Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Wildlife Conservation and Private Protected Areas: The Discrepancy Between Land Trust Mission Statements and Their Perceptions.
Dayer, Ashley A; Rodewald, Amanda D; Stedman, Richard C; Cosbar, Emily A; Wood, Eric M.
Afiliação
  • Dayer AA; Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Cornell University, 159 Sapsucker Woods Road, Ithaca, NY, 14850, USA. dayer@vt.edu.
  • Rodewald AD; Human Dimensions Research Unit, Cornell University, Fernow Hall, Ithaca, NY, 14850, USA. dayer@vt.edu.
  • Stedman RC; Department of Fish and Wildlife Conservation, Virginia Tech, 310 West Campus Drive, Blacksburg, VA, 24061, USA. dayer@vt.edu.
  • Cosbar EA; Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Cornell University, 159 Sapsucker Woods Road, Ithaca, NY, 14850, USA.
  • Wood EM; Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Fernow Hall, Ithaca, NY, 14850, USA.
Environ Manage ; 58(2): 359-64, 2016 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27263099
In 2010, land trusts in the U.S. had protected nearly 50 million acres of land, with much of it providing habitat for wildlife. However, the extent to which land trusts explicitly focus on wildlife conservation remains largely unknown. We used content analysis to assess land trust involvement in wildlife and habitat conservation, as reflected in their mission statements, and compared these findings with an organizational survey of land trusts. In our sample of 1358 mission statements, we found that only 17 % of land trusts mentioned "wildlife," "animal," or types of wildlife, and 35 % mentioned "habitat" or types. Mission statements contrasted sharply with results from a land trust survey, in which land trusts cited wildlife habitat as the most common and significant outcome of their protection efforts. Moreover, 77 % of land trusts reported that at least half of their acreage protected wildlife habitat, though these benefits are likely assumed. Importantly, mission statement content was not associated with the percentage of land reported to benefit wildlife. These inconsistencies suggest that benefits to wildlife habitat of protected land are recognized but may not be purposeful and strategic and, thus, potentially less useful in contributing toward regional wildlife conservation goals. We outline the implications of this disconnect, notably the potential omission of wildlife habitat in prioritization schema for land acquisition and potential missed opportunities to build community support for land trusts among wildlife enthusiasts and to develop partnerships with wildlife conservation organizations.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Propriedade / Ecossistema / Conservação dos Recursos Naturais / Animais Selvagens Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Animals País como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Propriedade / Ecossistema / Conservação dos Recursos Naturais / Animais Selvagens Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Limite: Animals País como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article