Examining social tolerance and conflict in the management of migratory bison

Wildlife restoration often depends more on social tolerance than on biological or ecological factors. One prominent example is the decades-long controversy surrounding the migration of wild bison from Yellowstone National Park... [ view full abstract ]

Wildlife restoration often depends more on social tolerance than on biological or ecological factors. One prominent example is the decades-long controversy surrounding the migration of wild bison from Yellowstone National Park into the state of Montana. Bison managers increasingly cite a lack of social tolerance in the surrounding communities as justification for limiting the species distribution and abundance. As in many human-wildlife controversies however, managers rely more on anecdotal observation, public comments, and specific incidents of human behavior rather than systematically collected social data to make these management decisions. In order to address this knowledge gap, we conducted 50 semi-structured interviews with residents of two affected gateway communities about their experiences living with migratory bison and perspectives on bison management. We found that tolerance for wild bison was far more widespread than managers had originally assumed. Even some of the most publicly vocal opponents of allowing bison to migrate into Montana expressed qualified support for some amount of bison to be outside the Park at certain times of the year.  An individual’s values, beliefs, livelihood, length of tenure, vulnerability, and social relations all shaped her or his tolerance for bison outside the Park.  Current management practices contributed substantially to the conflict over bison migration and reinforced less tolerant attitudes. Across both communities, tolerance for bison was deeply intertwined with the social struggle surrounding the ongoing demographic and economic transformation of these rural areas.  Our results demonstrate the importance of integrating social science research into wildlife management decision making.  This project also reveals the benefits of using qualitative approaches in human dimensions of wildlife research as this methodology is able to provide managers a more nuanced understanding of the complexities of social tolerance and conflict than reliance on attitudinal survey measures alone.  In turn, this allows managers to better identify and address specific issues in ways that can reduce conflict and improve tolerance for the species.