herbaceous alpine ecotones than in low‐elevation wetlands or mid‐elevation conifer forests. The conditional probability of reproductive success given grizzly bear occupancy was 30% (SE = 0.14). Grizzly bears with cubs had a higher probability of detection than grizzly bears without cubs, but sites were correctly classified as being occupied by breeding females 49% of the time based on raw data and thus would have been underestimated by half. Repeated surveys and multistate modeling reduced the probability of misclassifying sites occupied by breeders as unoccupied to <2%. The probability of breeding grizzly bear occupancy varied across the landscape. Those patches with highest probabilities of breeding occupancy—herbaceous alpine ecotones—were small and highly dispersed and are projected to shrink as treelines advance due to climate warming. Understanding spatial correlates in breeding distribution is a key requirement for species conservation in the face of climate change and can help identify priorities for landscape management and protection. Patrones Espaciales del Éxito Reproductivo de Osos Pardos, Derivados de Modelos Jerárquicos Multi‐Estado     

Human perspectives and conservation of grizzly bears in Banff National Park, Canada

Some conservation initiatives provoke intense conflict among stakeholders. The need for action, the nature of the conservation measures, and the effects of these measures on human interests may be disputed. Tools are needed to depolarize such situations, foster understanding of the perspectives of people involved, and find common ground. We used Q methodology to explore stakeholders' perspectives on conservation and management of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) in Banff National Park and the Bow River watershed of Alberta, Canada. Twenty-nine stakeholders participated in the study, including local residents, scientists, agency employees, and representatives of nongovernmental conservation organizations and other interest groups. Participants rank ordered a set of statements to express their opinions on the problems of grizzly bear management (I-IV) and a second set of statements on possible solutions to the problems (A-C). Factor analysis revealed that participants held 4 distinct views of the problems: individuals associated with factor I emphasized deficiencies in goals and plans; those associated with factor II believed that problems had been exaggerated; those associated with factor III blamed institutional flaws such as disjointed management and inadequate resources; and individuals associated with factor IV blamed politicized decision making. There were 3 distinct views about the best solutions to the problems: individuals associated with factor A called for increased conservation efforts; those associated with factor B wanted reforms in decision-making processes; and individuals associated with factor C supported active landscape management. We connected people's definitions of the problem with their preferred solutions to form 5 overall problem narratives espoused by groups in the study: the problem is deficient goals and plans, the solution is to prioritize conservation efforts (planning-oriented conservation advocates); the problem is flawed institutions, the solution is to prioritize conservation efforts (institutionally-oriented conservation advocates); the problems have been exaggerated, but there is a need to improve decision-making processes (optimistic decision-process reformers); the problems have been exaggerated, but managers should more actively manage the landscape (optimistic landscape managers); and the problem is politicized decision making, solutions vary (democratizers). Although these 5 groups differed on many issues, they agreed that the population of grizzly bears is vulnerable to extirpation, human use of the area should be designed around ecological constraints, and more inclusive decision-making processes are needed. We used our results to inform a series of workshops in which stakeholders developed and agreed on new management strategies that were implemented by Parks Canada. Our research demonstrates the usefulness of Q method to illuminate people's perspectives and identify common ground in settings where conservation is contested.     

Studying citizen science through adaptive management and learning feedbacks as mechanisms for improving conservation

Citizen science has generated a growing interest among scientists and community groups, and citizen science programs have been created specifically for conservation. We examined collaborative science, a highly interactive form of citizen science, which we developed within a theoretically informed framework. In this essay, we focused on 2 aspects of our framework: social learning and adaptive management. Social learning, in contrast to individual‐based learning, stresses collaborative and generative insight making and is well‐suited for adaptive management. Adaptive‐management integrates feedback loops that are informed by what is learned and is guided by iterative decision making. Participants engaged in citizen science are able to add to what they are learning through primary data collection, which can result in the real‐time information that is often necessary for conservation. Our work is particularly timely because research publications consistently report a lack of established frameworks and evaluation plans to address the extent of conservation outcomes in citizen science. To illustrate how our framework supports conservation through citizen science, we examined how 2 programs enacted our collaborative science framework. Further, we inspected preliminary conservation outcomes of our case‐study programs. These programs, despite their recent implementation, are demonstrating promise with regard to positive conservation outcomes. To date, they are independently earning funds to support research, earning buy‐in from local partners to engage in experimentation, and, in the absence of leading scientists, are collecting data to test ideas. We argue that this success is due to citizen scientists being organized around local issues and engaging in iterative, collaborative, and adaptive learning.     

Science, Ethical Arguments, and Management in the Preservation of Land for Grizzly Bear Conservation

Abstract: Environmental groups advocate the preservation of an area within British Columbia's coastal temperate rainforest as a sanctuary for grizzly bears (    Ursus arctos horribilis ). Debate among government, industry, and environmental spokespersons has provided arguments but no resolution. We have applied to this issue available biological knowledge on grizzly bears and the arguments of a range of ethical theories. The theories of three professionally trained ethicists were included: Tom Regan, Holmes Rolston III, and Arne Naess. Aldo Leopold's prominent position in the conservation movement justifies his "land ethic" as a fourth ethical theory. All four theories agree that the area should be preserved. Contrary to this fundamental agreement, the theories diverge when tested against a "hard" conservation scenario, the conflict between the protection of the last surviving grizzly bears versus the survival of a culturally distinct human tribe. Application of the principles developed by Regan and Naess recommend that human interests should override the preservation of grizzly bears, whereas Leopold's and Rolston's arguments favor the preservation of the area for the bears. Our work can be used as a model of how the gap between biological sciences, ethical theories, and ecosystem management can be bridged successfully.     

Demographic Connectivity for Ursid Populations at Wildlife Crossing Structures in Banff National Park

Wildlife crossing structures are one solution to mitigating the fragmentation of wildlife populations caused by roads, but their effectiveness in providing connectivity has only been superficially evaluated. Hundreds of grizzly (Ursus arctos) and black bear (Ursus americanus) passages through under and overpasses have been recorded in Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada. However, the ability of crossing structures to allow individual and population‐level movements across road networks remains unknown. In April 2006, we initiated a 3‐year investigation into whether crossing structures provide demographic connectivity for grizzly and black bears in Banff National Park. We collected hair with multiple noninvasive methods to obtain genetic samples from grizzly and black bears around the Bow Valley. Our objectives were to determine the number of male and female grizzly and black bears that use crossing structures; examine spatial and temporal patterns of crossings; and estimate the proportions of grizzly and black bear populations in the Bow Valley that use crossing structures. Fifteen grizzly (7 female, 8 male) and 17 black bears (8 female, 9 male) used wildlife crossing structures. The number of individuals detected at wildlife crossing structures was highly correlated with the number of passages in space and time. Grizzly bears used open crossing structures (e.g., overpasses) more often than constricted crossings (e.g., culverts). Peak use of crossing structures for both bear species occurred in July, when high rates of foraging activity coincide with mating season. We compared the number of bears that used crossings with estimates of population abundance from a related study and determined that substantial percentages of grizzly (15.0% in 2006, 19.8% in 2008) and black bear (17.6% in 2006, 11.0% in 2008) populations used crossing structures. On the basis of our results, we concluded wildlife crossing structures provide demographic connectivity for bear populations in Banff National Park. Conectividad Demográfica para Poblaciones de Úrsidos en Estructuras para Cruce de Vida Silvestre en el Parque Nacional Banff     

Challenges to interdisciplinary research in ecosystem-based management

Despite its necessity, integration of natural and social sciences to inform conservation efforts has been difficult. We examined the views of 63 scientists and practitioners involved in marine management in Mexico's Gulf of California, the central California coast, and the western Pacific on the challenges associated with integrating social science into research efforts that support ecosystem-based management (EBM) in marine systems. We used a semistructured interview format. Questions focused on how EBM was developed for these sites and how contextual factors affected its development and outcomes. Many of the traditional challenges linked with interdisciplinary research were present in the EBM projects we studied. However, a number of contextual elements affected how mandates to include social science were interpreted and implemented as well as how easily challenges could be addressed. For example, a common challenge is that conservation organizations are often dominated by natural scientists, but for some projects it was easier to address this imbalance than for others. We also found that the management and institutional histories that came before EBM in specific cases were important features of local context. Because challenges differed among cases, we believe resolving challenges to interdisciplinary research should be context specific.     

Large carnivore hunting and the social license to hunt

The social license to operate framework considers how society grants or withholds informal permission for resource extractors to exploit publicly owned resources. We developed a modified model, which we refer to as the social license to hunt (SLH). In it we similarly consider hunters as operators, given that wildlife are legally considered public resources in North America and Europe. We applied the SLH model to examine the controversial hunting of large carnivores, which are frequently killed for trophies. Killing for trophies is widespread, but undertaken by a minority of hunters, and can pose threats to the SLH for trophy-seeking carnivore hunters and potentially beyond. Societal opposition to large carnivore hunting relates not only to conservation concerns but also to misalignment between killing for trophies and dominant public values and attitudes concerning the treatment of animals. We summarized cases related to the killing of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos), wolves (Canis lupus), and other large carnivores in Canada, the United States, and Europe to illustrate how opposition to large carnivore hunting, now expressed primarily on social media, can exert rapid and significant pressure on policy makers and politicians. Evidence of the potential for transformative change to wildlife management and conservation includes proposed and realized changes to legislation, business practice, and wildlife policy, including the banning of some large carnivore hunts. Given that policy is ultimately shaped by societal values and attitudes, research gaps include developing increased insight into public support of various hunting policies beyond that derived from monitoring of social media and public polling. Informed by increased evidence, the SLH model can provide a conceptual foundation for predicting the likelihood of transient versus enduring changes to wildlife conservation policy and practice for a wide variety of taxa and contexts.     

Grizzly bear habitat selection is scale dependent.

The purpose of our study is to show how ecologists' interpretation of habitat selection by grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) is altered by the scale of observation and also how management questions would be best addressed using predetermined scales of analysis. Using resource selection functions (RSF) we examined how variation in the spatial extent of availability affected our interpretation of habitat selection by grizzly bears inhabiting mountain and plateau landscapes. We estimated separate models for females and males using three spatial extents: within the study area, within the home range, and within predetermined movement buffers. We employed two methods for evaluating the effects of scale on our RSF designs. First, we chose a priori six candidate models, estimated at each scale, and ranked them using Akaike Information Criteria. Using this method, results changed among scales for males but not for females. For female bears, models that included the full suite of covariates predicted habitat use best at each scale. For male bears that resided in the mountains, models based on forest successional stages ranked highest at the study-wide and home range extents, whereas models containing covariates based on terrain features ranked highest at the buffer extent. For male bears on the plateau, each scale estimated a different highest-ranked model. Second, we examined differences among model coefficients across the three scales for one candidate model. We found that both the magnitude and direction of coefficients were dependent upon the scale examined; results varied between landscapes, scales, and sexes. Greenness, reflecting lush green vegetation, was a strong predictor of the presence of female bears in both landscapes and males that resided in the mountains. Male bears on the plateau were the only animals to select areas that exposed them to a high risk of mortality by humans. Our results show that grizzly bear habitat selection is scale dependent. Further, the selection of resources can be dependent upon the availability of a particular vegetation type on the landscape. From a management perspective, decisions should be based on a hierarchical process of habitat selection, recognizing that selection patterns vary across scales.     

Learning and the transformative potential of citizen science

The number of collaborative initiatives between scientists and volunteers (i.e., citizen science) is increasing across many research fields. The promise of societal transformation together with scientific breakthroughs contributes to the current popularity of citizen science (CS) in the policy domain. We examined the transformative capacity of citizen science in particular learning through environmental CS as conservation tool. We reviewed the CS and social‐learning literature and examined 14 conservation projects across Europe that involved collaborative CS. We also developed a template that can be used to explore learning arrangements (i.e., learning events and materials) in CS projects and to explain how the desired outcomes can be achieved through CS learning. We found that recent studies aiming to define CS for analytical purposes often fail to improve the conceptual clarity of CS; CS programs may have transformative potential, especially for the development of individual skills, but such transformation is not necessarily occurring at the organizational and institutional levels; empirical evidence on simple learning outcomes, but the assertion of transformative effects of CS learning is often based on assumptions rather than empirical observation; and it is unanimous that learning in CS is considered important, but in practice it often goes unreported or unevaluated. In conclusion, we point to the need for reliable and transparent measurement of transformative effects for democratization of knowledge production.     

Lessons from Białowieża Forest on the history of protection and the world's first reintroduction of a large carnivore

Understanding how the relationships between large carnivores and humans have evolved and have been managed through centuries can provide relevant insights for wildlife conservation. The management history of many large carnivores has followed a similar pattern, from game reserved for nobility, to persecuted pests, to conservation targets. We reconstructed the history of brown bear (Ursus arctos) management in Bia?owie?a Forest (Poland and Belarus) based on a detailed survey of historical literature and Russian archives. From the end of the Middle Ages to the end of 18th century, the brown bear was considered “animalia superiora” (i.e., game exclusively reserved for nobility and protected by law). Bears, also a source of public entertainment, were not regarded as a threat. Effective measures to prevent damages to traditional forest beekeeping were already in practice. In the beginning of 19th century, new game‐management approaches allowed most forest officials to hunt bears, which became the primary target of hunters due to their valuable pelt. This, together with an effective anticarnivore policy enhanced by bounties, led to bear extirpation in 1879. Different approaches to scientific game management appeared (planned extermination of predators and hunting levels that would maintain stable populations), as did the first initiatives to protect bears from cruel treatment in captivity. Bear reintroduction in Bia?owie?a Forest began in 1937 and represented the world's first reintroduction of a large carnivore motivated by conservation goals. The outbreak of World War II spoiled what might have been a successful project; reproduction in the wild was documented for 8 years and bear presence for 13. Soft release of cubs born in captivity inside the forest but freely roaming with minimal human contact proved successful. Release of captive human‐habituated bears, feeding of these bears, and a lack of involvement of local communities were weaknesses of the project. Large carnivores are key components of ecosystem‐function restoration, and site‐specific histories provide important lessons in how to preserve them for the future.     

Beyond Biogeography: a Framework for Involving the Public in Planning of U.S. Marine Protected Areas

Abstract:  Planning of marine protected areas (MPAs) is highlighted in the conservation literature but is not explored in much detail. Many researchers acknowledge the importance of involving the public in MPA planning, but there is limited guidance on how to do this in an effective manner. I present a framework for involving the public in planning of U.S. MPAs. Derived from empirically and theoretically based research on public participation in U.S. natural resource management, this framework is composed of factors that influence the success of participatory processes: active participant involvement, complete information exchange, fair decision making, efficient administration, and positive participant interactions. Processes incorporating these factors will produce decisions that are more likely to be supported by stakeholders, meet management objectives, and fulfill conservation goals. This framework contributes to the MPA social science literature and responds to calls in the conservation literature to increase the use of social science research to inform conservation decision making.     

Investment and the Policy Process in Conservation Monitoring

Despite decades of discussion and implementation, conservation monitoring remains a challenge. Many current solutions in the literature focus on improving the science or making more structured decisions. These insights are important but incomplete in accounting for the politics and economics of the conservation decisions informed by monitoring. Our novel depiction of the monitoring enterprise unifies insights from multiple disciplines (conservation, operations research, economics, and policy) and highlights many underappreciated factors that affect the expected benefits of monitoring. For example, there must be a strong link between the specific needs of decision makers and information gathering. Furthermore, the involvement of stakeholders other than scientists and research managers means that new information may not be interpreted and acted upon as expected. While answering calls for sharply delineated objectives will clearly add focus to monitoring efforts, for practical reasons, high‐level goals may purposefully be left vague, to facilitate other necessary steps in the policy process. We use the expanded depiction of the monitoring process to highlight problems of cooperation and conflict. We critique calls to invest in monitoring for the greater good by arguing that incentives are typically lacking. Although the benefits of learning accrued within a project (e.g., improving management) provide incentives for investing in some monitoring, it is unrealistic, in general, to expect managers to add potentially costly measures to generate shared benefits. In the traditional linear model of the role of science in policy decisions, monitoring reduces uncertainty and decision makers are rational, unbiased consumers of the science. However, conservation actions increasingly involve social conflict. Drawing insights from political science, we argue that in high‐conflict situations, it is necessary to address the conflict prior to monitoring. Las Inversiones y el Proceso de Políticas en el Monitoreo de la Conservación Sanchirico et al.     

Evaluating mortality rates with a novel integrated framework for nonmonogamous species

The conservation of wildlife requires management based on quantitative evidence, and especially for large carnivores, unraveling cause‐specific mortalities and understanding their impact on population dynamics is crucial. Acquiring this knowledge is challenging because it is difficult to obtain robust long‐term data sets on endangered populations and, usually, data are collected through diverse sampling strategies. Integrated population models (IPMs) offer a way to integrate data generated through different processes. However, IPMs are female‐based models that cannot account for mate availability, and this feature limits their applicability to monogamous species only. We extended classical IPMs to a two‐sex framework that allows investigation of population dynamics and quantification of cause‐specific mortality rates in nonmonogamous species. We illustrated our approach by simultaneously modeling different types of data from a reintroduced, unhunted brown bear (Ursus arctos) population living in an area with a dense human population. In a population mainly driven by adult survival, we estimated that on average 11% of cubs and 61% of adults died from human‐related causes. Although the population is currently not at risk, adult survival and thus population dynamics are driven by anthropogenic mortality. Given the recent increase of human‐bear conflicts in the area, removal of individuals for management purposes and through poaching may increase, reversing the positive population growth rate. Our approach can be generalized to other species affected by cause‐specific mortality and will be useful to inform conservation decisions for other nonmonogamous species, such as most large carnivores, for which data are scarce and diverse and thus data integration is highly desirable.     

Introducing a common taxonomy to support learning from failure in conservation

Although some sectors have made significant progress in learning from failure, there is currently limited consensus on how a similar transition could best be achieved in conservation and what is required to facilitate this. One of the key enabling conditions for other sectors is a widely accepted and standardized classification system for identifying and analyzing root causes of failure. We devised a comprehensive taxonomy of root causes of failure affecting conservation projects. To develop this, we solicited examples of real-life conservation efforts that were deemed to have failed in some way, identified their underlying root causes of failure, and used these to develop a generic, 3-tier taxonomy of the ways in which projects fail, at the top of which are 6 overarching cause categories that are further divided into midlevel cause categories and specific root causes. We tested the taxonomy by asking conservation practitioners to use it to classify the causes of failure for conservation efforts they had been involved in. No significant gaps or redundancies were identified during this testing phase. We then analyzed the frequency that particular root causes were encountered by projects within this test sample, which suggested that some root causes were more likely to be encountered than others and that a small number of root causes were more likely to be encountered by projects implementing particular types of conservation action. Our taxonomy could be used to improve identification, analysis, and subsequent learning from failed conservation efforts, address some of the barriers that currently limit the ability of conservation practitioners to learn from failure, and contribute to establishing an effective culture of learning from failure within conservation.     

Expert judgment and uncertainty regarding the protection of imperiled species

Decisions concerning the appropriate listing status of species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) can be controversial even among conservationists. These decisions may determine whether a species persists in the near term and have long‐lasting social and political ramifications. Given the ESA's mandate that such decisions be based on the best available science, it is important to examine what factors contribute to experts’ judgments concerning the listing of species. We examined how a variety of factors (such as risk perception, value orientations, and norms) influenced experts’ judgments concerning the appropriate listing status of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) population in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Experts were invited to complete an online survey examining their perceptions of the threats grizzly bears face and their listing recommendation. Although experts’ assessments of the threats to this species were strongly correlated with their recommendations for listing status, this relationship did not exist when other cognitive factors were included in the model. Specifically, values related to human use of wildlife and norms (i.e., a respondent's expectation of peers’ assessments) were most influential in listing status recommendations. These results suggest that experts’ decisions about listing, like all human decisions, are subject to the use of heuristics (i.e., decision shortcuts). An understanding of how heuristics and related biases affect decisions under uncertainty can help inform decision making about threatened and endangered species and may be useful in designing effective processes for protection of imperiled species.     

Animal agency in wildlife conservation and management

Wildlife conservation and management (WCM) practices have been historically drawn from a wide variety of academic fields, yet practitioners have been slow to engage with emerging conversations about animals as complex beings, whose individuality and sociality influence their relationships with humans. We propose an explicit acknowledgement of wild, nonhuman animals as active participants in WCM. We examined 190 studies of WCM interventions and outcomes to highlight 3 common assumptions that underpin many present approaches to WCM: animal behaviors are rigid and homogeneous; wildlife exhibit idealized wild behavior and prefer pristine habitats; and human–wildlife relationships are of marginal or secondary importance relative to nonhuman interactions. We found that these management interventions insufficiently considered animal learning, decision-making, individuality, sociality, and relationships with humans and led to unanticipated detrimental outcomes. To address these shortcomings, we synthesized theoretical advances in animal behavioral sciences, animal geographies, and animal legal theory that may help conservation professionals reconceptualize animals and their relationships with humans. Based on advances in these fields, we constructed the concept of animal agency, which we define as the ability of animals to actively influence conservation and management outcomes through their adaptive, context-specific, and complex behaviors that are predicated on their sentience, individuality, lived experiences, cognition, sociality, and cultures in ways that shape and reshape shared human–wildlife cultures, spaces, and histories. Conservation practices, such as compassionate conservation, convivial conservation, and ecological justice, incorporate facets of animal agency. Animal agency can be incorporated in conservation problem-solving by assessing the ways in which agency contributes to species’ survival and by encouraging more adaptive and collaborative decision-making among human and nonhuman stakeholders.     

Importance of deepening integration of crime and conservation sciences

Conservation crime is a globally distributed societal problem. Conservation crime science, an emerging interdisciplinary field, has the potential to help address this problem. However, its utility depends on serious reflection on the transposition of crime science approaches to conservation contexts, which may differ in meaningful ways from traditional crime contexts. We considered the breadth of crime science approaches being used in conservation as well as the depth of crime science integration in conservation. We used the case of sea cucumber (Holothuria floridana, Isostichopus badionotus) trafficking in Mexico as an example of why the interdisciplinarity of crime and conservation sciences should be deepened and how integration can help ideate new solutions. We first conducted a review of literature to capture the range of interdisciplinarity applications. We identified 6 crime science approaches being applied to the conservation contexts of illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing; wildlife and plant crime; and illegal logging. We then compared this knowledge base to the case of illegal sea cucumber fishing in Mexico. We identified 5 challenges in the application of these approaches to conservation contexts: the relative diffusion of harms and victims in conservation crimes; scalar mismatches in crime, authority, and the conservation issue itself; interactions between legal and illegal networks; communities and their authority to define and control crime; and the role of natural science in the rule of law. Considering these 5 factors may enhance the depth of interdisciplinarity between crime and conservation sciences. Nurturing interdisciplinary crime and conservation science will expand innovation and help accelerate successful risk management programs and other policy agendas.     

Evaluating environmental education,citizen science,and stewardship through naturalist programs

Amateur naturalists have played an important role in the study and conservation of nature since the 17th century. Today, naturalist groups make important contributions to bridge the gap between conservation science and practice around the world. We examined data from 2 regional naturalist programs to understand participant motivations, barriers, and perspectives as well as the actions they take to advance science, stewardship, and community engagement. These programs provide certification‐based natural history and conservation science training for adults that is followed by volunteer service in citizen science, education, and stewardship. Studies in California and Virginia include quantitative and qualitative evaluation data collected through pre‐ and postcourse surveys, interviews, and long‐term tracking of volunteer hours. Motivations of participants focused on learning about the local environment and plants and animals, connecting with nature, becoming certified, and spending time with people who have similar interests. Over half the participants surveyed were over 50 years old, two‐thirds were women, and a majority reported household incomes of over $50,000 (60% in California, 85% in Virginia), and <20% of those surveyed in both states described themselves as nonwhite. Thus, these programs need to improve participation by a wider spectrum of the public. We interviewed younger and underrepresented adults to examine barriers to participation in citizen science. The primary barrier was lack of time due to the need to work and focus on career advancement. Survey data revealed that participants’ ecological knowledge, scientific skills, and belief in their ability to address environmental issues increased after training. Documented conservation actions taken by the participants include invasive plant management, habitat restoration, and cleanups of natural areas and streams. Long‐term data from Virginia on volunteer hours dedicated to environmental citizen science show an increase from 14% in 2007 to 32% in 2014. In general, participants in the naturalist programs we examined increased their content knowledge about ecosystems, had greater confidence in conserving them, and continued to engage as citizen scientists after completing the program.     

Preferred conservation policies of shark researchers

There is increasing concern about the conservation status of sharks. However, the presence of numerous different (and potentially mutually exclusive) policies complicates management implementation and public understanding of the process. We distributed an online survey to members of the largest professional shark and ray research societies to assess member knowledge of and attitudes toward different conservation policies. Questions covered society member opinions on conservation and management policies, personal histories of involvement in advocacy and management, and perceptions of the approach of conservation nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to shark conservation. One hundred and two surveys were completed (overall response rate 21%). Respondents considered themselves knowledgeable about and actively involved in conservation and management policy; a majority believed scientists have a responsibility to advocate for conservation (75%), and majorities have sent formal public comments to policymakers (54%) and included policy suggestions in their papers (53%). They believe sustainable shark fisheries are possible, are currently happening today (in a few places), and should be the goal instead of banning fisheries. Respondents were generally less supportive of newer limit‐based (i.e., policies that ban exploitation entirely without a species‐specific focus) conservation policy tools, such as shark sanctuaries and bans on the sale of shark fins, than of target‐based fisheries management tools (i.e., policies that allow for sustainable harvest of species whose populations can withstand it), such as fishing quotas. Respondents were generally supportive of environmental NGO efforts to conserve sharks but raised concerns about some NGOs that they perceived as using incorrect information and focusing on the wrong problems. Our results show there is an ongoing debate in shark conservation and management circles relative to environmental policy on target‐based natural resources management tools versus limit‐based conservation tools. They also suggest that closer communication between the scientific and environmental NGO communities may be needed to recognize and reconcile differing values and objectives between these groups.