1 / 22

Public Attitudes T oward Lake Champlain Cormorants: Nuisance or Scapegoat ?

Public Attitudes T oward Lake Champlain Cormorants: Nuisance or Scapegoat ?. Walter F. Kuentzel David E. Capen Zoe Richards (University of Vermont) Bryan Higgins (SUNY – Plattsburgh). Erhai Lake. Photo: Rachel King - http://www.emc.org.uk/_China-RK09/_rachel_king.htm.

lindley
Download Presentation

Public Attitudes T oward Lake Champlain Cormorants: Nuisance or Scapegoat ?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Public Attitudes Toward Lake Champlain Cormorants: Nuisance or Scapegoat? Walter F. Kuentzel David E. Capen Zoe Richards (University of Vermont) Bryan Higgins (SUNY – Plattsburgh)

  2. Erhai Lake Photo: Rachel King - http://www.emc.org.uk/_China-RK09/_rachel_king.htm

  3. A Problem Species

  4. A Problem Species

  5. The Human Dimension • Knowledge • Attitudes • Impact on the Fishery • Social Acceptability

  6. Management Control and Public Controversy Nuisance Species vs. Animal Rights

  7. Attitude Strength Extremity Direct Experience Importance Acceptance/Rejection Knowledge

  8. Conceptual Model Attitude Strength Dimensions Fishery Impact Knowledge Importance Experience Latitudes User Groups Management Control Cormorant Attitudes

  9. Methods

  10. Knowledge

  11. Cormorant Attitudes

  12. Effect on Fishery

  13. Management Control

  14. Other Variables

  15. User Group Differences

  16. Predicting Support for Management Control Importance -13.2* Fishery Impact 6.6 -6.5 -7.5 Knowledge 7.9 Management Control -18.4 Acceptance/ Rejection 4.2 -12.7 -6.2 Cormorant Attitudes Direct Experience Model Fit - Χ2 =23.6 (4), CFI=.99 * - Standardized Coefficients

  17. Predicting Support for Management Control Importance -13.2* Fishery Impact 6.6 -6.5 -7.5 Knowledge 7.9 Management Control -18.4 Acceptance/ Rejection 4.2 -12.7 -6.2 Cormorant Attitudes Direct Experience Model Fit - Χ2 =23.6 (4), CFI=.99 * - Standardized Coefficients

  18. Predicting Support for Management Control Importance -13.2* Fishery Impact 6.6 -6.5 -7.5 Knowledge 7.9 Management Control -18.4 Acceptance/ Rejection 4.2 -12.7 -6.2 Cormorant Attitudes Direct Experience Model Fit - Χ2 =23.6 (4), CFI=.99 * - Standardized Coefficients

  19. Predicting Support for Management Control Importance -13.2* Fishery Impact 6.6 -6.5 -7.5 Knowledge 7.9 Management Control -18.4 Acceptance/ Rejection 4.2 -12.7 -6.2 Cormorant Attitudes Direct Experience Model Fit - Χ2 =23.6 (4), CFI=.99 * - Standardized Coefficients

  20. Predicting Support for Management Control Importance -13.2* Fishery Impact 6.6 -6.5 -7.5 Knowledge 7.9 Management Control -18.4 Acceptance/ Rejection 4.2 -12.7 -6.2 Cormorant Attitudes Direct Experience Model Fit - Χ2 =23.6 (4), CFI=.99 * - Standardized Coefficients

  21. Take Away Points

  22. Questions or Comments?

More Related