340 likes | 582 Views
MY INTERACTIONS WITH ANIMALS. Personal pets falconry birdwatching Professional endangered species wildlife conservation biodiversity. HUMAN-WILDLIFE RELATIONSHIPS. Knowledge, attitudes, preferences, values, activities and issues. ONTOGENY OF HUMAN-WILDLIFE RELATIONSHIPS.
E N D
MY INTERACTIONS WITH ANIMALS • Personal • pets • falconry • birdwatching • Professional • endangered species • wildlife conservation • biodiversity
HUMAN-WILDLIFE RELATIONSHIPS Knowledge, attitudes, preferences, values, activities and issues
ONTOGENY OF HUMAN-WILDLIFE RELATIONSHIPS • Key components develop early in life and may even be innate (the “biophilia hypothesis”) • <8 years old--affected strongly by basic emotions related to animals (fear, cuddly things, etc.) • 8-12 years old--most significant period, acquire “facts” about animals from personal experiences • outdoor interactions with wildlife are very important • reinforced by books, stories, classroom learning, and TV (13% of children’s books have an animal in the title!) • 13-16 years old--concepts, abstract ideas, ethics • begin to understand the complexity of relationships
Basic attitudes towards animals Knowledge of animals Activities involving wildlife Opinions on key wildlife issues Human-animal relationships Values attributed to animals Preferences for certain animals
KNOWLEDGE OF WILDLIFE • Most Americans are surprisingly ignorant about wildlife, but they often have strong “beliefs” that are thought to be factual (but often aren’t) • Stephen Kellert’s 1980 study (T-F and multiple choice test), for example: • “Most insects have backbones” (57% correct) • “The manatee is an insect” (26% correct) • “The coyote is an endangered species” (26% correct) • “Raptors are small rodents” (13% correct) • Overall, for the general population, 53% correct • Many errors could be traced to common “myths” about wildlife
KNOWLEDGE OF WILDLIFE • Americans were most knowledgeable about: • Dangerous wild animals (63% correct) • Pets (56% correct) • Domestic animals (53% correct) • Americans were least knowledgeable about: • Native predators (47% correct) • Taxonomic relatedness (38% correct) • Invertebrates (36% correct)
KNOWLEDGE OF WILDLIFE • Most knowledgeable groups: • birdwatchers, trappers and hunters, college educated, high income, members of nature groups, residents of Alaska and Rocky Mountains • Least knowledgeable groups: • < high school education, >75 years old, <25 years old, residents of large cities
A SHOCKING DISCOVERY • 2002 study of British school children (4-12 years old) • Identification and knowledge of native wildlife versus Pokémon characters • Sex and age differences existed • Overall, kids knew much more about Pokémon characters (78% correct) than native species (53% correct)!!!
ATTITUDES TOWARD ANIMALS • 1980 study by Stephen Kellert is a classic • Based on responses of Americans to a battery of questions designed to reveal attitudes toward animals • Used statistical methods to arrange respondents into categorical groups • Revealed 10 groupings of basic attitudes • Subsequently validated by many other similar studies
10 ATTITUDES • Naturalistic: primary interest in wildlife and outdoors; animals are the context for activities in natural setting (backpackers, nature study, sport hunting) • Ecologistic: Primary concern for environment as a system, emphasis on wildlife interactions with other species (ecological study, conservation activism) • Humanistic: Primary interest and affection for individual animals, especially pets and large attractive species (pet ownership, casual zoo visitation, anthropomorphism) • Moralistic: Primary concern for ethically correct treatment of animals, strongly opposed to exploitation and cruelty (animal welfare/rights group member) • Scientistic: Primary interest in studying the physical attributes and biological functioning of animals (scientific study, collecting)
10 ATTITUDES (continued) • Aesthetic: Primary interest in the artistic and symbolic features of animals (nature appreciation, wildlife art) • Utilitarian: Primary concern for the practical and material values of animals (farmers, meat hunters, trappers) • Dominionistic: Primary satisfaction derived from mastery and control of animals, typically in a sporting context (trophy hunters, animal spectator sports) • Negativistic: Primarily concerned about avoiding animals because of fear and dislike (fear of animals, cruelty to animals) • Neutralistic: Completely uninterested, passive avoidance due to indifference (avoidance of animals)
WHO’S IN AND NOT IN THESE GROUPS • Naturalistic: college educated, Alaska vs <6th grade, black • Ecologistic: college educated, Alaska vs <6th grade, black • Humanistic: 18-25 yrs old, female vs farmers, >60 yrs old • Moralistic: west coast, female vs rural, male • Scientistic: college educated,18-25 yrs old vs >60<12 yrs old • Aesthetic: female, east coast vs <6th grade, farmer • Utilitarian: farmers, >60 yrs old vs college educated, urban • Dominionistic: farmer, male vs west coast, female • Negativistic: black, <8th grade vs college educated, rural • Neutralistic: urban, female vs rural, male
HOW MANY ARE IN THESE GROUPS? • Naturalistic: 1978 (10%), 1995 (12%) • Ecologistic: 1978 (7%), 1995 (13%) • Humanistic: 1978 (35%), 1995 (22%) • Moralistic: 1978 (20%), 1995 (16%) • Scientistic: 1978 (1%), 1995 (<1%) • Aesthetic: 1978 (15%), 1995 (13%) • Utilitarian: 1978 (20%), 1995 (14%) • Dominionistic: 1978 (3%), 1995 (8%) • Negativistic: 1978 (2%), 1995 (15%) • Neutralistic: 1978 (35%), 1995 (40%) • Theistic: 1995 (<1%) a new category? • Note: totals are >100% because of overlap
2002 CLASS • Naturalistic: 24% (vs 12%) • Ecologistic: 22% (vs 13%) • Humanistic: 28% (vs 22%) • Moralistic: 19% (vs 16%) • Scientistic: 2% (vs <1%) • Aesthetic: 9% (vs 13%) • Utilitarian: 6% (vs 14%) • Dominionistic: <1% (vs 8%) • Negativistic: <1% vs 15%) • Neutralistic: <1% (vs 40%) • Theistic: <1% (vs <1%) • Note: totals are >100% because of overlap
ANIMAL PREFERENCES • Not all animals are liked by people; favorites exist • Kellert’s study ranked a range of species • Top favorites (among choices offered): • dog, horse, swan, robin, butterfly, trout, salmon, eagle, elephant, owl, turtle, cat • Bottom least favorites: • cockroach, mosquito, rat, wasp, rattlesnake, bat, vulture, shark, skunk, lizard, crow, coyote • We generally prefer animals that are: • beautiful, intelligent, related to us, large, useful, economically valuable, not threatening, not predatory, graceful
WHY WE VALUE ANIMALS • We have relied on wildlife as valuable resources for >99% of human history • Today, we value wildlife in 2 basic ways: • Instrumental value: We still value animals that are useful to us because they help us achieve our own goals (an anthropocentric view) • Intrinsic value: We also value animals in their own right, regardless of their usefulness (a biocentric view) • Many Americans do not value wildlife highly in either context and are willing to compromise human needs for only a few favored species
PARTICIPATION IN ACTIVITIES INVOLVING WILDLIFE • American interact with wildlife in a variety of ways: • 78% watched nature shows on TV • 67% owned a pet • 59% feed birds • 45% visit zoos • 44% fished • 12% hunted • 11% belonged to a conservation organization • 8% birdwatched seriously • How they interact with wildlife influences their relationship with wildlife (e.g., the “Bambi” effect)
MOST ASPECTS OF HUMAN-ANIMAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE DYNAMIC • Much variation exists within American public • gender, ethnicity, age, regional, etc. • Differences exist between different cultures • Changes take place over time • Education influences human-animal relationships
EDUCATION AFFECTS ATTITUDES negativistic naturalistic utilitarian moralistic ecologistic dominionistic “Negative” attitudes diminish; “positive” attitudes replace them
MANY AMERICANS PURSUE WILDLIFE-RELATED ACTIVITIES • In 1996, there were 40 million “consumptive recreational users” and 110 million “non-consumptive recreational users” • 82 million feed birds, 60 million bird watched, 18 million photographed animals • Most Americans support wildlife conservation and management • Most Americans want stronger wildlife protection (e.g., 82% favor the Endangered Species Act in spite of special-interest opposition)
OPINIONS ON WILDLIFE ISSUES VARY WIDELY • In the USA wildlife species are held as a public trust and managed by government in ways that reflect “the public’s” views • But, “the public” can be divided on key wildlife issues, reflecting differences between individuals/groups • Divergent opinions can often be interpreted in terms of underlying knowledge, attitudes, preferences and values
HUMAN-WILDLIFE RELATIONSHIPS CAN IMPROVE • Better knowledge, improved attitudes, increased value, and broader tolerance promote an ethic of care and compassion • Education makes a huge difference • Early experiences with animals are very important • Messages and images conveyed by the media can be very influential (e.g., whaling, tuna-porpoise, killing baby seals for fur, listing feral cats as unprotected animals, etc.)