Evolution of People-Wildlife Relations ANAGING INTERACTIONS between people and wildlife is the primary focus of wildlife management. The role of human values and behaviors has been recognized by wildlife managers since the inception of the pro- fession, early in the 20th century. Only since the mid-rgyos, however, have the human dimensions of wildlife management become an organ- ized field of study, and not until more recently did they become a formally recognized as- pect of wildlife management practice. In comparison, the biological dimensions have been at the core of wildlife management since its beginning. The traditional lament of wildlife biologists-that wildlife management is IO% man- aging wildlife and go% managing people (Fazio and Gilbert rg86:3)-is recognition that in practice the human dimensions of wildlife management are an integral compo- nent of wildlife management, one for which wildlife managers historically have not been adequately trained. In this book we take steps toward preparing wildlife managers to consider people’s beliefs, attitudes, preferences, and activities as a formal part of man- aging wildlife. We view the human dimensions as natural and intriguing core elements of wildlife management. What do we mean by the term lzulnan dinzensions? We define the huvnalz dinzensions of wildli,fe nzu.lzugenzentin this way: how people value wildlife, how they want wildlife to be managed, and how they affect or are affected by wildlife and wildlife management deci- sions. The human dimensions field seeks to understand human traits and looks at ways to incorporate that understanding into wildlife management planning and actions. The term human diwlensions covers a broad set of ideas and practices, including economic and social values, individual and social behavior, public involvement in management de- j j G ,< c. G ’ i, ’ i - p ,p! cision malting, and communication. Those topics and others are covered in this text. .:t ,J L’ This chapter was contributed by Daniel .I. Decker, 1.1 FOUNDATIONS FORVALUINGWILDLIFE Tommy L. Brown, and Wildlife management is based on human values. It exists because wildlife are viewed as William F. Siemer. a resource for people. When landowners practice management on their own lands, it reflects their personal values. When a state agency undertakes management on behalf of its citizens, it reflects community or social values in that state. North Americans’ view of Social and Community Values wildlife-our belief in their value for us-motivates wildlife management at all levels. That is the premise of any study of the human dimensions of wildlife management. During the last quarter-century many writers have addressed the nature of wildlife values (e.g., Shaw and Zube 1980, Decker and Goff 1987, Gray 1993), but the subject can be traced back to the classic Greek philosophers (Petulla rg87)! We won’t dwell on ’ the evolution of philosophical arguments about nature and our relations with it, nor will we exhaustively review the eras of human-wildlife interaction in Europe and North America and their profound impact on the fate of wildlife populations. Several textbooks present the historical underpinnings of the wildlife management profession (Bailey et al. 1974, Reiger 1975, Trefethen 1975, Shaw 1985, Anderson 1991, Gray 1993, Bolen and Robinson 19g5), so we will give only a brief overview as background. Understanding the philosophical and experiential foundations of society’s interest in wildlife can help one appreciate how human-wildlife interactions and human values have shaped wildlife management. Historical insight may be essential to interpreting current situations where segments of society hold different values and the interplay between them creates challenges for wildlife managers. Here we will only scratch the surface of the complex story behind wildlife values in our amalgamated North American culture. Wildlife have been the subject of religious, cultural, recreational, economic, and sci- entific concern. Human interactions with wildlife can be intimate or vicarious, con- crete or sentimental. The situations influencing human interests in wildlife in North America have changed markedly, and although some interests have grown in imhor- tance and others have diminished, the same constellation of interests persists among segments of American society. Those interests reflect several basic value orientations toward wildlife. 1. I. I Native American Values Before Europeans arrived in North America, Native Americans relied extensively on wildlife, both for subsistence and as a focus of their spiritual life and culture. Though the reliance f&r subsistence has diminished, wildlife continue to play important roles for many Native Americans (see Chapter 17). Scholars have devoted relatively little attention, however, to contemporary Native American attitudes, values, and behaviors related to wildlife. Lack of information is more than an academic problem. It can contribute to misunderstanding, distrust, and open conflict when wildlife management agencies are faced with issues that involve tribal lands or Native rights to natural resources (McDonald and McAvoy 1997, Krech rggg, Martin 1999, Davis 2000). Despite the bleak situation generally, there are examples of concerted effort to consider Native American values, as reflected in Chapter 17. 1.1.2 New-American Values Wildlife were of tremendous practical and cultural significance for Americans of Euro- pean descent, who carried with them to the New World the Judeo-Christian concept of People-WildlifeRelat stewardship or domination over nature. They perpetuated in North America a long- standing cultural assumption of Western society-that humans are superior to other ‘elements of nature (Campbell rggr, Diamond 1997). The scientific revolution in Europe during the period of early North American settle- ment strengthened that philosophy. Science was, and still is, seen as the business of re- vealing the secrets of nature, largely for the purpose of controlling it for the benefit of . humans. It was, and still is, the systematic and disciplined approach to dominance over nature. The assumption of superiority and the goal of dominance suited the needs of early European settlers, who faced the task of “taming,” 0; at least coexisting with, a seemingly unbounded wilderness. The wilderness has been tamed, but the goal of dom- inance is still strongly embedded in North American culture (Petulla 1987). Though the idea. of human domination over nature existed for some time in Europe, most people did not in fact have the legal right to exercise domination of wildlife. In Europe wildlife laws largely prohibited common people access to wildlife. Such’ rights were reserved for the privileged classes. In the New World, however, there were few such constraints. Mammals, birds, and fish were hunted and trapped at will, for food and fiber, and harassed as needed, to pre- vent crop depredation or threats to people and domesticated animals. Wildlife were so abundant, and the struggle of the early immigrants for survival was so consuming, it is unlikely that many European colonists considered the effects of their activities on wild- life populations for anything but utilitarian purposes. Imagine the situation 300 to’400 years ago. Wildlife were a primary source of food and fiber for explorers and missionaries, for the settlers who followed, and, through the intermediaries of trappers and “market hunters,” for village and city dwellers. Wildlife were essential, and at the same time wild animals were competitors for livestock and crops. Some were even threats to human health (e.g., rabid animals) and safety (e.g., large predators) as settlers pushed into the wilderness to carve out livelihoods. The harsh conditions of life in early America reinforced the Western belief that to survive, humans had to dominate nature, and specifically wildlife. What other choice did they have? If they did not dominate nature, they would be dominated by it-that was the reality of daily survival in the New World for many people. Although conditions have changed remarkably over the last IOO to 150 years, the North American view of wildlife today has been deeply shaped by past relationships with wildlife. It’s part of our culture. 1.2 USE AND ABUSE The many values of wildlife for American society, and the depth of feeling many Americans have for wildlife, have directed the evolution of wildlife management. Conditions for wildlife that prevailed in North America for perhaps IOO centuries changed relatively quickly with the influx of Europeans. Between the mid-17th and late Social and Community Values 19th centuries American wildlife populations declined markedly. The demands of an expanding nation for food, fiber, and habitat resulted in staggering overexploitation dur- ing the I~OOS, overwhelming the natural processes that had previously allowed wildlife to prosper. Throughout our history wild animals have simultaneously been considered vermin and an important resource, depending on the situation and species. We are still facing that paradox. The massive westward migration of Americans, fueled by the discovery of gold in California and the prospects of land for farming and ranching throughout the nation’s midsection during the mid and late I~OOS, created population pressures that adversely affected wildlife. The plights of such western species as American bison and pronghorn antelope are well-known examples of exploitation almost to the point of extinction. Wildlife populations also